SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Moebius Seaview 1:350 scale WIP

7454 views
195 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November, 2005
  • From: Formerly Bryan, now Arlington, Texas
Posted by CapnMac82 on Tuesday, August 08, 2017 8:00 PM

Bakster
I am in a bit of funk about Tilley. His passing has hit me really hard. I didn't see this coming, and it is so dang upsetting to know that he served so many, for so many years, and the man barely had time to enjoy his retirement.

Ditto.

For all his openess with us, our Professor was a private man.  I suspect that he had some health issues which he kept to himself, as they had no bearing on what he was sharing and living with us.

When it gets me down, I'll go find some of Daniel's (dafi) postings.  He's a serious person who is also light of heart.  And the light of heart can lift us all.

When that doesn't work, I'll spin up my recording of the Anapolis kids singing the Navy Hymn.

Failing that, I'll try to make heads or tails out of quatnum tensor mechanics, which becomes pretty absurd with color and charm and the like.  At which point I can just go watch old MMonty Python videos or the like.

I caught myself lofting boat frames the other day--but I stopped when I could not decide if they were 1:1 or not (garage is too messy and desk is likewise--sigh)

  • Member since
    July, 2014
Posted by Bakster on Tuesday, August 08, 2017 10:21 PM

CapnMac82
For all his openess with us, our Professor was a private man.  I suspect that he had some health issues which he kept to himself, as they had no bearing on what he was sharing and living with us.

Capn, I think that you hit the nail on the head. Months before his retirement he mentioned  something to me in a PM that alluded to him having something checked out. He did not let on that it was anything serious. Like you said, he was a private man, and it would not surprise me to learn that he was keeping it close to his vest.

On Sunday, I forced myself to work on this project in order to get my mind off of things. You know...when that plexiglass cracked on me I was not surprised. In a spiritual sense, that crack is a reflection of how I feel about his passing. A part of me broke on hearing the news. What more can I say. He will be dearly missed, and he was taken from us way too soon.

Thanks for posting. 

 

  • Member since
    July, 2014
Posted by Bakster on Friday, August 11, 2017 10:19 AM

It's time to make waves

Here is the rub. I have a vision in my mind of what I want it to look like, but the path to get there is still in flux. I see this stage very reminiscent of my struggle to simulate wood on my Mayflower build. It was a process. I hope this goes easier than that though.

For now, while I am away, latch onto your flotation devices because the water could get rough. That means you too, Max. And use your shark repellent for cripes sake. Sheesh.

 

 

  • Member since
    December, 2002
  • From: Fort Knox
Posted by Rob Gronovius on Friday, August 11, 2017 10:34 AM

Bakster

 

Who is up for some nostalgia?

 

The TV series Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea aired from 1964 to 1968. I was 4 years old at the onset of the show; my brother is two years older than I am. We scarcely missed an episode.

I can still laugh about how my brother planned his day around the airing of each new episode. He was a man on a mission, and I was pulled along by his wake. Even at that early age I laughed about his resolve. Later, as the model kits were released, we both built the Aurora SV kits, and we did so more than once. My brother was in near rapture when they released the flying sub. It was out of this world to him. These were the good old days, when everything was a wonder.

Today, I am setting out to re-build this pretty simple kit. This time though, I am going with the new Moebius release.

How do you take a pretty cool looking sub and make it cooler? I suppose you can add lights and hyper detail the thing. Still, in the end, is that enough? How about putting the sub in a sea going diorama? Now, that would be cool. Well, that is what I am setting out to do with this kit. This will be the challenge of the build because, I have not done a sea going diorama before. As they say though, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

..

4. Model the sub in a sea going diorama.

I'm 4 years younger than you, but I remember watching this show as a kid, but probably towards the end of the series or in syndicated reruns. One of my first kits was the Aurora flying sub with removable roof. It did not swim very well. I remember building several Aurora subs, the Japanese one with the plane on the deck (I-19?) and the Skipjack adding some clay to the lower hull and making them swim underwater. That Skipjack moved like lightning through the water. My brother and I raced them, but it was too uneven.

I always wanted to try the Seaview in the same way. I was very curious to see how seaworthy it would be under water. The I-19 ran very well underwater, just not nearly as speedy as the Skipjack. I wonder if it would be aquadynamic or more like a bulldozer underwater.

  • Member since
    July, 2014
Posted by Bakster on Friday, August 11, 2017 3:04 PM

Rob Gronovius
I always wanted to try the Seaview in the same way. I was very curious to see how seaworthy it would be under water. The I-19 ran very well underwater, just not nearly as speedy as the Skipjack. I wonder if it would be aquadynamic or more like a bulldozer underwater.

Hey Rob, I have often wondered if some military brainiac had the shape tested. 

PS: No offence to our military brains. No slander intended.

 

  • Member since
    November, 2005
  • From: Formerly Bryan, now Arlington, Texas
Posted by CapnMac82 on Friday, August 11, 2017 8:39 PM

Hydrodynamics gets longhai egghead quick.

You spend rather a long time dealing with "k" factors--the turbulence created by a surface immersed in water.  Some of that is surface tension (molecular stability of water); some the dissovled things in the water. 

Different liquids are different, PTFE, for one has a bunch of things with very dense electron shells when in molecular cohesion, so there are few "bumps" on them.  Molecularly water is bumpy, which is what makes it such a relentless solvent.  Those "spaces" are also why so many things will go into solution with water.

So, that surface boundary layer does all sorts of things.  Like creating drag; or piling up a secondary layer upon the first (and so on).  Which is where we get the hydrodynamicist's foe:  cavitation.

Add in hydrosonography, an it gets really wobbly.

Every bump, every intake, every hatch, every appuretnance creates some cavitation, and therefore, noise.  Water is 14 times denser than air, so sounds propogate over ginormous distances, even while following a cube root inversion.

Which goes even more complex with biobathyrithmic stratification (salinity, density, temperature, currents/gyres, etc.) which act as sonic reflectors.

So, we cover the boats in anechoic tile.  Which bears very fine grooves (to hold and break boundary layers), and looks matte, when it is actually glossy.  So, big honking window panes are probably not the best idea.  Neither are "manta fins."  How quiet Seaview's tail empennage would have been is probably academic (and/or classified).  Scorpion & Skipjack went through a bunch of tail configurations looking for the best answer--mostly to decide that putting the screw aft of the fins was a simpler answer.  Which worked out better when the superiority of a towed array was demonstrated to one and all.

To my memeory of, ahem, hydrodynamic testing of Seaview, the bow flares tended to nose-dive her.  From my present perspective, I imagine you'd need up angle on the stern planes and probably the sail planse as well.

  • Member since
    December, 2002
  • From: Fort Knox
Posted by Rob Gronovius on Saturday, August 12, 2017 9:26 AM

Bakster

 

 
Rob Gronovius
I always wanted to try the Seaview in the same way. I was very curious to see how seaworthy it would be under water. The I-19 ran very well underwater, just not nearly as speedy as the Skipjack. I wonder if it would be aquadynamic or more like a bulldozer underwater.

 

Hey Rob, I have often wondered if some military brainiac had the shape tested. 

PS: No offence to our military brains. No slander intended.

 

If I was still a kid, and had a pool, I'd probably build one of the repopped Aurora ones just to see. Another submarine I built many years ago was the SeaQuest DSV by Monogram in the 1990s. The surface was rough so I figured it wouldn't sail through the water as smoothly.

  • Member since
    July, 2014
Posted by Bakster on Saturday, August 12, 2017 9:53 AM

Rob Gronovius
If I was still a kid, and had a pool, I'd probably build one of the repopped Aurora ones just to see. Another submarine I built many years ago was the SeaQuest DSV by Monogram in the 1990s. The surface was rough so I figured it wouldn't sail through the water as smoothly.

Lets say that you could turn back the clock, and you had a pool. Walk me through how you would test it. It sounds like a fun experiment. Would you secure a string at the bow and pull it along?

 

  • Member since
    July, 2014
Posted by Bakster on Saturday, August 12, 2017 10:08 AM

CapnMac82
To my memeory of, ahem, hydrodynamic testing of Seaview, the bow flares tended to nose-dive her.  From my present perspective, I imagine you'd need up angle on the stern planes and probably the sail planse as well.

Capn, that makes sence to me. Fighting the ship that way doesn't sound like something that is too desirable.

 

  • Member since
    December, 2002
  • From: Fort Knox
Posted by Rob Gronovius on Saturday, August 12, 2017 8:32 PM

Bakster

 

 
Rob Gronovius
If I was still a kid, and had a pool, I'd probably build one of the repopped Aurora ones just to see. Another submarine I built many years ago was the SeaQuest DSV by Monogram in the 1990s. The surface was rough so I figured it wouldn't sail through the water as smoothly.

 

Lets say that you could turn back the clock, and you had a pool. Walk me through how you would test it. It sounds like a fun experiment. Would you secure a string at the bow and pull it along?

 

When I built the old Aurora kits, I used a stick of modeling clay and molded it to the inside of the lower portion of the hull. I remember adding some oblong lead fishing weights to the clay. With the Skipjack, when I tossed it into the pool, sort of like throwing a dart, it dove, sprinted across the pool and nosed into the far side before surfacing. It swam straight and traveled like a bullet underwater. I remember doing something so the propeller would free spin, as opposed to being fixed, and gluing the aft reactor hatch shut and waterproofing the seam with modeling putty. I hand painted it Testors gloss clear to see how fast it would go.

I know if the IJN sub was released deep underwater and given forward thrust, it would swim towards the surface smoothly and straight before surfacing.

I'd probably do something similar to figure out how to make the seaview travel underwater, straight, and not sink or dive towards the bottom, but instead have enough buoyancy to rise towards the surface as it travels forward.

  • Member since
    July, 2014
Posted by Bakster on Sunday, August 13, 2017 8:57 AM

Say Rob, thanks for sharing all that. It is fun to think about!

Ocean water

As many of you know, and as I am learning, there are a number of different ways to simulate ocean water. For my project, and because of what I am trying to do with the bow light, I have to think outside of the box. In my mail yesterday were some gels that I ordered. I did some preliminary trials with them, I acheived so-so results. I also tried a very different model railroader approach. The latter of these two has some serious promise. 

More to come as I home in on this.

 

 

  • Member since
    July, 2013
Posted by steve5 on Sunday, August 13, 2017 2:38 PM

this should be good , can't wait mate .

steve5

  • Member since
    July, 2014
Posted by Bakster on Monday, August 14, 2017 8:14 PM

steve5

this should be good , can't wait mate .

steve5

 

Hey Steve, I wish that I had your confidence in the good outcome. I am flying by the seat of my pants! Lol. Hoping for the best! 

Thanks!

 

  • Member since
    July, 2012
  • From: Douglas AZ
Posted by littletimmy on Monday, August 14, 2017 10:04 PM

Bakster
I also tried a very different model railroader approach. The latter of these two has some serious promise. 

Model railroaders have quite a few "tricks" up their sleeves. Dont forget , they "invented" weathering.

( How did the Armor guys come up with pitchforks and torches so fast ???) Thought Little Timmy as he ran for his life.

                      Dont worry about the thumbprint... paint it rust and call it "Battle damage" !

  • Member since
    July, 2014
Posted by Bakster on Monday, August 14, 2017 10:45 PM

littletimmy
Model railroaders have quite a few "tricks" up their sleeves

So true. I came across a number of tricks that they use that produce stunning realism to their layouts. There is a ton that we can learn from them. 

 

  • Member since
    December, 2002
  • From: Fort Knox
Posted by Rob Gronovius on Tuesday, August 15, 2017 9:52 AM
Most long time armor modelers already know that railroaders were the grandfathers of weathering. Today, the amount of weathering has gotten out of hand. The nose of the Seaview is so bulbous that's why I made my bulldozer in the water comment.

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS

SUBSCRIBER-ONLY CONTENT
FREE NEWSLETTER