Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Hank

  • Birthday 11/05/1946

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Mocksville, NC
  • Interests
    U.S.N. history, early USN Sailing Warships, 1960's era USN Combatants

Recent Profile Visitors

2,069 profile views
  1. Scottie, Welcome to Model Ship World - we've made email contact so I'll be in touch again soon. This is the right "spot on the dial" for wooden sailing ship models and I'm sure you'll find lots of commentary - all you have to do is ask!! Hank
  2. Realizing that I will probably never get around to actually building this kit, I have the following items for sale as a package only: Trumpeter kit #03701 – 1:200 scale USS ARIZONA (BB-39) Originally intending to build this into the 1940 USS PENNSYLVANIA (BB-38), I have the following 3rd Party Parts and Accessories as listed below: Artwox #03701 – 1:200 scale ARIZONA Wood Decking Set Model Monkey (Shapeways plastic, not resin) – 1:200 scale 1934 PENNSYLVANIA Bridge Modifications Kit Model Monkey (Shapeways plastic, not resin) – 1:200 scale PENNSYLVANIA Boat Cranes Kit – Assembled/painted in separate plastic parts box. Model Monkey (Shapeways plastic, not resin) – 1:200 scale PENNSYLVANIA Funnel (1940 era) Model Monkey (Shapeways plastic, not resin) – 1:200 scale PENNSYLVANIA Main Deck Vents (3) – Painted White Ensign Models #2005 – 1:200 scale PE ARIZONA Deck Plates White Ensign Models #2002 – 1:200 scale PE ARIZONA PE Set Master Model #SM-200-001 – 1:200 scale 14”/45 cal. Main Gun Barrels Eduard #53 099 – 1:200 scale PE Cranes Set Eduard #53 100 – 1:200 scale PE Catapults Set Eduard #53 104 - 1:200 scale PE Life Boats Set Eduard #53 111 – 1:200 scale PE Railings Set Sapguy 3”/50 Mk. 22 Open Gun Mounts ( Shapeways Plastic, not resin) – 3 guns Arwox # AW60003 – 1:200 scale Anchor Chain The Floating Drydock PM-C115 Stud Link Anchor Chain 11.5 LPI (3D Printed – 4 sets) – NO LONGER AVAILABLE Trumpeter #06633 – 1:200 scale WWII USN Figures Set Note: This kit was started and a small amount of modification work has been done to the hull & main deck as I had intended to build this as USS PENNSYLVANIA (BB-38) in 1940. All kit instruction sheets, decals, flag sets, etc. and as far as I can determine, all kit parts are included in the original kit box. I purchased this kit from another modeler and a few parts he had scavenged for use on his ARIZONA project - I have not made an inventory of these items but they mainly involved the kit PE brass sheets - I believe these items will be included in the 3rd party PE sets described above. Package Price - $650.00 PLUS shipping – I have just under $950.00 invested in all of this and today’s prices may, in some cases, be higher than my original cost in 2015 when I purchased all of this. Interested parties should send me a PM and we can discuss in detail shipping and payment, etc. In addition, I have created quite a few 2D CAD drawings related to the PENNSYLVANIA modifications made to her after her 1935 refit - and the differences in her and ARIZONA. If interested, I can include a copy of those drawings and my photos & reference materials that I've collected for this model. Interested parties should PM me or reply for additional details, etc. incl. shipping costs and payment, etc. Thanks, Hank Strub
  3. I have books 1-16 of the Thomas Kidd Series available for sale. All are in excellent condition - read once and put on the shelf! The following list describes their title, type (hard/soft) cover, original price: I will sell the Kidd Series books for 50% of their original price + shipping. Some of the hardcover editions are no longer available, so if you collect nautical books, this might be a good deal. The 3 additional paperbacks are from the 1960's era and are interesting reading if you've never encountered Hornblower or heard of the Mary Deare. Anyone interested please PM me, etc. Hank
  4. Phil, I appreciate your comments above re. CAD and tend to basically agree with your observations. While I wouldn't characterize CAD drawings as being "artistic" I would say that some very proficient CAD drafters have been able to produce 3D rendered drawings (and I include your OKY BOAT pix) that certainly could almost pass for photos. I think this is an exception and not the rule overall. You are IMHO, completely correct in that much of it depends on that individual's ability to produce a quality and professional drawing in the end. There is a talent and knack to this, it's not by accident! I'll go back to one of my earlier comments regarding the 1935 drawings at NARA II that I found of BB-38 after her modernization. These wonderful "artistic" plans were more than likely drawn ink on vellum (at least the originals that I handled appeared to be such) and that particular draftsman had an extremely professional ability in his artwork. That's the main reason I wanted scans of those drawings. While computers can produce all sorts of colors, shades, tones, etc. they tend to lack a certain "artistic" aspect of drawing that manual drawings have - nuances, if that's the correct word for it, and I think a lot of this is due to the individual in the "driver's seat". I've seen quite a few recent 3D renderings of War of 1812 era combatants that are commercially available as "artwork" and I'm sorry, they simply don't have the same "feel" that the traditional water color or oil/acrytic paintings have. They tend to be "technical" rather than "artistic" in composition. Along the way of 47 years of drafting/CAD etc. I can honestly say that I've met very FEW engineers who could produce a correctly scaled and accurate engineering drawing that was actually useful. The usual answer was "I'm not being paid to do drafting!" - and their resulting drawings showed that over and over again (down & dirty). But, corporate heads now have virtually eliminated the Draftsman and even Designer level positions to save $$. However, in this hobby of ship modeling I think that anyone who is able to make their own drawings, whether CAD or manual, is certainly a few steps ahead of someone who lacks these abilities. The CAD drawings I've made for my various model projects were created to make parts, not to be "artwork" per-se, while at the same time "finished drawings" that I could share with others upon request, etc. Layout & composition, etc. being rule of thumb! As a side note, while my PENNSYLVANIA model is still basically in the box, I have already drawn up brand new main mast drawings, deck equipment drawings, and a few other miscellaneous details for that model in MicroStation 2D CAD and have shared some with Steve Larsen (Model Monkey) in order for him to produce 3D parts. ARIZONA and PENNSY are NOT identical in several aspects. Hank
  5. Roger, I can relate to your sub tale in that when drawing up HVAC & Mechanical equipment (boilers, chillers, heat exchangers, etc.) in new facilities layouts, we had to include repair/replacement space for pulling out tube bundles, etc. and believe it or not, quite a few corp. managers didn't want to allot this extra floor space because it cost more - they simply had no conception of what's required to maintain & operate this equipment - they were only interested in the bottom line. Hank
  6. Tim, To answer your question, "Yes!" - I reported aboard 03 Sept. 68 a few days before NEW JERSEY left Long Beach, CA for her one and only WestPac cruise 1968-69. We spent 6 months on/off the gun line and then an extra 2 weeks lurking in the Sea of Japan after NK shot down a USAF EC-121. I have been a member of their veterans group since 1990. I got you beat on the Tamiya 1/350 scale models - that kit first hit the market as a Life-Like kit (and in my opinion was a better kit in many ways - I've had/built 2 of them). I've built the Tamiya kits as well, but sold those in progress as I had no further interest in them. I got involved in the 1/200 scale Trumpeter MISSOURI kit in 2006 and spent 6 years converting it to USS NEW JERSEY 67-69 configuration. During that time I created quite a few CAD drawings in MicroStation to supplement the various modifications made to the ship that the kit did not encompass (it is as MO on surrender day, 1945). The Trumpeter kit, by the way, is far from correct as far as the hull is concerned and that was an exercise in reforming a misshaped hull - I did it one way, other modelers have done it in other fashions. However, the end product is this: She is 53" LOA. Much of the superstructure and all masts/RADARs/antenna, etc. are scratchbuilt. I incorporated 3D parts from a couple vendors in addition to supplemental PE & Decking - I had the decking vendor (Pontos) create the wood decking to my drawn specifications which was modified from their MISSOURI deck parts. I also designed 2 PE sheets for parts and found a UK vendor to print them for me. During the 6 years of building this model I had the pleasure of correspondence and communications with the late Richard Landgraff who oversaw some of her 1968 final mods and also her complete 1981-82 refit - he knew the ship inside & out. Back to drafting - here is my full size drafting table just after resurrection in my workshop earlier this year: It is now covered up with FLETCHER Class plans, my CAD drawings, and a light table on the lower right. My shop construction is a complete topic of its own over on Workshop Equipment, etc. forum in case you're interested. Hank
  7. Tim wrote: Sorry I missed that, Tim - Well, back in the '60s (in NC) boys took shop, girls took home economics - just the way it was back then. I see your point however and that does make sense. Different times, etc. I did learn cooking from my mother and found years later this came in quite handy. Not to bore everyone to tears 😱, but I'll relate this short tale - Having been transferred to a DE in San Diego in 1968 I quickly learned that this would be temporary as this ship was going to transit to Seattle, WA as a USNR Station Ship and they had no billet for a PN3 (Personnelman). So, while we were transferring people here and there to reduce the crew, the cooks were also transferred leaving the galley without proper staffing. Well, I made the BIG mistake early one morning of putting on an apron and proceeding to fry my own eggs - and found myself doing commissary duty 3 times a day for the next week or so until my 2nd Class could arrange for a temporary CM1 to take over. Initially, I found it quite novel (as long as liver [yuk!!!🥴] was not on the menu and I didn't have to mess with it!! ). 3 weeks later I was stepping on the quarterdeck of USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62) and reporting aboard (well YEAH!!). I think a further comment in the thread regarding typing classes was also somewhat overlooked - in today's CAD/CPU world, this is a necessity, not an elective decision to be made lightly. I was fortunate enough in college in 1965 to take a semester of typing - although my professor said I would never amount to anything as far as admin. abilities were concerned. I'm glad I've forgotten what her name was as she was dead wrong!! That typing class actually got me into the admin field in the Navy and later has provided me extremely useful CAD abilities ever since. I can (and do) type roughly 110 wpm and that's not exaggerating, simply a fact. And sadly, I know CAD guys still employed that are "Hunt & Peckers" when it comes to the typing aspect of CAD work (pun intended!!!). Also (and finally🥱) I have seen some very artistically rendered 3D CAD industrial layouts of various utilities & facilities that could rival the best hand drawn architectural renderings out there - but, in the final analysis it is the individual who has to decide which medium to work in. I see benefits using both board and CAD depending on the need, ability of the artist/draftsman, and what is required. Glad you brought all this up!!! Hank
  8. Rik, In regards to the Spark freeware - I'm pretty sure that this version is a lot less "user friendly" than their Spark Mechanical version that you have to purchase - at least, my experience with CAD & various software programs is that what's free is basic - no bells, whistles, or enhancements. And - this is where I'M having a problem in that I'm used to a professional level CAD program WITH all those extras. And I think that's why my acquaintance who's making great strides in using Spark is doing so because he's never had any prior CAD experience to confuse the issue, so to speak. The kind of designing we are trying to accomplish is basically items for modern warship models (deck equipment, railings & stanchions, RADAR antenna, etc., gun mounts, and FC directors). This is pretty straight-forward using 2D drafting/CAD but can get very involved when you move into 3D and solid modeling, etc. My main problem (as I see it!) is finding the tools to do various manipulations that I'm used to having available in my 2D program - they simply don't exist and having to come up with a work-around gets very frustrating and when I do that, it isn't long before The Admiral gets wind and winds up The Cat!!🥵 My suspicions are that they DO exist, but only in the paid-for version of that software. They get you coming & going. 😭 But, looking back a few years ago - I built a 1/48 scale scratchbuilt model of U. S. Sloop of War PEACOCK (1813) and in the preparation stage and developing drawings, I produced some 15-20 2D CAD drawings in order to make all the parts for the various carronades, masts, yards, spars, as well as all the bulkhead drawings for the hull and much more. In addition, that was when I was working away from home and bought the 18x24 tabletop drafting board and used it quite extensively at night when I needed a quick sketch drawn up in order to continue construction. Whether or not Spark is your "cup of tea" I can't answer, but is perhaps one of several you might investigate along the way. Hope this helps! Hank
  9. Richard said: I think any of these so-called computer groups or clubs, etc. can turn out to be a waste of time - I went to one of these "social group meetings" way back in the early '80s in order to enhance my MS-DOS operating system skills etc. and it turned into a 2 hour session of old geezers trying to sell everyone one of us "newbies" on their favorite software program at the time. Yeah, believe it - in 1984 there were actually computer geezers (old dudes in their 50s - LOL!!!) - and I'm now 74, go figure, right?? And, no one learned anything!! Perhaps finding another local individual with like interests might be a better and easier learning solution, etc. Your comment re. night school - not a bad idea - a lot of local tech schools/colleges, etc. offer evening CAD classes for beginning students and this might be helpful. My suggestion is (before spending any $$ on a CAD program) - determine what your use of it will be (drawing up model parts, house plans, nuclear weapons development - you know, the usual stuff!) and then look around online for a FREEWARE CAD program that fits your needs. This will allow you time to see how "it feels" and perhaps download something different, etc. Back several months ago an online modeling acquaintance of mine proposed us both learning a 3D program to design & print parts to replace items he had handmade and wanted something a bit more refined. This way we could help each other in the learning curve (oh, YES!!! There is a learning curve!). So, I found the freeware Spark DSM and we both downloaded it and began learning it. Well, he did, I'm still struggling. Anyhow, it is a mechanical 3D design program that is oriented towards small parts, etc. - you wouldn't want to learn a CAD house design program for designing model parts, right? Once you know what the CAD program will be used for, decide whether you are going to build the parts from scratch or 3D print. I use a 2D CAD program for creating actual drawings to take out to my shop for making the wood or plastic scratch made parts. Now, when I want to make these as 3D printed parts I design them (or "visualize me designing them ) in the 3D program which will eventually produce the files the 3D printer can understand. Oh, and that brings up another subject - the intermediate printer program you have to install to make a further printing file that the printer understands. Isn't this great???? Usually though, these programs are also available as freeware. As far as board drafting tools, instruments, etc. goes - if that's your interest then by all means pursue it - once in a while a good deal hits Ebay or Etsy for old, used drafting stuff but sometimes the prices can be steep. I know that if I were selling any of my old drafting stuff I would be asking top dollar as those tools are in 1st class condition! And, a lot of those instruments/tools being from well known brands at the time are no longer in production and hard to find. Lastly, having a drafting table and all of its attributes on hand has other advantages also. For example, when The Admiral is on the rampage, off her Quarterdeck with Cat in hand, having a modeling retreat complete with adjustable full size drafting table can provide 1) adequate shelter in case she catches up with you, and 2) when the board is adjusted to 0° (flat) it and a sleeping bag can provide a welcome place to retire until the Quarterdeck resumes "normal operations" and it's safe to come out. You'll just need to sneak out back behind in order to take a leak😁! Hope this has provided sufficient inspiration and so forth, Hank
  10. Tim, You're not alone!! I too, took mech. drafting in 10th grade (1962) and would have pursued an industrial arts path but my parents wanted me to go the "college prep" route instead. After a short college stint, 4 years USN, and back to college to finish, where did I end up??? Western-Electric doing board tech. illustrating prior to learning a pre-CAD computer based graphics program while working on the Safeguard Anti-Ballistic Missile Program. I then took a contract at one of the NC DuPont facilities doing board drafting until 1983 when they brought in IGDS Intergraph CAD - and I've been doing CAD (and a bit of board drafting along the way) ever since. I retired in 2019 but have a full size drafting table in my shop, along with a stand-alone CPU and single monitor for viewing the photos/drawings, etc. for my ship modeling. I have my same Samsonite Briefcase full of drafting equipment (circa. 1970's) and some of it is actually NIB (New In Box)!! A lot of those instruments can't be found anywhere and if you do they're usually of 3rd world mfgr. I actually suppliment my CAD drawings with small board drafted sketches when I need to refine something without going back to the house where my CAD software resides. I've worked in various industries (Petro-Chem, Electronics, Facilities, Chemical, Food & Drug, Pharma, Bio-tech, etc.) and have also spent an unemployed year doing house plans for an overworked residential house designer. My program of choice (45 years experience) is Bentley MicroStation 2D CAD and I still keep an active license - actually was working today on a stanchion/handrail layout for the pilot house overhead on a FLETCHER class DD that I am building. Another modeler/vet/acquaintance of mine in Fairbanks, AK and I began a self-taught 3D program called Design Spark Mechanical - a free download and it leads to making your own 3D printed resin parts. He's W-A-Y ahead of me at this point and I'll admit that when you use a Cadillac CAD program for 40 odd years and then try to learn a free CAD program - well.....it's not apples to apples. However, I am regularly using metric measurements now so that's some progress on my part. I now make sure I double dimension all my CAD drawings. I also kept my light table (18x24) as well as a small 18x24 table top drafting board w/parallel bar - the light table occupies the right hand side of my large drafting board and is proving its value all over again. I can honestly say that most CAD people are NOT draftsmen and either don't have the education/experience of board drafting to understand what a drawing is (or should be) about. Layout and composition (which back in the day was expected!!!) are basically unheard of today and I'll admit that CAD drawings lack the "artistic" originality that the old pen & ink and pencil/vellum drawings had. I spent a week at NARA II in 2016 doing research with some other ship modelers & researchers and found a set of full size (60" wide) drawings of USS PENNSYLVANIA drawn in 1932 after her modernization. I had them scanned and will refer to them when I get to building my 1940s era BB-38 (1:200 scale) - the craftsmanship & artistic beauty of those old drawing is alone worth having a copy of them. I knew one of the Long Beach Nav. Shipyard managers who oversaw modernizations of BB-62 (in 1968 when I was aboard and later in 1981), BB-63 in his many years of shipyard service - and his CAD drawings, while accurate, lacked any sense of artistic ability at all. They were drawn to serve a purpose, not to be enjoyed. Such is 20....whatever. But, CAD is here and I embrace it - as long as the drawing shows what's to be represented and the drawing as a whole is professionally created and rendered. Sigh...asking a lot😪 these days....! The 3D end of things is where it's all headed (unfortunately) - because $$$ rules everywhere, it's as simple as that. However, it doesn't rule in MY shop and I do things MY way!!! While my cohort in Alaska is designing 3D parts and printing them (some for me, as well!!) my efforts so far are not getting that far - so, I fall back on my old school handmade model parts, drawn up either on the board, from blueprints, or my 2D CAD drawings. I will pursue this because I have a brand new 3D printer sitting looking at me saying "Choose Me!!, Choose Me!!!" And also because in many cases, there simply aren't vendors selling all the various items we modelers need to build a scratchbuilt model. While tall ships, etc. are IMHO done best by old school methods, the steel ship is sort of hand in hand with more up to date techniques and abilities. A lot of my current model's parts will be 3D designed & printed in conjuction with the kit I started with and my scratchbuilt superstructure add-ons. So, "YES, VIRGINIA - THERE ARE OLD SCHOOL DRAFTSMEN Still out here" - hope this gives you moral courage to continue your craft!
  11. Tim, Well, looks like both of us have separated ourselves (albeit only a short distance) from The Admiral and the ever-searching, ever-reaching Cat!!! Kudos on Your Shop - it looks like it will serve you well. I think your compact size & layout looks great and should provide a suitable space for model construction. However, you may want to invest in a home RADAR unit, in case The Admiral's pottery project goes belly-up and things start flying thru the air - LOL!!! Hank
  12. OK, so here's a post-election/pre-Turkey Day Update: Needing additional work space (I mean we all realize that 2 sides of the shop utilizing a work bench isn't REALLY enough, is it???) I've added a slide in/out work tray under the back work surface under the window. I used left-overs and a piece of glued-up pine board (24"Wx15"D) that was a remainder, so have no extra cost involved. Well, since I don't pay myself.....yeah, that's right!!! So, here is the open/shut case photos on this little project: And finally, here is the board in use - I'm making small part assemblies for the 3"/50 Dual R.F. gun mounts on my 1/144 scale USS STODDARD project: Oh, did I mention (no, I didn't ) that I'm now in the long learning curve of a 3D mechanical modeling program (Design Spark - Mechanical) - free version, of course!! Hope to sometime in the near future begin printing my own parts!! Hank
  13. Well, all the above is well and good....however, the question asked by SailingAnthony1812 is regarding frigate CONSTELLATION's spar dimensions, not a discussion as to whether the ship in Baltimore's Inner Harbor is or isn't the original frigate CONSTELLATION. Many of you weren't members of the NRG when this article was published (myself included), but back in the very early days of the N.R. Journal, when it was still a black & white, stapled newsletter, there was a beautiful model of CONSTELLATION (1797) described in photos, plans, drawings, and so forth by Thomas A. Todd - the article was USF CONSTELLATION As She May Have Appeared In the Period 1797 to 1800. This is the lead article in the NRJ Volume 31, June 1985, Number 2 - and I'm looking at it as I type. The second page of the article gives the sheer plan and hull lines as well as the Spars, 1801 - I believe this draft of CONSTELLATION is the one most of us are familiar with, and is also one of the pull-out plans in the volume Register of Officer Personnel....and Ship's Data 1801-1807, USGPO, Washington, 1945. This article by T. Todd is quite complete for a modeler to glean very useful information in not only building CONSTELLATION (or for that matter, USF CONGRESS) but most any other early U.S. Navy sailing warship of the period. He gives in addition, correspondence regarding his model's construction and a complete bibliography of his sources. So, S.A.1812 - if possible, you should try to locate a copy of this article, as it would be extremely useful as I've stated above. Perhaps, in everyone's interest, NRG could reprint this particular article in full as many members today probably aren't aware of its existence. [edit] I might add that these spar dimensions are also given in the Appendix to H. I. Chapelle's HASN (pg. 483). Hank Strub
  14. Having bought the Byrne's Saw many years ago, I read thru this whole thread with interest. There is a lot of good information here. While my use of the saw has tended to be in a rather simple and straightforward application - nothing exotic or requiring angled cuts as in ripping, I find it quite useful in the ways other modelers have chosen to address the issue of angled rip cuts. I've also toyed with purchasing Jim's angled table accessory and may still do so - if the need becomes a reality. I especially like the idea of mounting the saw on a permanently angled base of sorts, using the piano hinge and thumbscrew method as suggested by Jaager. In fact, this basic idea could lead to a number of small additions for convenience in setting up the correct angle for cutting, etc. Hank
  • Create New...