CDR_Ret

I usually type in the text for a post in its entirety and leave a space (Return) between paragraphs. Then I upload the images I want to include in the post. This is a separate and preliminary action to actually inserting the image. Their thumbnails appear in a row in the UPLOADED IMAGES section below the text window. Next, you place the cursor at the location to insert the image within the text (usually at one of the blank lines). And finally, hover your cursor over the image you want to insert, then click on the "Insert" button that appears. That action inserts the image into the post. The default alignment is left-aligned. You can center the image by ensuring your cursor is adjacent to the image and then left-clicking the center alignment icon in the formatting row at the top of the post. You can also resize the image after it is inserted by double-clicking it. You can only make it smaller than its original size. And make sure the "Keep original aspect ratio" checkbox is checked, otherwise your image will be distorted if you change the width. Terry

Hello Frank. After working with various 3D CAD programs for nearly two decades, I think that you should first decide what the ultimate purpose and scope of using this approach will be for your projects. Are you primarily intending to reconstruct and fair existing plans? Is your intent to 3D print the entire hull structure and superstructure? Or are you mainly interested in printing the smaller parts and otherwise creating the ship's structure out of conventional materials? For validating and fairing existing ship's plans, especially those from the 19th century and earlier, I recommend the DELFTship Free software. It is a for-the-purpose naval architectural program that defaults to three standard views, provides infinitely customizable stations, waterlines, buttocks, and diagonals, and has reasonably easy-to-use modeling tools such as Gaussian and developable visualization of hull surfaces. All these features are built-in and appropriate for ship design and modeling. This is the go-to program for developing smooth, fair hull surfaces. The poor documentation for the hobbyist and nautical research modeler is its main drawback, in my opinion. Search this forum using the term "DELFTship" to take a look at some of the results by several modelers/researchers (myself included) using this program. For 3D printing large components such as the hull, deck cabins, boats, etc., you may want to check out some of the software mentioned above. I have no experience with that application. For small details and relative ease of modeling, I would go with the free, open-source, full-feature Blender program. However this program has a notoriously steep learning curve. Take a look at the Blender tutorial series by BornCG on YouTube if you want to consider this route. The instructor is an excellent teacher who doesn't assume you know what the buttons do and how the multitude of program features work. Sadly, most of the competent 3D programs do have that steep learning curve, so plan on spending some time figuring out ship design within the program you choose. Some of the standard 3D CAD programs are pretty clunky when attempting to create a continuously varying surface in 3-space that must conform to an existing set of plans. I can assist with DELFTship. @3DShipWright and @Martes may provide assistance with Blender. Take a look at their models, which are both accurate and very aesthetic. They are going more for illustrative results than 3D printing. Terry

Hello Doug from Colorado Springs! Welcome aboard. Terry

I would recommend checking out this thread regarding laser-cut frames, etc. Kiyoo Iizawa was actively involved in this forum a few years ago and did some beautiful work using CG modeling and laser-cut components. He was writing a manual/book to help modelers get into laser-cutting modeling, but after some attempts at collaboration, I think there was an (amicable) divergence of views on how to present the process. Terry

IMHO, going directly from existing drawings to code that drives a 2D laser cutter is risky when cutting out frames or bulkheads. I have no experience with the quality of plans from the big national museums and other credible sources, but when I manually compared the body and halfbreadth plans of my 1891 brigantine project, it was an exercise in frustration. Heights and breadths of station and waterline intersections did not agree among the three views. The point I am trying to make is that there is no guarantee that using existing plans (especially if they are old, original drafts) will drive a laser cutter that will result in a smooth, fair, hull surface without a lot of extra work. The above observation was the reason I went to CG drafting in the first place. After nearly a decade of periodic frustration, trying different methods and different copies of plans from the Smithsonian and other museum/library archives, I found that using the DELFTship Free naval architecture software was pretty much ideal for fairing out the hull lines because it had the features needed to visualize the shape of the hull, remove low and high spots, and compare the resulting lines to the original drawings. The bottom line here is that obtaining a set of working plans that will actually be fair and eyepleasing in the real world won't necessarily yield the same set of station lines, waterlines, and buttock lines as in the original set of plans you obtained. It is up to you how far you are willing to deviate from the original drawings. There are a number of MSW members who have posted their projects using DELFTship Free, including my own. Comparison of the final modeled stations (green) in DELFTship Free compared to the original G.C. Berger drawing stations. Waterlines (blue) were included to ensure the correct vertical scale. To understand the genesis of these lines, please refer to the Galilee research log in my signature. (High-resolution plans obtained from the San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park Library; G.C. Berger, Pacific Marine Research Society; Date and provenance unknown.) Once you have what appears to be a valid set of lines to work with, then you can start thinking about what laser setup to use for cutting out your parts. Remember to cut to the outside-most of the front and back curves for each frame or bulkhead. Terry

Beautiful, Nate! Terry

So far, so good!

Welcome aboard, Kevin! Yeah, the Lewis and Clark is nothing but HY-80 razor blades. There are quite a few (mostly former) bubbleheads as members here. Terry

Hey, Deyson. Another Coloradoan! Where are you located? I'm retired and living near grandchildren in the Springs. Great to have you aboard! Terry

Viriato. Eu sugiro usar o translate.yandex.com tradutor português / inglês. Isso parece fazer um trabalho muito preciso. (I suggest using the translate.yandex.com Portuguese/English translator. That seems to do a really accurate job.) Terry

Try reading it via the link on a mobile phone. Worked fine for me. Sad outcome.

You guys should work up a tutorial for developing laser patterns for things like cabin and roof planking, skylights, and other fine details. You might even start a small business of doing bespoke laser cutting jobs to pay for your hobby! Terry

Is there a simple way to add realistic crew in these renders? The main thing that indicates your image is artificial is the absence of any hands visible on deck, or at least at the wheel. Galilee had only eight assigned crewmembers (plus the five scientific expedition members), and all the photos of the ship at sea always had at least a few humans visible topside. Terry

Most browsers have a feature to translate text to the user's default language. Looks pretty clear to me. Nice job on Bismark! Terry

Not sure who to send this to, but I received this security message when I tried to access the site's article database: Probably not related to this weekend's mishap, but thought you should know. Terry

Where do you call home? I lived in Vermont several times in my life and consider the state my favorite. Lived in the greater Burlington area. I also drove LCT ferries to work my way through college (UVM). Best job ever! Terry

Looks like you are using Sketchup. Nicely done! Terry

Beautiful work, Nate!

This topic reminded me of a joint US-UK naval exercise back in the Spring of 1975 that my squadron participated in. At that point I was a junior Naval Aviation Intelligence Officer assigned to an A-7E (Corsair II) squadron, VA-66, stationed at NAS Cecil Field in Pensacola, Florida. This was the year before I got my heart right and entered the Naval Nuclear Propulsion pipeline, and, ultimately, the submarine force. The exercise involved both the USS Independence (CV-62) and the HMS Ark Royal (R07) operating together in the West Atlantic. The Ark Royal cross-decked a squadron of Buccaneers to the Indy and the Indy cross-decked a squadron of Corsair IIs. This was evidently a prolonged collaboration because the photos of the aircraft taken at Cecil Field in my collection were dated March/April, 1975, while the shipboard photo was dated May, 1975. These photos were taken as Ektachrome slides, which were the thing back then. They're not great but they might be useful as a reference of operational aircraft. I failed to identify which squadron they belonged to but the date of deployment might narrow the choices. This final photo shows a Buccaneer on the USS Independence flight deck. Several A-7Es are in the background. Enjoy! Terry

For the casual visitor and ignorant ones like me, SIB = "ship in bottle". (I had to go look for this term to learn what it meant....) Terry

These are all good points to consider. The tarp in the DTM photo was put up when the weather was foul. To my untrained eye, though, the deck just doesn't look wet as much as having a gloss coat of paint. The finish is very uniform. Galilee's waterways and open bulwarks were definitely painted. One thing to remember is that during her charter period, she was classified as a yacht to avoid port fees, and DTM tried to gain public interest in the geomagnetic project by inviting the local populace onboard whenever ship was in port. So it might have been an exception to the rule regarding the finish of the decks. Galilee's weather deck in fair weather. I've treated the deck color the same as the coamings and waterways. (Courtesy Carnegie Science Library, c. 1906. All rights reserved.) As for lower maintenance, it might have been considered less maintenance to repaint the deck occasionally rather than replace or at least recaulk weathered planks. I apologize for hijacking the thread... I'll go back into my hole. P.S. In Crothers' The American Built Clipper Ship, p. 346, he states under "Deck and Deck Structures," in part, "...No paint was applied to deck surfaces. The raw wood was kept clean by constant scrubbing and mopping... Preservation was achieved by an occasional application of oil to repel water." So that may be the source of the sheen in photographs. Terry

@druxey, would this statement have been true for all eras and applications? I understand that sailing warships had holystoned decks, but sailing merchants, particularly in the latter days of sail, had relatively small crews, which would have made routine deck maintenance difficult. I have some really good photos of the Galilee (1891 brigantine, crew of 11) taken in the early 1900s, and her deck definitely looks painted to me. Photo of a shark caught by the ship's crew of Galilee during her DTM Cruise II in the Pacific Ocean. (Courtesy Carnegie Science Library, c. 1906. All rights reserved.) Terry

Thanks @BANYAN. I've spent so much time immersed in developing the structure of the ship over the past seven years that I'm only now beginning to look at the rigging and related securements in any detail. And I'm not well versed in the jargon associated with masting and rigging, so what you quoted is mostly gibberish to me. A lot of catch-up will be required before drafting up the plans! Appreciate your efforts. Terry

Hi Srenner, You may want to DM the other Blender users in this forum such as @Kurtis and @3DShipWright with your question. I'm afraid that the answer to your question is well above most of our paygrades! Terry

Back in the days of "useta-fish" (US attack submarines were named after sea creatures until they started naming them after random congressmen, then cities. "Fish don't vote!"—Adm. Rickover), we typically stood one-in-three, six-hour watches underway. Generally, attack boats (SSNs) were able to keep their watchbills manned with qualified watchstanders because we did frequent local ops when not deployed. I don't ever recall a dog watch in an SSN because the watches rotated through the 24-hour cycle and everyone could get at least six hours of sleep per day. Boomer crews, on the other hand, arrived at the turnover site with a large portion of the crew either provisionally qualified on their watch stations—or not at all. This was because, for the Offcrew period, we had no boat, and personnel transfers occurred during Offcrew. For the first month or so on patrol, there were a lot of port-and-starboard (we called it "port-and-stupid") watches. After four months at sea on a Westpac in USS Hawkbill, nearly everyone was qualified to their most senior watch stations, so we were able to go to one-in-four watches for the crew and the officers were one-in-six. As Senior Watch Officer, I even let the Engineer off the watchbill completely because he had an ORSE (Operational Reactor Safeguards Examination) to prepare for on the way back to Hawaii after that deployment. I have no idea what modern submarines do. It's been more than 30 years since I've been on a boat...