lmagna

Looks like it is going to make a very nice superstructure.

On this thread we have been talking (mostly) about battleships and the change, (Or not) in their value. The results of especially the US submarine effort in the Pacific was so effective that it caused much of the inability for the Japanese to risk or use ships like the Yamato and Musashi. I have even read that by the end of the war the Japanese were reduced to using unprocessed oil from the Dutch East Indies in their ships, increasing the potential of fire and other issues due to it's unstable properties. Not certain if it was true as I think I only read it once somewhere. The cost in lives in the submarine service was high but so were the returns.

1/96 would make a monster! Not just in size but in weight as well! I think that if I was to build a BB of that time period it would have to be the USS Washington, but my real love would still have to be many of the pre-dreadnaught and early dreadnaught ships. Somehow they just seem more stately even though they were far inferior in every way.

Your storage arrangements are way too organized Brad!

Not certain if you are referring to the Iowa's or Yamato's in this sentence but if you are referring to how much damage the Musashi absorbed before being sunk one has to look at the fact that she took torpedo hits on both port and starboard sides causing her to automatically counterflood and pretty much maintain an even platform that provided a more stable gun base. This was taken into account after the battle and the same mistake was not made on the Yamato. It took much less ordinance to sink the Yamato as the vast majority of hits were on the port side. It is my understanding that the Iowa's had a slightly better armor for facing heavy and light cruisers but that the Yamato's armor was based on the armor used by the British and was more effective against Battleship sized guns. The US Navy was never really happy with the armor or the guns on the Iowa's and the next generation of US Battleships were intended to address many of these shortcomings. With the extra thickness at almost every level of the armor on the Yamato it is claimed that it is the only battleship armor that was impervious to penetration by any battleship gun in the world. I am still curious if this would have held true in a battle like the First Navel Battle of Guadalcanal where the opening ranges were less than two miles and decreased from that when the battle turned into a melee almost immediately and some ranges came down to a matter of yards before opening up again as the ships passed. What would have happened if the ships we are discussing, (Or much more possible, the USS Washington and South Dakota) had been involved with Adm Lee in charge instead of Scott. Like is said above the US had a much better fire control system than the Japanese but in the case of Adm. Scott he didn't use what he had to much advantage at all at Guadalcanal. The Iowa's were slightly faster but I do not believe this was ever much of a factor in any of the major fleet engagements of the WWII Pacific theater. The US had a much better damage control system in place and sometimes this resulted in US ships remaining fighting or surviving when some Japanese ships were destroyed. One must also remember that the Yamato was destroyed by one of the main magazines blowing up. One of what should have been the best protected locations on the ship. In the battle off Samar The Yamato fired a number of times at the Gambier Bay, hitting her at least once I believe, (I would have to dig out a couple of my books to get the exact details). I am also not completely certain but I think she fired on the USS. Johnson before she turned and ran from Torpedoes for such a distance that she was unable to re-engage for the rest of the battle. Again it turned out that the use of the weapon outweighed the weapon's potential. I think that Roger summed it up for both the use of the carrier and the battleship. WWII proved almost beyond doubt that neither ship could operate safely without the homogenous cooperation of the other, but used together in ways not fully contemplated prior to the war they were still a devastating weapon.

Even though I have not read Victor Davis Hanson's works I think I can possibly guess what his reasoning is as there are many that feel the same and in fact felt the age of the battleship was over well before WWII. This was especially true for countries like Japan that had such limited resources. But using that same reasoning one could look at all of the countries involved on both the Axis and allied sides with the possible exception of the US and Britain and say the same thing. When used effectively the battleship was still a weapon of awesome potential even though not always in the way navies thought they would be prior to the beginning of the war. But they were both expensive to build and even more to operate and so many countries held them in reserve rather than risking them. Japan in particular held the belief that they would be able to draw the US fleet into a massive surface action where the battleships would slug it out Mahan style and leave the Japanese fleet victorious. They refused to change this concept even late in the war when it was clear that it would never happen. Then they compounded it by not aggressively engaging when the opportunity did present it's self. The whole thing is of course somewhat more complex and involved but the Battleship, including the Yamato class was still a weapon to be respected in WWII.

I had much the same thing happen with the old Blue Devil Destroyer years ago, only without the string. I recovered it but also never sailed it again!

Must have had a senior attack Brad. I forgot that the landing gear would hold the fuselage off of the deck making it harder to hold onto the aircraft, (Especially if you run hard aground at full speed from 1/3rd mile away! Would be a Court Martial this time) Possibly just using thin steel or tin plates glued under the wheels that contact the deck imbedded magnets would be strong enough. (?) It would be nice to be able to equip the deck with the proper mixture of aircraft to match the era of the day!

Not certain if you are referring to the Mogami or the Yamato. While I personally am not a big fan of either ship and cannot help but wonder how much potential and advantage (If any) the Yamato class had over the Iowa class is a product of legend or just plain speculation. You can pretty much do anything you want with numbers and preferences. As the one opportunity in the battle off Samar did not go the way it could have we will never know. But if Japan had used the Yamato and Musashi on the early morning of 14 October, instead of the 14" gunned Kongō and Haruna, for the hour and a half bombardment of Henderson Field I am almost certain that the damage and loss of life would have been considerably higher. I also wonder what the outcome would have been on the morning of 12 November when the Hiei and Kirishima ran into Task Force 67 and ended up fighting at sometimes pistol ranges where even 5" guns were inflicting damage on the Japanese battleships! What if the two battleships had been the Yamato and Musashi instead? Even the Japanese sailors were aware and often commented that the two ships were harbor queens and all of the fighting was being done by other ships of the fleet.

I agree, some kind of inquest is in order at the very least. The Captain not only ran hard aground but caused structural loss of a section of the ship requiring the use of shipyard facilities to repair. You need to look into FPV gear if you intend to do this all of the time. Or possibly binoculars.

Another excellent choice are the two books by Byron Como, The Defenders of Taffy 3 and the Raiders of Taffy 3. Very well researched and written, at least in my humble opinion.

After giving the WIS some further thought I remembered what kind of ship we were talking about and what their normal duties were. While many costal and inland working vessels at the very least have a binnacle located on a raised location a mine sweeper has to know EXACTLY where they are at all times when they are working. This can be as exacting as just a few feet one way or another. One of the methods is to take bearings from known shore objects and triangulating their position on a chart. While this can easily be done with just a compass it is much more accurate if one uses a device that is more specifically designed for the purpose. In this case I now think that the WIS is a telescopic alidade. These devices can take many forms from simple sights like on a rifle to the one I think is being used in this case, or even more. I am not certain if this design is electronically coupled to a charting computer in the pilothouse below but it could be. Hope that helps. (Sorry Roger your post didn't show for me until after I posted mine. Looks like we are saying much the same thing. I need to learn how to type faster!)

Have you considered installing Neodymium Magnets in the plane for weight and then also installing a matching magnet(s) in the deck where you would like the planes to set? Could kill several birds with one stone. Transporting planes separately, changing the types of aircraft on deck. Holding them down without locking them into place and possibly other advantages.

Your "Whatever it is" like Mark says is an engine room telegraph. I am not certain that it is the device that would be located there though. On many small ships like this it would be much more common to have a second magnetic binnacle located in this position.

This is what I have used for years. Gives better control so small bits do not break as often. Low RPM so plastic does not melt. Low cost and can still be used as a screwdriver. In addition it is high torque and the battery charge seems to last forever! The same model without the light is even less expensive. https://www.amazon.com/BLACK-DECKER-BDCSFL20C-Lightdriver-Screwdriver/dp/B0753F9HK9/ref=sr_1_6?crid=2B53APSN4KS1Q&keywords=cordless+screwdriver&qid=1656107639&sprefix=cordless+screw+driver%2Caps%2C127&sr=8-6 https://www.amazon.com/LONKER-Keyless-Converter-0-3-6-5mm-0-3-3-6mm/dp/B0722R1VJW/ref=asc_df_B0722R1VJW/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=241941495556&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=4764432449092262939&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9033346&hvtargid=pla-457878370008&psc=1

Good to see you back at it Per. These masterful models deserve everything you can give them when building. and your work is surely making the grade.

I knew a guy years ago up in BC Canada who used to make his own operational scale winches for the Tugs he built. But they were masterpieces of machining engineering and well beyond mere mortals like me! I have made a couple of larger operational scale tug towing winches in past years using servo parts, but none of them were small scale anchor winches.

Congratulations on a very nicely built unusual and interesting model Javlin. I will just stay seated while waiting for your next installment. Wouldn't want to loose my place with the excellent view!

I have tried several times to figure out how to start designing and have come to the conclusion that my prior skill sets don't come anywhere close to covering writing programs for this tool to operate properly. I have resigned myself to either possibly just using files produced by others or getting some one-on-one instruction from someone who knows something about it. I am presently heavily involved with RL matters that could occupy several months or possibly even longer, but when that settles down, I do hope to be able to devote more time and effort. Meanwhile I will continue to follow works like yours and others here and wish.

First hand accounts are always so interesting. Years ago I had the fortune of meeting a WWII U-boat Captain. We had several interesting conversations.

Not certain of the size of the Bonnie's winch and chain but in RC it is usually a simple matter of running the chain over the winch drum (or around the capstan) and hide the actual operational winch under the deck just below. https://www.amazon.com/Electic-Vehicle-Crawler-Accessory-Controller/dp/B07N8YVXCH/ref=asc_df_B07N8YVXCH/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=344022289111&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=11046223499574246901&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9033347&hvtargid=pla-723665476058&psc=1&tag=&ref=&adgrpid=74886007568&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvadid=344022289111&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=11046223499574246901&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9033347&hvtargid=pla-723665476058 You do normally need something heavier than a plastic anchor to make it work smoothly though.

Looks fine on a 17" screen blown up. I can't think that it would have any issues holding the engine, (Unless you intend to play with it like I would have done as a kid). In addition most of it would disappear under the engine. In my case, as it appears that I am totally unable to even grasp the computer skills required to 3D print, I would have had to make it from brass tubing, sheet and rod. A skill I do still possess thankfully. But it would have been a cart without an engine as I could never have made the engine! The real masterpiece. Congratulations.

You can set the deck up with a crashed HO4S using your "failed" print. The smaller model printed out nicely. Now all you need to do is install all of the RC gear in it!

We have much the same here........... including my live-at-home ones! Instead I have had to add to my retirement chores by driving my older teen back and forth to his first job several times a week now. We are also looking at sponsoring a Ukrainian single mother who is trying to get out with her son.................... (A childhood friend of a neighbor who came to the US a few years ago) Maybe he mows lawns! We are getting so much rain this year that watching the lawn grow is an action sport!

Looking very nice Mike. Good to see you are still having time for your build.