TITANIC by Force9 – Trumpeter - 1/200 - PLASTIC - White Star Liner

[Kelp]

Quoting Titanic the Ship Magnificent, “ As stated previously, the bottom frames were joggled in clinker fashion.  This was done to eliminate the use of the tapered packing pieces ordinarily associated with this type of plating”.

 

I would now like to find a photo of a hull bottom with “packing pieces” so we can compare the two methods.

[Jim Lad]

Not sure whether this will be any help, but an illustration from Pursey's 'Merchant Ship Construction (1969 edition).

 

John

 

[Roger Pellett]

Kelp,  

 

See my post # 53, previous page.  Fig #11 of the posted drawing shows clinker plating with tapered packing strip.

 

Without further study it’s just a guess but I suspect that the clinker plating and joggled frames made it easier to replace damaged individual plates in the event of a grounding.

 

Roger

[Force9]

@Roger Pellett  Not sure that would be the best explanation... The answer must be some combination of Weight, Strength, Time, or Cost.  It seems to have been a more expensive solution than the IN and Out plating, so likely weight/strength and/or speed of construction are all in play.

 

I don't think Lusitania or Mauretania went with this approach...?

 

Cheers

Evan

[Force9]

Fun with Frames

 

One of my quirks is that I try to incorporate into my ship models a view of the framing to give a sense of the underlying construction.

 

In my Old Ironsides build, for example, I have stripped away some of the outer planking to reveal the stout girth and tight spacing of her Live Oak frames.

It seemed to me that I could break up the monotony of the Titanic bottom plating by hacking out an opening and adding some exposed framing to highlight the double hull construction.  (And continue my quirky streak…)

 

The double bottom framing on the Titanic was not only a key component of the overall structure of the ship, but also served to divide up the water ballast and distribute weight across the various compartmented tanks.  

 

The frames were numbered from the middle out to the ends. So, the first frame aft of center was 1A (Aft) and the first frame forward of center was 1F (Forward).  I don’t think there was a frame zero.  I think the aftmost frame was 149A and the forwardmost was 154F.  They were spaced about three feet apart through the midsection but were spaced closer toward the ends.  It may be that “floors” is the technical term for these frames and “intercostal” is the term for the fore/aft frames that subdivide the tanks and create the cellular structure.

 

I whipped together a simple jig to help me drill holes into strips of styrene to represent the framing. This was all done by hand with a pin vise.  I could stack four strips at a time and figured I’d need to do twelve to get eight or nine good ones. 

I tried to open the hull around frame 18A which is Watertight bulkhead “J” that separates ballast tank compartment #8 Port from ballast tank compartment #9 Port.  I’ve approximated the location so don’t hold me to account.  I chose to add this feature on the port side aft section hoping to deter some folks from thinking this exposed framing is representing the gash from the iceberg.  We’ll see…

 

Before drilling, the rectangular dimension was outlined with blue masking tape.  More narrow Tamiya tape was used to define a “Drill free Zone” to help ensure that I didn’t get too close to the final outline.

 

I grabbed the power drill and went to work…

 

Once the section had been drilled out, I came back with a utility knife to eliminate the jagged edges.

Next came a heavy file to get the final smooth outlines against the blue tape.

The perimeter was then outlined with .030 x .250 strip and reinforced on the inside with scraps of whatever thick chunks of styrene I had at hand.

 

I’ve fudged a bit on the frame dimensions and the spacing. I didn’t do the math to determine the exact scale size.  The final frame size and spacing was determined by the styrene stock I had at hand. I had one strip of .020 x .250 styrene in my stash that seemed an easy fit. The .010 thin version probably scaled better, but it seemed to distort when I drilled holes into it and otherwise didn’t give much surface area for attaching to the sides. 

 

I used the same .020 x .250 strip to insert spacers between each frame to evenly separate them and help lock them in with more surface area for the cement.  .020 x .188 strip would probably have been a bit better to represent the 36” spacing between the actual frames, but I had none in my stash.

 

I included one row of the intercostal cross framing, but elected not to put all the rows in place… It would get too crowded and would be difficult to keep it all aligned as I went along.

 

Here is where things stand:

 

 

I will overlap the edges with strakes and leave some of the strake ends extended slightly beyond the outer frames.  Exposing these ends will help with the illusion that the hull strakes are all thinner than the thickness of the model molding would suggest.

 

Here is a mockup without any strakes cemented down…. This is the effect I’m trying to achieve.

Based on our recent discoveries, I’ll come back behind and use some .010 x .020 strips to add the joggling to the edges of the frames.

 

I might need to bulk up the solid center frame… This may have been a heavier frame as part of the ship’s watertight system. 

 

I won’t add the double bottom interior until after I have primed and painted the frames – I need the access.

 

More tracing, transferring, cutting, cementing this week.

 

Cheers,

Evan

Edited July 18, 2023 by Force9

[Kelp]

Evan,  

What a fantastic idea to show some of the framing!  Your model is the only one I have seen which has included framing.  Very creative, and it looks terrific!

 

Roger,

Thanks for pointing out to me the plating detail which shows the packing pieces.  This clarified my question on how this was built.

 

Don (kelp)

[yvesvidal]

15 hours ago, Force9 said:

 

Superb idea and excellent building.

 

Yves

[Roger Pellett]

Clinker Bottom Plating and Joggled Frames:

 

Results of my research on this subject-

Of course all seams in Titanic’s shell plating were riveted.  Specifications for White Star’s Olympic Class vessels, which included Titanic, required that steel rivets be used in selected high stress areas.  One of these areas was her bottom plating. Wrought iron rivets were used elsewhere.  Unlike wrought iron rivets steel rivets were  susceptible to “hot shorting” if if heated above “cherry red” temperature so they were heated to a lower temperature than wrought iron ones and driven quickly before they lost their ductility.  

 

While wrought iron rivets were driven by hand, steel rivets had to be driven with mechanical riveting machines to ensure that the heated rivet would completely fill the hole in the plate before cooling and losing ductility.  For steel rivets Harland and Wolff used hydraulic riveters.  These were very large machines, each weighing several tons.  Shaped like giant C-Clamps they would squeeze the hot rivet from both ends.  They were powered by hydraulic fluid, probably water, pressurized at a central plant.  They, therefore, had to be attached to a network of piping.  The, other choice was pneumatic riveting, used in American shipyards.  Pneumatic riveting machines only weighed about 24 lbs but British shipbuilders considered these to be inadequate for high quality work.

 

Clinker plating was installed one row at a time, like shingles on a roof, so the hydraulic riveting machine never had to reach over more than one strake of plating to get to the seam being riveted.  On the other hand, when using the “in and out” plating system, shipyard practice was to first install all of the “in” strakes then the “out” strakes. (The geometry of the in and out method requires that two in strakes must be installed before the overlapping out strake between them.  The backing strips between the adjacent in strakes and frames were driven into the gap between them and held in place by friction.  Holes were punched in the backing strips matching those in the frame and the out strakes.)

 

If the in and out system had been used to plate Titanic’s bottom plating, the heavy, unwieldy, hydraulic riveting machines would have had to reach over at least two strakes of plating to close the outboard  seam of each out plate.  The plating for these strakes could be 8’ wide so the machine would have to have a reach of at least 16ft vs 8ft with the clinker system.

 

in short the reason for the clinker plating- Shipyard fabrication capabilities.

 

Once the decision was made to use the clinker plating system for Titanic’s bottom plating, joggling the frames followed.  This eliminated the cost of the expensive tapered liner plates.

 

Roger

 

References:

 

Holmes, A. Campbell,  Practical Shipbuilding, 1916

Garzke & Woodward, Titanic Ships, Titanic Disasters, 2002

McCarty & Foecke, What Really Sank The Titanic, 2008*

 

* Forensic and metallurgical analysis of Titanic’s rivets

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Roger Pellett

[Hubac's Historian]

Exposed framing is just one of the things you do that I love so much!  The effect is dynamite on Constitution, and equally impressive here.

[Roger Pellett]

A portable hydraulic riveting machine.  Photo from Practical Shipbuilding, 1914

 

[Force9]

@Roger Pellett  Terrific insight regarding the Clinker methodology... Makes sense that the Clinker construction would get used for the underbody but not the entire hull.  Probably doesn't lend well to cutting out entryways and portholes, etc.  In/Out much better for that.  

 

We can see the Hydraulic Riveters also at work on the upper bands of the hull in old photos...

 

@Hubac's Historian Thanks for the kind remark... I dunno that this type of effort is worthwhile for anyone else, but I have fun with it.

 

BTW - I have added the joggling to my frames... Very small in scale but still visible.

I added .010 x .040 strips to the top edges in an overlap fashion to create the effect.  Should look good once they've been primed and painted.

 

Question for the group at large - any thoughts to how these looked on the actual ship?  Would these also be given anti-foul red paint?

 

Cheers

Evan

[Roger Pellett]

Wrought iron rivets driven by hand were used for most of the in and out shell plating. The interesting photo that you posted appears to be riveting of the sheer strake, another highly stressed area requiring steel rivets.  An irony of the Titanic sinking is that iceberg damage occurred in an area where lower strength wrought iron rivets  driven by hand were used for plating seams.

 

Roger

[Force9]

@Kelp and @yvesvidal Thank you both for the positive feedback... Glad to see that folks appreciate my efforts!  I think this came out better than I thought it would - I'm a little sorry I didn't make more frames to extend the effect a bit more.  The frames were a bit of a hassle to make and I only used the styrene I had at hand.  These really would lend themselves to a 3d printed solution... higher quantity with better/accurate detail.  I think the trick would be to scale/adapt to the model and NOT make them accurate to the historic dimensions.  In particular, the joggling would need to align to the .250 styrene width that most folks would use to plate the bottom.

 

This will likely be the only cut out I'll add to the model.  There is at least one modeler I've seen currently making a spectacular version of the Trumpeter kit with all manner of cut aways into the hull - including an impressive engine room.  Wonderful stuff. Like many in this forum, I tend to gravitate to ship models in museums and enjoy seeing all manner of incredible displays.  The larger scale models with cut out views inside are always impressive... But for me, the models that elicit an ooh and aaaah are the ones with unexpected detail.  As you lean in you suddenly notice detail behind a port hole or beyond an open door or down an open hatch to the deck below.  Those models have depth... those models have dimension.  I'll be trying that approach with my build.  Hopefully I can make a few folks do a double take and peer a bit more into the open recesses and appreciate some unexpected detail.

 

I'll post more progress this weekend.

 

Cheers

Evan

[Force9]

Thanks again to all who are following along...  I appreciate the continued interest.

 

Clinker Strakes

 

I’ve already confessed to cheating on the Clinker plating… I didn’t overlap the plates on the hull bottom. Instead, I simulated the overlap by affixing a strip of .010 x .030 styrene to the underside of the adjoining edge of each .010 x.250 strake before cementing each tightly against the preceding row.  This lifted the adjoining edge and provided a more consistent clinker effect across the entire underside of the ship.

 

Very simple to do… I laid the .030 strip against a small metal ruler abutting each of the styrene strakes and laid down a bead of thin Tamiya cement along the length being careful to keep the strip tight against the ruler as I went along.  The capillary action filled in along the seam and affixed the strip nicely.

Then these were flipped over and cemented to the hull using Plastruct Cement as I pushed the styrene firmly against the preceding row.  I could cover a lot of territory across the mid-section with a few full-length strips. Same process for the shorter strips at the bow and stern.

 

In a few cases, I only added the .010 x.030 strip to half of the strake to help transition the plate to the ends of the ship.

I filled in the recessed plate on the Trumpeter kit bow so that the bottom plating was consistent.

 

I first scraped away the molded butt joins to get a flat surface.

Once all the hull strakes were laid down, I came back along with Tamiya Putty (and occasional Sprue Goo) to fill in the seams to give a smooth and consistent surface.

Here are close ups of the Bow…

Transition section…

Midships.

And finally, a few closer views of the clinker effect:

A bit more work needed to smooth out the outer edges to blend with the kit before I start adding the butt joins to establish the pattern of individual plates across the bottom.

 

Cheers,

Evan

 

Edited July 31, 2023 by Force9

[Roger Pellett]

A number of years ago a local organization held an event involving dinner followed by screening of the movie Master and Commander.  To add atmosphere to the evening I brought a Dockyard style model that I had built- exposed framing below the bends.  An otherwise intelligent lady, in all seriousness asked how the vessel floated with the holes in the bottom.

 

Be prepared for people to ask you if that large hole that you left in Titanic’s bottom is what caused her to sink! 😆😆

 

Roger

Edited August 6, 2023 by Roger Pellett

[Force9]

@Roger Pellett  Perhaps it'll give me an opportunity to describe it as the little known glass bottom observation area available only to first class passengers...??!!!

[Force9]

Bottom Plates

 

Up next, I needed to blend the outer edges of the new bottom plating with the kit hull… I didn’t like having that .010 lip all around the bottom of the hull.

 

Out came the Miliput again…

After taping around a narrow band that encompassed the outer edge and enough area for a smooth transition into the kit, I mixed up a small batch of the Miliput and spread a thin coat the length of the edge – port and starboard.  I was careful to keep it wet and kept smoothing it down and scraping with a scrap of styrene until it was reasonably thin and just covering the styrene edge.  I then removed the tape and let it all dry overnight.

 

Came back the next day and sanded the Miliput down using various grit sandpaper – coarse, medium, fine until it was blended into the kit surface and smooth to the touch.  A lot more effort than I thought it’d be before I started!  Another part of the kit that will be refined after a layer of primer.

 

In the meantime, I cut a length of .250 wide styrene to match the general length between butt joins on the upper hull to use as a marking template.

I then marked off the individual plates in pencil across the hull bottom mid-section.  Adjustments were made at the bow and stern to accommodate the more complex shapes.

Next, I snipped many dozens of .250 width strips of .010 x.030 styrene to approximate the kit butt joins.  I used some scrap styrene as a template:

These were cemented to the hull in the marked positions…

It took about four days’ worth of my modeling time, but the plates are complete (except for a few on the outer edges that will wait until final tuning).

 

Here is a view of my bottom plate butt joins along with the kit side versions:

Not too far off.  Some sample views:

Butt Straps and bottom keel up next.

 

Cheers,

Evan

 

Edited August 11, 2023 by Force9

[yvesvidal]

Incredible work. You are very courageous and patient. Your hull will be THE reference.

 

Yves

[Mirabell61]

congrats Evan,

excellant work with the plating, its not so easy in this small scale, and the look is great. Also the Trumpeter basis hull seems to be a high quality, beautiful lines.

 

Nils

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  'Just saw this and it gives one pause to think ... what if ?  And if I was the officer later assigned to manage the lookouts, I'd have ordered a mechanic to break open the locker to get at the binoculars.  Especially if the ship's safety were involved, it would be easier to ask pardon than permission.

 

[Force9]

@Snug Harbor Johnny Aye - one of many overlapping circumstances that collectively led to the tragedy.  If we could only hop into a Time Machine and go back and tweak one or two small things...!

 

Cheers

Evan

[Force9]

Folks -

 

Apologies for the lack of progress on my log.  A bit of travel and a bunch of honey-dos related to home projects and settling my kids back into college have kept me away.  I'm back at the workbench this week and should have some small gains to share soon regarding the center keel and some of the underbody butt straps.

 

In the meantime there has been some lively discussion on some of the Titanic FB forums regarding the purpose of the "mystery" tackle below the emergency cutters that shows in many photos:

The groups are wrestling with a coherent explanation for the purpose of this rigging. Bob Read has offered an elaborate explanation involving the recovery of the twisted and tangled boat falls, but I'm skeptical.

 

To give some quick context - this setup only shows up when Titanic (and Olympic) are putting to sea and the emergency cutters are swayed outboard in the ready position.  When in port the cutters are stored inboard and this rigging is stowed.

 

I have my own thoughts, but will hold back to not bias any opinions... Any ideas from the wider viewership??

 

Cheers

Evan

 

Edited September 22, 2023 by Force9

[Roger Pellett]

Could they have been used to board and land the pilot?

[Force9]

@Roger PellettInteresting... How would that work?  And if so, do we see this rig on other ships?

 

Perhaps the pilot would board thru one of the lower level access doors on the ship's side?

 

Cheers

Evan

[Roger Pellett]

Accounts that I have read about pilots say that they boarded by a Jacobs ladder put over the side by the crew.  However, as Titanic was such a large vessel I wonder if they had a bosun’s chair handled by a block and tackle to hoist him up.  Nothing but idle speculation!

 

Roger

[Force9]

Here is Bob Read's explanation for this rig: Titanic Cutter block and tackle explanation

 

His theory strikes me as overkill for the stated problem.

 

I would guess that the Olympic class has a problem unique to the cutters that would call for a common and simple remedy using this tackle. Unlike the other lifeboats, the cutters have another boat stored directly underneath them and between the davits at the boat deck level.  This makes loading the cutters from the boat deck awkward, cumbersome, and potentially dangerous.  I suggest that it was oftentimes preferred to lower the cutters one level and have the boat crew hop aboard through an open window. What we are seeing are the Bowsing Tackles used to secure the boat to the side of the ship while loading or unloading in times of active seas or deep ocean swells.  This rigging was common in 1912 and still in use today.

 

Perhaps a Bosun mate clambers into the cutter from the boat deck, releases the gripes, unlocks the falls, and rides the boat down to the A-deck.  He indicates by voice and hand signal to the davit operator to stop, reaches across with a boat hook and pulls the Bowsing Tackle inboard and secures it bow and stern.  Fenders tied to the thwarts are already dangling over the side to cushion the gunwales. The tackle is pulled taut to secure the cutter to the ships side to prevent any swinging or oscillation while the oarsmen and cox’n hop on board through an open A-Deck window.  The Bowsing Tackle is eased out to align the boat back under the davits, the tackle is cast off, then a signal is given to the davit operator, and the lowering proceeds to the water.

 

I think that the explanation is straightforward… These are the Bowsing tackles pre-rigged for securing the cutters to the A-deck siding while loading (and unloading) as circumstances merit.

 

So far, NOBODY has bought into my theory.  I've got no evidence to support my thinking, and Bob Read has way more credibility in this space to get folks aligned to his ideas.

 

Cheers

Evan

Edited September 26, 2023 by Force9

[Ferrus Manus]

Why wouldn't the oarsmen and cox'n just hop in before the boat went down? Perhaps to ease the weight on the crew hauling the tackles? 

[Roger Pellett]

Seamanship!  The crew lived in an era where they were still expected to be able to solve all sorts of problems with simple machines; levers block and tackles, etc.  So, this tackle could have been used for any number of different things.  Was the tackle permanent?  What had the vessel been doing when the photo was taken?  Answering these questions might be the key to solving the mystery

 

Roger

[scrubbyj427]

So without reading bobs article yet, I’m going to venture out and guess that they may have been used to secure the boat to the side of A deck for boarding. I believe that Olympic was meant to board her boats from her open A deck promenade and this was to be carried over to Titanic, except it was decided that the design of Titanics A deck promenade was to be modified well into her construction, this happened March of 1912, late into fitting out. This may have just carried over from her original design. But I could be wrong. 

[Force9]

I suppose the true purpose of this tackle will remain a head scratcher... I really do think it is bowsing tackle for securing the cutters to the A-deck... Bob's theory about recovering the tangled boat falls is sketchy in my mind. I really don't see a problem there that needs his complex solution.

 

Onward!

 

Evan