HMS Lion by Ian_Grant - 1/150 - RADIO - RESTORATION - WW1 Battlecruiser

[Keith Black]

Great work, great story, Ian. 

[Ian_Grant]

Just a quick pic or two.

 

Printed the magnetic and gyro compasses for the bridge. Came out pretty good for such diminutive parts.

 

I can't find any info as to equipment present in the spotting top. I felt certain there must at least have been one of those gadgets with a circle graduated in degrees, and an eye-scope one points at a distant object to read off its bearing. Here's my rendition, in the top. As it turns out, with the overlapping cover in place over the top, one can hardly see into it but I'll know it's there as well as those few who peer into it.

Edited June 23 by Ian_Grant

[Javelin]

13 hours ago, Ian_Grant said:

one of those gadgets with a circle graduated in degrees, and an eye-scope one points at a distant object to read off its bearing.

For what it's worth, the bearing device is called a pelorus. 

 

The stand itself is called a binnacle or compass/gyro repeater. I'm however not certain if in that time they actually had repeaters or if it was a fixed rose that would give relative bearings (relative to ship's bow that is)  rather than compass bearings.

Nowadays we take gyro bearings with these things. 

 

Sorry for interrupting. You're doing an excellent job. Quite an improvement over your original version!

[Ian_Grant]

I was thinking fixed relative to the bow 🤔.  I later thought, "Wasn't it just v-sights rather than an optical tube?". Oh well.

 

Thanks for your comments and encouragement!

[ddp]

the Princess Royal outboard/inboard drawing i have on my computer as fitted does not show anything in the spotting top.

[Ian_Grant]

RC boat club has our annual demo at the "Stewart Park Festival" in Perth in a couple of weeks, conveniently located 8km from our cottage during our next stay. To this end I would like to get Lion on the water. I will probably take my sailboat too in case the wind obliges.

 

I greased up the propeller stuffing boxes then mounted the twin 540 motors, along with 6mm-4mm couplings, and 4mm U-joints I had in my parts box from the 70's. 😏

U-joint close-up. I have a handful since I had several boats running back then. I like the two-ball joints since the motor and prop shaft axes need not intersect. Due to the greater distance from baseplate to shaft centre compared to my old Decaperm motors, I could not get the prop and motor shafts to align; dropping the motors lower would have meant almost nothing to screw into underneath them! 

Conducted a motor current draw test with my 5C NiMH pack. A single motor draws 620mA @ 6.3V on the bench ( almost exactly the manufacturer's no-load spec), and the same driving the propeller in the pool. It's obviously not feeling the load; I could probably have gone with smaller 385 motors😠. But anyway, 1.2A @ 12V, times two motors, 2.4A; I'd drain the 3Ah lead-acid down in about an hour at full speed (I think). A little more battery oomph would be nice.

 

In fact, I'm sure a single 540 motor would deliver sufficient power for both props if only I could order a gearbox with my random shaft spacing. I could do it with belts and timing gears but it would be a trick to get counter-rotation. On the other hand, is it even necessary in a scale model boat at scale speeds?

 

Also I am considering putting the twin ESC units on different channels so I can run on one motor only, most of the time.

 

In future I could try fitting two identical propellers and drive both from a single motor via belts, to save battery draw.

 

In the meantime I have added some detail.

 

Main director, and spotting top glued and painted black. The masts above the funnel tops are black too. The fore topmast isn't tapered or painted or glued in so far.

Aft searchlight platforms added, with more anti-splinter railing mats. Access is by ladders hidden in this view. Need to add some metal bulwarks behind them. Considering adding another searchlight each side; not historically accurate but it gives a nice balance between fore and aft searchlight groups and I like the look as seen in the 3D render (which is inaccurate in other ways too!).

Extra searchlights in the 3D render.

I've also been busy printing more deck furniture and gluing in place. Here is what surrounds "Q" turret at present.

The flat circles are coaling scuttles.

Bridge with rangefinder, chart table, both compasses, access ladder.

Thanks for following and commenting.......👍

 

Ian

Edited July 4 by Ian_Grant

[ddp]

would not the motor go in reverse if you reverse the polarity with the battery?

[Ian_Grant]

Hi ddp:  Yes of course. The ESC units take care of that, reversing the voltage (or not) depending on whether I move the transmitter stick up (Fwd) or down (Rev).

 

Rereading my post, I think you misunderstood when I mentioned "gearbox"; I only meant a metal box with two shafts connecting to the prop shafts and a single shaft connecting to a single motor, with internal gears to connect them and rotate the prop shafts appropriately. Not a mechanism with forward and reverse gears! 

[Ian_Grant]

Footnote:  I looked up the motor manufacturer data. Using 385 motors instead of 540 would give me about half the torque, at half the current draw. Since the 540 drew zero additional current with the prop in water as opposed to air it must have abundant torque for the task. Sigh. Could have had half the draw and twice the cruise duration. 

 

I am going to try two identical propellers and if there are no adverse effects (I wouldn't expect any) then change the internals to drive both with one of my motors, thus doubling the duration. Maybe I could sell one motor and one ESC on to someone in the club? And my never-to-be-used 6V battery. 😞

[Javelin]

With two identical props you will have a stronger propellor effect when reversing. With counterrotating ones this balances out. 

Depending if you go for right or left handed props, the bow will very strongly move to either port or starboard side when reversing. Which then means that whenever you'd want to reduce speed, you need to take into account a heading change and turning of the vessel. Rudders don't work when props run backwards, so you can't compensate for it either. 

 

That's the only disadvantage I can think of. Perhaps also vibrations that will increase instead of cancelling each other out, but that's difficult to predict. 

She's looking sharp!

[ddp]

Ian, do both props spin in the same direction or does 1 spin right & the other spins left?

[Ian_Grant]

3 hours ago, ddp said:

Ian, do both props spin in the same direction or does 1 spin right & the other spins left?

I have re-installed the same pair of counter-rotating plastic propellers from the 70's. 

[Ian_Grant]

Torpedo net booms stuck into the starboard side. Each boom has a brass etch eye at the outboard end through which I will be threading some "rope". I discovered I don't have much natural colour thread left around so I'll be looking in the sewing shop tomorrow. Once the eyes are threaded I can glue the booms in.

Also, I made the four mechanical semaphores. They turned out pretty good. A 1/16" brass rod with two 3d-printed parts, painted to look like wood; then two "EverGreen" plastic "arms" and some very small wire for handles for the signalman. I didn't actually rig them. 😏

I was amazed that the little part behind the "handles" printed faultlessly using a 0.2mm nozzle. Here it is in CAD; the disks are 0.109" DIA, 1/16" thick; with a 0.07" DIA semi-circular cutout for the brass rod to pass through. They  printed flawlessly with no support required and stuck to the (textured) plate. Amazing machine.....

 

The grid squares are 1/8".

Edited July 9 by Ian_Grant

[Ian_Grant]

On 5/13/2025 at 8:18 AM, NavyShooter said:

Suggestion - if you go with a Hobbywing 1080 ESC, you can adjust the internal frequency that they operate at - when operated at lower frequencies, they 'whine' like most ESCs do.  If you adjust the Freq to the higher end, the ESC whine effectively disappears.

 

I've got a video somewhere about doing that...let me dig up a link.

I don't know if your 1060's are able to be programmed the same way.

 

 

On 5/13/2025 at 9:24 PM, Ian_Grant said:

No, the 1060 doesn't have complex programming like the 1080; it just has two simple jumpers one of which selects "driving " mode (brake/no brake etc; for boats we select simply Fwd/Rvrs),  the other of which selects battery type. I asked tech support and they told me for lead-acid just set the jumper to NiMH mode. I must say this simplicity appeals. Also, the 1080 is $25 more, $50 more for a pair to run my pair of motors.

 

I downloaded the 1080 user manual; programming is done via a single push button and an indicator LED which blinks different numbers of times depending on where you are in the programming flowchart and what you have selected. From my experience trying to program "Cateye" bicycle computers in a similar low-tech programming approach, this might be ok or it might be an exercise in frustration. They do mention, though, that selecting a higher PWM frequency will increase ESC heating since it is "on" more often.

 

I know what you're saying about the whine, though. I will ask the club members who recommended the 1060 if they have this problem. I'm still inclined toward the 1060 but hope I won't regret it.

 

In related news, my 12V motors arrived today!  I need a 12V battery then I could buy a pair of ESCs at the local shop (they have both the 1060 and 1080) and try them out. All new to me!

 

For reference, here is a link to the 1080 user manual. There are 15 programmable functions.

 

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0109/9702/files/Manual_QUICRUN_WP-1080_G2-Brushed.pdf?v=1670441020

@NavyShooter  some weeks ago recommended the 1080 ESC for its programmability, specifically to avoid audible "whine".

 

I have now had the ship on the water, at the club demo at the "Stewart Park Festival", with no discernible whine from the 1060 ESC's. So that's great,........

 

BUT!!! ........ I have now discovered that the 1060 provides less power in reverse than in forward, for RC car applications. This is a fixed spec, not programmable. Not sure how much but read on an old comment string that it's limited to 50% of max. In Lion, this is so low that it takes a lo-o-o-o-ng time to stop if one reverses when already going forward which gave me a couple of scares during the club demo when several ships were wheeling around the pond. Waiting around for "reverse" to eventually take full effect, it hardly moves backwards. You can hear that the motors are slower/quieter in reverse. I don't recall this effect with the old rheostatic controllers in the 70's.

 

Looking again at the 1080 ESC, two of the programming variables are "forward power" and "reverse power" (25%-50%-75%-100%).  DANG!!!  I think I want that extra reverse power......which means buying two 1080 units (about $150 CDN), relegating the two 1060 units (about $100 CDN) to the "unwanted" pile which already includes a 6V Gel battery and its associated charger. If I pull the trigger on 1080's I'll need to sell this stuff on somehow.......the long-suffering Admiral will be displeased. 🤔

 

For all that, the ship was on the water for the first time in 49 years and looked good even though incomplete!! So there's that.

Funnily enough, although the club has several warships mine is the only one painted overall in drab grey......also the only ship from the WWI era.

 

One last comment - she's a little lower in the water than I'd like - a bit too much fixed ballast under the fore and aft decks - I assumed upper works weight would be negligible but it isn't - I can now see myself drilling through the bulkheads (!!) (a bit tricky in the stern) to let some of the lead shot spill out - especially as she was running without the extra weight of the timing gears and servos to rotate the turrets. Sigh.

 

Thanks for following and for commenting!

 

Ian

Edited July 24 by Ian_Grant

[ddp]

should have put the lead shot into bags so can be removable til all work is done so you would know what lead weight is needed to get the model down to the correct waterline.

[Ian_Grant]

1 hour ago, ddp said:

should have put the lead shot into bags so can be removable til all work is done so you would know what lead weight is needed to get the model down to the correct waterline.

Yes, however much of the shot is in the inaccessible cavities at bow and stern. Unfortunately. I thought I'd left enough margin but apparently not.

[Javelin]

Having much less power astern than forward is quite normal in real ships as well. Propellor shape and pitch are optimised to move ahead, not astern.

The main reason a rudder manoeuver is always preferred over a telegraph one. The turning radius is always much shorter in advance than a straight stop. Also reversing props makes you lose any rudder effect/use. That's why sailing isn't as easy as it looks, you need to look well in advance. Real ships also have a lot less power available than any model. 

 

That said, I understand that on a pond a short stopping distance is preferred, certainly when other ships are involved. 

[Ian_Grant]

3 hours ago, Javelin said:

Having much less power astern than forward is quite normal in real ships as well. Propellor shape and pitch are optimised to move ahead, not astern.

The main reason a rudder manoeuver is always preferred over a telegraph one. The turning radius is always much shorter in advance than a straight stop. Also reversing props makes you lose any rudder effect/use. That's why sailing isn't as easy as it looks, you need to look well in advance. Real ships also have a lot less power available than any model. 

 

That said, I understand that on a pond a short stopping distance is preferred, certainly when other ships are involved. 

Thanks Javelin:  Interesting info on real ships. I always assumed a prop would push the same amount of water spinning in either direction.

 

I had a couple of frights on the water because her turning radius is quite large too. I could at first try 75% "reverse power" with 1080's if I decide to buy them.

[ddp]

if your model had the 2 rudders & 4 props like the real ship had, then your model might have handled better then it currently does.

[FreekS]

Another thing to watch for is time delay between “forward” and “reverse”. Car models have this, ship models  should NOT and it’s often a programmable property of the ESC.

[Ian_Grant]

1 hour ago, FreekS said:

Another thing to watch for is time delay between “forward” and “reverse”. Car models have this, ship models  should NOT and it’s often a programmable property of the ESC.

You're right; cars use "Fwd/Brake/Rev" whereas ships want "Fwd/Rev". The 1060 ESC uses a jumper to program this while the 1080 has an internal programmable register.

[Ian_Grant]

I addressed the problem alluded to earlier by removing some a lot of the fixed ballast at bow and stern. This ballast was in the form of lead shot onto which, fortunately, I did not pour epoxy resin but rather inserted a layer of wood over it to keep it stable.

 

The bow was easy; there's a large bulkhead sitting right there. Just drilled a hole each side of centre part way down and presto the shot fell out as I tilted the hull back.

 

The stern was another story. I had to remove the motors and ESC units in order to get the drill body into the hull interior, and drill through a bulkhead recessed behind the aft turret which I could not really see. All without having the bit emerge through the hull bottom or side. You would have needed a crowbar to pry apart my buttocks at the moment I pressed the drill trigger. Again it went well and the shot poured out fine.

 

In float testing originally the waterline of the hull (incl battery, motors, ESCs, etc) was about at the middle of the black bootstripe (which is where I want it) without the removable upper works. Adding the upper works settled w/l to the top of the bootstripe, which I didn't like.

 

I had assumed in original float tests in the shop last winter that the upper works would have negligible weight, however it currently weighs 1.16kg. This is what decided me to remove some previously fixed ballast. I have poured out 2.09kg of ballast. The hull with upper works now sits with w/l at the bottom of the bootstripe. Adding three of my original metal pieces (total 0.6kg) gives a nice waterline. These metal bits will be placed in the accessible areas, giving me leeway to adjust ballast when I add a sound system, possibly smoke generation, etc.

 

So that's a big relief for me.

 

Thanks for your comments and likes!

 

Ian

Edited Thursday at 03:40 PM by Ian_Grant

[ddp]

you must be glad that you also did not glue them solid as then that would be an extremely serious problem to try to fix.

[Glen McGuire]

1 hour ago, Ian_Grant said:

You would have needed a crowbar to pry apart my buttocks at the moment I pressed the drill trigger.

LOL!  I did not need that visual, Ian!  🤣

[Ian_Grant]

2 hours ago, ddp said:

you must be glad that you also did not glue them solid as then that would be an extremely serious problem to try to fix.

Yes it would have been. Probably would have required removing hull skin......😠

[Ian_Grant]

Went to the club pond sail last night. I had verified that the 1060 ESC's do in fact give me full power in reverse; I did what I should have done in the first place and put a voltmeter across a motor to find that it varied from +12V to -12V at the extremes. At the pond, I had much better response in reverse than on the maiden voyage. Either I did something wrong then (can't imagine what since the ESC units automatically calibrate on power-up), or removing 2kg of ballast to get to the proper waterline made all the difference.

 

I've added the topmasts and the three boat cranes are started. Here are some pics.

 

Interior gear. I have plenty of room to add stuff. Seems funny having only one servo, for the rudder, but kudos to modern tech.

From right to left- motors with 5:1 planetary reduction and U-joint couplers; ESC speed controls one per motor (they're so tiny compared to the rheostats I used in the 70's!); lead gel battery; rudder servo and receiver.

Wood fore topmast and brass signal yards. Sorry for focus....

Main topmast with first bit of rigging! Telescoped brass tubes for mast, brass tube yard, 3D-printed "star".

Focus! I need to get a steady rest apparently.

An idea of what ship's boats will be in the aft well deck. I found some free 3D files of various RN boats and can scale each print in the slicer program. The two stacked boats are the same design printed at different scales. The bottom-most boat is a whaler design, not really suitable for the "admiral's barge" now that I see it in person. I did find an admiral's barge but the file costs and really needs to be printed in resin. Note the crane boom.

Crane for boats at fwd superstructure, in progress.

That's it for now. Holidays coming up so it might be a while with no posts. Thanks for following.

Edited 7 hours ago by Ian_Grant

[Kevin-the-lubber]

You’re getting incredibly good results from that Bambu, those boats are not far off resin levels. Mmmn, maybe I ought to invest in a 7th printer…..

 

I try to follow along with all the electronics talk but it still goes completely over my head. So that’s what a servo looks like 🙃.

[Ian_Grant]

On 8/7/2025 at 12:27 PM, Kevin-the-lubber said:

You’re getting incredibly good results from that Bambu, those boats are not far off resin levels. Mmmn, maybe I ought to invest in a 7th printer…..

 

I try to follow along with all the electronics talk but it still goes completely over my head. So that’s what a servo looks like 🙃.

@Kevin-the-lubber, the boat interiors look great but the external hulls are not properly faired; it's not the printer it's the 3D design with too few polygons. Oh well, it's for free! These designs are intended for war gaming apparently. 

 

I used a fine 0.2mm nozzle and selected 0.08mm layers; knowing these values the Bambu Slicer selects the Bambu-Designer-Approved recipe for all the other factors and prints a nice result.

 

The boats buried in the aft well deck work as is, but the more visible (in terms of hull exterior) boats stacked at the forward boat cranes will need to be sanded, or filled and sanded, or plain rejected if I can find something else.......I did find files for Titanic's lifeboats but they're not really apt for most of Lion's boats.

 

For example, here's a slicer image from the 36ft pinnace hull. Hmmm, I wonder if unbeknownst to me the slicer has a function which could smooth those out? Will have to do some googling. 😏 Or learn some Blender.

Edited yesterday at 02:26 AM by Ian_Grant

[Kevin-the-lubber]

Does the .STL look that simplified before it’s sliced? It seems strange that someone has gone to all the trouble of modelling the interior in such detail but then simplified the hull like that. I think Bambu uses an in-house version of orca-slicer. I use the generic version and, when I drop in a complex object comparable to a boat, it throws a little hissy fit and then asks if I want the software to simplify. I wonder if this is happening automatically in yours, and if you can switch that off in preferences. A clue might be how long it takes to slice. I never simplify and it can take 10 minutes for it to grind its way through one of my arty vases or whatever, compared to 20 seconds for simple stuff.

[Ian_Grant]

5 hours ago, Kevin-the-lubber said:

Does the .STL look that simplified before it’s sliced? It seems strange that someone has gone to all the trouble of modelling the interior in such detail but then simplified the hull like that. I think Bambu uses an in-house version of orca-slicer. I use the generic version and, when I drop in a complex object comparable to a boat, it throws a little hissy fit and then asks if I want the software to simplify. I wonder if this is happening automatically in yours, and if you can switch that off in preferences. A clue might be how long it takes to slice. I never simplify and it can take 10 minutes for it to grind its way through one of my arty vases or whatever, compared to 20 seconds for simple stuff.

Yes, that's how it looks as downloaded then imported into Studio, before slicing. You raise an interesting point, though. I will look into it. Thanks Kevin!