| Author |
Topic: Italeri 1/35 PT109 The Final Days |
|
Jimmy
New Member
|
  
Posted on: Oct 7, 2014 - 9:35am
|
Thank you Jeff. I'll check it out.
|
Total Posts: 2 | Joined:
May 3, 2022 - 11:08am | IP
Logged
|
|
Michael Vorrasi
Advanced Member
|
Posted on: Oct 7, 2014 - 10:52am
|
Hi Ultimate Shield,
You might want to rethink the location of the depth charges. Seems from your photo that they are both too far forward, and too far inboard. You need to relocate them closer to the deck edge and closer to the forward torpedoes. If they rolled off from their current location, they would slam into the deck instead of clearing the edge.Please check out actual photos of the 109 in this thread as they show correct location of the depth charges.
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboardr.cgi?fid=102&cid=101&tid=3214&st=10&nd=20&pg=1&sc=20
Mike |
Total Posts: 72 | Joined:
Jul 1, 2013 - 11:46am | IP
Logged
|
|
David Waples
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Oct 7, 2014 - 7:33pm
|
It's hard to tell from the photos but I would guess closer to the Chart House. Back from the deck edge is the right idea. How close is open to speculation. It was not uncommon to have them located in from the edge and yes, they would roll across the deck a little before going off the side. The photo does not clearly show where the toe rail ends but if I were guessing (and I am) I would think it would be gone just forward of where the depth charges would roll back.
I'm also of the no mast camp. There's just no indication that it was there. From previous photos I've seen of this boat it was gone before Kennedy took command. I have to tell you that I love those A frame masts. Nobody would like to see it more than me. I just don't think it's there.
Best reference photo I've seen is this one. It's pretty clear that those depth charges are set back a ways. As close as it is to the torpedo tubes it has to be. Photo is from the jacket cover of Dr. Ballard's book. I believe it comes from the Kennedy Library but not positive.
Dave
David Waples |
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined:
Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm | IP
Logged
|
|
Drew Cook
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Oct 8, 2014 - 8:08am
|
Hey Ultimate Shield,
Mike and Dave are correct. Shoot me your email, and I'll send you a couple of PT 109 depth charge placement photos and an excellent speculative -- and I believe correct -- diagram by Dave Waples.
Mine is: rac701@msn.com
|
Total Posts: 1306 | Joined:
Oct 19, 2006 - 10:44am | IP
Logged
|
|
Ultimate Shield
New Member
|
Posted on: Oct 9, 2014 - 1:47pm
|
Thanks for the input guys. Really do appreciate it
Concerning the Depth charges.
I placed them farther back to mimic a photo in this thread after reading about what the crew might have done after the torpedo/depth charge incident.
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboardr.cgi?fid=102&cid=101&tid=2913&pg=15&sc=20&x=0
Here's a few better photos of my current positioning of the charges. Other than being set back, they're in the same forward position that Italeri had them in. I'm not opposed to moving them closer to the cart house, as I'm thinking of making all new toe rails anyway, but lmk what you think he
-Dana
|
Total Posts: | Joined:
Unregistered | IP
Logged
|
|
Drew Cook
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Oct 9, 2014 - 5:01pm
|
Just my opinion, but, from studying the existing photos of the 109 under JFK...
They're too far forward -- they should be as close to the forward tubes as to allow the torpedos to just clear them with the tubes cranked out for launching, as shown in Dave Waples drawing (the rearmost placement) in his post of November 15, 2012.
And they're way too far from the edge of the deck. I think they should be at the edge of the foot rails, as in Dave's drawing.
|
Total Posts: 1306 | Joined:
Oct 19, 2006 - 10:44am | IP
Logged
|
|
Stuart Hurley
MASTER
|
Posted on: Oct 10, 2014 - 4:12am
|
Hi,
Just my opinion also,
I agree they need to be further back, just over one depth charge length from the tube and with the base of the rack just inside the toe rail. I don't think your tube locking plates are quite near enough to the deck edge. They should overlap the margin plank by about 1.5mm, so the 'cranked out' angle may not be enough as it is for clearance. Try viewing your model from the same angle as the photo and experiment with the placement. Looks like the tubes are cranked in in the photo above.
Best Regards,
Stu.
|
Total Posts: 255 | Joined:
Mar 19, 2013 - 3:32am | IP
Logged
|
|
Drew Cook
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Oct 10, 2014 - 1:27pm
|
What Stu said...
|
Total Posts: 1306 | Joined:
Oct 19, 2006 - 10:44am | IP
Logged
|
|
David Buck
TOP BOSS
|
 Posted on: Oct 10, 2014 - 3:43pm
|
Hi,
Try this one "pacificwrecks.com PT 132" one photo is worth a thousand words, although not the 109 it may help a little.
Ta.
D.buck |
Total Posts: 332 | Joined:
May 4, 2008 - 2:59am | IP
Logged
|
|
Ultimate Shield
New Member
|
Posted on: Oct 15, 2014 - 9:00pm
|
Ok, so here's the repositioned depth charges. Set them just forward of the cart house and just behind the toe rail.
Also, here is how I went about tackling the subtle "S" curve for the bow. Starting from the forward 3rd of the cart house, just under the front of the torpedo head, I added small strips of .010" styrene and slowly built up to .020" strips to the aroximate high point, then went back to .010" strips right up until about the center of the most forward hatch. Then I did just the smallest amount of sanding to the most forward point of the bow (enough that it didn't cause problems. It doesn't sound like much, but I think it did a OK job given the limited ability to modify this area, and it should pop out more once the deck is permanently attached to the hull.
Oh and I forgot to answer your question about how I was planning to do the water effect. I've never actually done one, so this will be a first for me. But I am very fond of the water effects of modelers like Kostas Katseas. Even though the largest scale I've seen his technique done in is 1/350, I;m confident it's possible to do with larger scales as well. In fact, I have seen an incredible 1/72 Revel U-boat done in Very heavy seas that even had water coming out of the hull vents. (though I can't seem to find it now, really wish I could find it)
The real purpose of the waterline is to be practice for the 1:200 Bismarck I have going. I've put so much damn time into the thing, I don't want it to be brought down in the end with a poor water effect.
|
Total Posts: | Joined:
Unregistered | IP
Logged
|
|
|
