Author Topic: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing  (Read 512104 times)

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Pat

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 395
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #300 on: 03 Jan , 2010, 21:33 »
While I'm at it, there was another question posed early in 2009 that perhaps I can also shed more light on.

Sorry I can't find the original post (I have a VERY slow dial-up and it took me about 3 days to go through this thread the first time) but the question was regarding a couple of metal tanks on either side of the casing near the bow.  somebody was wondering what the tanks were for, and it was suggested that they might have been for a net-cutter that had since been removed.

I think there was also a comment that a couple of similar tangs further back had had the hole welded shut.

As a sailor myself for 30 years, I find it hard to believe that any seaman would weld closed a hole in anything without a strong reason.  Any holes serve as attachment points for all sorts of things in an emergency, such as heavy seas where they wanted to clip off a lifeline in a hurry.  So unless they HAD to be closed (in which case, while you had the equipment out why not just cut the tang right off?), the openings would still be there.

My quess is that the tangs might be attachment points for the handwire that goes from bow to stern on the stanchions when the boat is in harbour.  They'd simply clip on the wire at the bow and string it through all the removable stanchions until they get to the stern where there must be some other attachment points for the wire.

Offline Pat

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 395
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #301 on: 03 Jan , 2010, 21:48 »
Sorry to post so often so close together, but I'd been saving them up until I reached the end of the thread in case somebody else came up with the answer I was going to give.

Another question had been asked about the "grapnels", the long poles attached at bow and stern of U-boats.

At least on the water and in marine supply stores, these "grapnels" look like what we call 'boat hooks'.  Most modern ones are made of lightweight aluminum tubing, semi-sealed so that if they fall in the water, they'll float for about 5-10 minutes, or enough time to hopefully retrieve them.

Older ones, (and by older I mean 30+ years) were made of wood for the same reason.  They wouldn't have been made of aluminum during the war because the aircraft industry needed all the aluminum it could get, so it wouldn't have been wasted on U-boats when wood would do.

This seems to be confirmed by the length of the boathook/grapne;s on the U-boats.  Modern ones telescope down to about 1-2 meters in length but stretch out to as long as you can handle.  Since wooden ones can't telescope, then they'd be made as long as possible right from the start.

Boathooks of course have all sorts of uses, but commonly are used to catch things floating on the surface (U-boats used to check garbage to see if they could learn anything about the ships they were hunting), catching and holding small boats that would come alongside (like inflatable rubber dinghys used to land operatives on shore), or men who had fallen overboard.

Modern boathooks have a straight point with a blunted tip and a curved, blunted hook underneath but I've seen variations on this in drawings of older boathooks, some with semicircles for the tips, some with Y-shaped ends, etc.

Offline Pat

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 395
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #302 on: 03 Jan , 2010, 22:05 »
I might as well empty out all the things I've been saving up.

A while ago, Simon and Siara were debating about a couple of projections on either edge of the deck forward of the Turmembau (CT) near the large round hatch.

I'm not sure, but I think they're a variation on attachment points for the torpedo loading frame. 

Take a look at a book called "Kreigsmarine U-boats, 1939-45 Vol1", by Gordon Williamson, Osprey Publishing (sorry, I don't have a scanner) on page 39 there is a photo which shows something similar in that location on the stb side and slightly forward of it on the pt side.  Then on page 46 of the same book, there's a photo of men loading a torpedo through the deck hatch and the outside leg of the framework they're using is connected on the same point.

The only reason I can think of that the points might not be directly across from each other is that the torpedo loading hatch was slightly offset to stb and therefore the leg for the portside of the framework was longer and might have needed slightly different geometry for strength.

Offline Pat

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 395
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #303 on: 03 Jan , 2010, 22:18 »
I thought of another one.  Sorry if I'm being a pest with so many posts right together.

There was another exchange between Siara and Simon earlier asking about placement of cleats along the deck and trying to get the exact points of attachment.

While things such as the trunking and decl hatches would be pretty standard from one boat to another (especially ones from the same yard), cleats are something that probably weren't specified so exactly by the government.  (Free flow holes are another and they vary considerably from one boat to another and from one year to another when the boat was built).

Just like the camouflage patterns were subject to the individual skipper's whim (although the colours available were standard, where they were applied was not), cleats are often welded or bolted to wherever the skipper felt a need and would probably be different from one boat to another.  Like the holes in the tangs, once attached, it would be unusual for a cleat to be removed, so a new boat might have fewer cleats than one that's been in service for a long time.

I've seen lots of class boats of different types where the hull was the same for every boat in the class but minor things like cleats could be found in different places on different boats.

Some cleats probably were in standard locations (the ones at the back edges of the CT just under the point where the rails attach) but ones along the side of the deck amidships might be in different locations depending where bollards were on shore or on the submarine tender ships like 'Black Watch' (the ship that looked after my U-boat).

Offline NZSnowman

  • Admiral4
  • *
  • Posts: 2,419
  • Gender: Male
  • U-1308
    • U-1308 - Wikipedia
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #304 on: 03 Jan , 2010, 23:07 »
Hi.  New member here.  Please excuse me if I screw up the proper format for posting since this is a new forum software that I'll have to learn how to use yet.

Welcome to the AMP Forum :)


I've been building a 1:72 scale U-boat and had been searching for trunking and piping detail under the casing, since it's all going to be accessible in my model, and when I found NZSnowman's drawings they just blew me away.  He's got exactly the data I've been looking for all this time and his drawings are terrific!!!!

Thank you for your kind words. I have enjoy doing the research and the drawing. I have start working on my 'Working Drawing' again http://models.rokket.biz/index.php?topic=124.0


NZSnowman asked: "I was laying in bed this morning and wondering why are the models 1:72 scale, why not 1:70 or 1:75 scale? Anyone know why 1:72 scale."

And dougie47 replied: "Aircraft model scales tend to be in 24th, 32nd, 48th, 72nd, and 144th scale. All numbers that we can divide by 8. This allows Airfix's new 1/24th Mosquito (with 617 parts by the way!) to be exactly twice the size of a 1/48th Mosquito. If 1/72nd had been rounded off to 1/75th we wouldn't be able to make such a comparison."

I think dougie is on the right track when he said that all the aircraft scales can be divided by 8.  It was simply that in the early years of commercial model kits, (at least the ones that were mass marketed in the English speaking world and thus became well known, that they were all measured in inches and the full size item was measured in feet.  It's much easier to divide inches by 1/4, 1/8, etc. than it is to divide by 10s, and this also works out easily with a foot.

Even though metric is used in most places now and measurements divisible by 10 make more sense, the scale standard had already been set in the largest model-making countries of the time.

Thanks for the additional information. I saw the the inches to a feet things....Long live the metric system ;D  ;)


Sorry I can't find the original post (I have a VERY slow dial-up and it took me about 3 days to go through this thread the first time).

I know what a very slow dial-up this like!!! A few years ago at the place I work, it would take about 5min to download a email - no joking!!!


but the question was regarding a couple of metal tanks on either side of the casing near the bow.  somebody was wondering what the tanks were for, and it was suggested that they might have been for a net-cutter that had since been removed.

I think there was also a comment that a couple of similar tangs further back had had the hole welded shut.

As a sailor myself for 30 years, I find it hard to believe that any seaman would weld closed a hole in anything without a strong reason.  Any holes serve as attachment points for all sorts of things in an emergency, such as heavy seas where they wanted to clip off a lifeline in a hurry.  So unless they HAD to be closed (in which case, while you had the equipment out why not just cut the tang right off?), the openings would still be there.

My quess is that the tangs might be attachment points for the handwire that goes from bow to stern on the stanchions when the boat is in harbour.  They'd simply clip on the wire at the bow and string it through all the removable stanchions until they get to the stern where there must be some other attachment points for the wire.

Post http://models.rokket.biz/index.php?topic=106.msg1201#msg1201

This is good thinking, about the attachment points. I think you are right about closing the openings, the holes would serve as great attachment points. Also I just look at the book U-995 by Eckard Wetzel http://cgi.ebay.de/U-995-Eckard-Wetzel_W0QQitemZ370313170051QQcmdZViewItemQQptZSach_Fachb%C3%BCcher?hash=item5638628c83 it look like U-995 never had a net-cutter  :-\


Another question had been asked about the "grapnels", the long poles attached at bow and stern of U-boats.

At least on the water and in marine supply stores, these "grapnels" look like what we call 'boat hooks'.  Most modern ones are made of lightweight aluminum tubing, semi-sealed so that if they fall in the water, they'll float for about 5-10 minutes, or enough time to hopefully retrieve them.

Older ones, (and by older I mean 30+ years) were made of wood for the same reason.  They wouldn't have been made of aluminum during the war because the aircraft industry needed all the aluminum it could get, so it wouldn't have been wasted on U-boats when wood would do.

This seems to be confirmed by the length of the boathook/grapne;s on the U-boats.  Modern ones telescope down to about 1-2 meters in length but stretch out to as long as you can handle.  Since wooden ones can't telescope, then they'd be made as long as possible right from the start.

Boathooks of course have all sorts of uses, but commonly are used to catch things floating on the surface (U-boats used to check garbage to see if they could learn anything about the ships they were hunting), catching and holding small boats that would come alongside (like inflatable rubber dinghys used to land operatives on shore), or men who had fallen overboard.

Modern boathooks have a straight point with a blunted tip and a curved, blunted hook underneath but I've seen variations on this in drawings of older boathooks, some with semicircles for the tips, some with Y-shaped ends, etc.

Again thanks for the additional information  :)


I might as well empty out all the things I've been saving up.

A while ago, Simon and Siara were debating about a couple of projections on either edge of the deck forward of the Turmembau (CT) near the large round hatch.

I'm not sure, but I think they're a variation on attachment points for the torpedo loading frame. 

Take a look at a book called "Kreigsmarine U-boats, 1939-45 Vol1", by Gordon Williamson, Osprey Publishing (sorry, I don't have a scanner) on page 39 there is a photo which shows something similar in that location on the stb side and slightly forward of it on the pt side.  Then on page 46 of the same book, there's a photo of men loading a torpedo through the deck hatch and the outside leg of the framework they're using is connected on the same point.

The only reason I can think of that the points might not be directly across from each other is that the torpedo loading hatch was slightly offset to stb and therefore the leg for the portside of the framework was longer and might have needed slightly different geometry for strength.

Pat, are you talking about these holes?




I thought of another one.  Sorry if I'm being a pest with so many posts right together.

There was another exchange between Siara and Simon earlier asking about placement of cleats along the deck and trying to get the exact points of attachment.

While things such as the trunking and decl hatches would be pretty standard from one boat to another (especially ones from the same yard), cleats are something that probably weren't specified so exactly by the government.  (Free flow holes are another and they vary considerably from one boat to another and from one year to another when the boat was built).

Just like the camouflage patterns were subject to the individual skipper's whim (although the colours available were standard, where they were applied was not), cleats are often welded or bolted to wherever the skipper felt a need and would probably be different from one boat to another.  Like the holes in the tangs, once attached, it would be unusual for a cleat to be removed, so a new boat might have fewer cleats than one that's been in service for a long time.

I've seen lots of class boats of different types where the hull was the same for every boat in the class but minor things like cleats could be found in different places on different boats.

Some cleats probably were in standard locations (the ones at the back edges of the CT just under the point where the rails attach) but ones along the side of the deck amidships might be in different locations depending where bollards were on shore or on the submarine tender ships like 'Black Watch' (the ship that looked after my U-boat).

Again thanks for the additional information  :) Also that U-Boat are you doing? My drawing is of U-1308, the last VIIC/41 build. It would be the height of VIIC's, it had all the newest U-boats toys like FuMT 1 Aphrodite, FuMT-2 Theti, Tarnmatte and Alberich. I will be add FuMO-61 Hohentwiel-U and a Schnorchel, I am unsure if U-1308 had these last two things as there is no document :( 



 

Offline Pat

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 395
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #305 on: 04 Jan , 2010, 00:00 »

Simon, yes, this dial-up id driving me crazy.  I think there

Offline NZSnowman

  • Admiral4
  • *
  • Posts: 2,419
  • Gender: Male
  • U-1308
    • U-1308 - Wikipedia
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #306 on: 04 Jan , 2010, 01:11 »
Simon, yes, this dial-up id driving me crazy.  I think there

Offline Pat

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 395
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #307 on: 05 Jan , 2010, 17:02 »
Thanks for the suggestion but I don

Offline NZSnowman

  • Admiral4
  • *
  • Posts: 2,419
  • Gender: Male
  • U-1308
    • U-1308 - Wikipedia
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #308 on: 07 Jan , 2010, 11:50 »
Thanks for the suggestion but I don

Offline NZSnowman

  • Admiral4
  • *
  • Posts: 2,419
  • Gender: Male
  • U-1308
    • U-1308 - Wikipedia
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #309 on: 07 Jan , 2010, 22:26 »
Electrical System - Bow section of the Engine Room


Offline Greif

  • Admiral2
  • *
  • Posts: 755
  • Gender: Male
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #310 on: 08 Jan , 2010, 01:55 »
Very nice Simon.  I am using your drawings as on of the references while I build the Type VII interior by the way. ;)

Ernest

Offline NZSnowman

  • Admiral4
  • *
  • Posts: 2,419
  • Gender: Male
  • U-1308
    • U-1308 - Wikipedia
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #311 on: 08 Jan , 2010, 02:10 »
Ernest, if you want to look at any other sections of the interior, let me know, as I can post you the latest drawing.

Offline Greif

  • Admiral2
  • *
  • Posts: 755
  • Gender: Male
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #312 on: 08 Jan , 2010, 03:08 »
Thank you Simon, I'm working on the galley/PO quarter at present.  If you have any drawings of that area I would be glad to have them at my fingertips so to speak.

Ernest

Ernest, if you want to look at any other sections of the interior, let me know, as I can post you the latest drawing.

Offline NZSnowman

  • Admiral4
  • *
  • Posts: 2,419
  • Gender: Male
  • U-1308
    • U-1308 - Wikipedia
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #313 on: 08 Jan , 2010, 13:00 »


I have not research that the original colour (sorry color for you other people  ;) ;D ) of the galley. Would be nice to know that is the original colour was.

Offline Sniperonzolo

  • Lieutenant (jg)
  • *
  • Posts: 73
Re: VIIC/41 - Schematices drawing
« Reply #314 on: 08 Jan , 2010, 13:41 »
woooof NZ!!!!
looks fantastic!!!
ps why u looks like a sailor in your pics???
do i see your face around regattas?

ceers