Forward crew section VII / 3D model / 1/72

[Marko]

oh, well i measured the CMK pieces, and currently the dimensions line up perfectly, however if i would make the spacers all equal and lift the keel upwards, the part would stand out too far away. Also CMK designed the torpedo room too aft, which brings the keel out of proper alignment. Im sorry for that, but i think we have to call it as is. The water tank reached too far out so i rather trimmed it to fit the below deck compartment, i also made the same water level mark as the upper water tank next to your bunk

[tore]

Somehow the drawing of the watertigth  bulkhead between the CPO mess and fwd torpedoroom is going into the boxkeel as are part of the pressurehullframes as indicated on the posted drawings. The horisontal centerlines of your frames indicates the pressurehulline. See the posted picture.
Tore

[Marko]

hmm, yes, i guess i know what you are talking about, those "supports" are going into the pressure hull, while they should remain outside, i think i should lower the resting plate of the batteries till the pressure hull outer limits, and cut the supports off.

[tore]

hmm, yes, i guess i know what you are talking about, those "supports" are going into the pressure hull, while they should remain outside, i think i should lower the resting plate of the batteries till the pressure hull outer limits, and cut the supports off.

Yes, make the battericompartmentfloor follow the yellow lines on the top of the frames as on the posted drawing below.
Tore

[Marko]

erm, batteries were inside the pressurehull right? they had extra box around them and that's it right?

I extended the pressurehull's edge till the cut-away position and shortened the supports. I know that they are still not the same length, but i think that would not be justified since the rest of the compartments have been made without them, or totally different as the original plans. Oh, CMK added holes between those support ribs of thepressure hull, should i make the same or was it solid between?

[Marko]

latest results:
still needs some assembling guides and approval or if there are needed any changes

[tore]

Marko
I am posting two crossection drawings at frame 51 and 64 may be they explain better than words.
Tore

[tore]

erm, batteries were inside the pressurehull right? they had extra box around them and that's it right?

I extended the pressurehull's edge till the cut-away position and shortened the supports. I know that they are still not the same length, but i think that would not be justified since the rest of the compartments have been made without them, or totally different as the original plans. Oh, CMK added holes between those support ribs of thepressure hull, should i make the same or was it solid between?

The batteriycompartments were indeed inside the pressurehull having bulkheads all around. I am not sure I`m understanding you on the "supportribs" question. But if you mean the strengthening ribs inside the saddletanks (outside the pressurehull) they were of different execution depending on which tank, You`ll find excellent crossectiondrawings on the net (Uboat Archives).
Tore

[Marko]

well i know that i should lift the boxkeel quite a bit higher, but if i do so, CMK's parts will fall out of alignment. In my opinion that would not look esthetic. since the boxkeel in crew compartment would be approx. 5 mm higher than the boxkeel in the forward torpedo room designed by the CMK. This issue could be solved only if CMK would design the torpedo room about 2 cm forward to the bow, then the boxkeel could follow the diagrams that you provided. So unfortunately i cannot fix this.  the holes that i ment (marked with red circles)...


maybe this will help explain the alignment issues (these parts essentialy do not allow me to make higher boxkeel + those equal length supports, well technically i could do it, but i think i would loose the smoothness of parts):

[TopherVIIC]

Marko -
You ARE aware that the CMK forward compartment has very little to do with historical accuracy compared to known drawings, yes? For instance, the part marked "C" has holes amidships. In reality, that was a solid bulkhead that separated the torpedo compensating tanks 2 and 3 (port and starboard). Holes there would make the tanks one big tank, not two. Forward of that, part "C" has a solid bulkhead, where there should be none - That was the trimzelle. There are numerous other"inventions" in that CMK kit. Just letting you know so that you are aware THEY did not look at the drawings very thoughtfully... :-)
Christopher

[tore]

Marko
The area you have indicated red circles is the centerplate inside the box keel, this plate was solid except for 4 slots presumably made for liftingslings  used during the buildingperiode. You may consider the closed boxkeel to go up to frame 77 with solid centerplate,further fwd you are in the freefloodarea and the centerplate have openings. The isometric drawings showing only a centerplate with holes from the bulkhead between CPO mess and fwd torpedoroom does`t make sense to me as in this area you have two torpedocompensating tanks (no2 and 3) up to frame 69 and then fwd trimtank almost up to frame 74.
Tore

[Marko]

Oh, so ill skip those holes then, either ways, there is very little room to maneuver around there.
CMK probably made those holes to make the cut outs more attractive, since obviously making compensating tanks would prove difficult (so as did the freshwater tanks in my section)

I just had a conversation with our rapid prototyping expert, he fast reviewed some of parts and said that most of it would be no issue, here and there result cannot be guaranteed - especially those reliefs in the freshwater tanks, however we will try to print out all of the parts. If the printouts will prove to be at least good, i will move on to the rear torpedo section.

Also IF the prints wont be faulty, i might consider designing the complete 1/72 type II interior, for the SN kit, or the 1/72 Type XXIII.

[TopherVIIC]

I hope the prints come out well sir! Good luck! I look forward to seeing the results of your hard work!
Christopher

[TopherVIIC]

As a modeler I am quite sure that we LIKE to paint, model and represent details. I think that is one of the reasons why (among many reasons) you have gotten so much interest in your study. You would potentially be filling a gap in the modeling world. I like that!
With any model, there comes a point where the reality of a real full sized object cannot fully be replicated under current manufacturing techniques in miniature. With each day, that point becomes smaller and smaller.
One day we will be able to conceptualize and finalize our drawings into quite refined miniature 3d "real" models.
I suppose it will be to the artists at that point to make sure we keep including details that are as period as possible, for the modelers to build, paint, and represent! :-)
Cheers!

[tore]

Christopher.
Wise words, I thought it was a walkover to make my model of the norwegian version of U 995. The more I went into details the more I realised how much I had forgotten in those 59 years since I spent my time onboard. However the details of the model makes it both challenging and interesting
but of course for most people a sub is just a sub. For me ex U 995 was particular sub and played a very important role in my life and I am amazed and happy to see so many  people are interested and spending days and weeks to figure out details. Looking forward to see the endresults of all your projects.
Tore