The First Modern Submarine

Discussion in 'Gallery & Designs' started by Gil, Sep 4, 2006.

  1. rmks2000

    rmks2000 Member


    My preference is the classic card stock method. To me, the 'filler' method is fine for a one-off model. The paper method requires quite a bit more effort to design, but I think is more accessible to modelers (assuming that you are sharing this model). With that said though, the filler method could also be accomplished using tissue paper rather than filler. This would probably be the fastest way to see if the hull formers are designed correctly.
  2. Jim Krauzlis

    Jim Krauzlis Active Member

    It's your model, of course, but since you asked...:grin:

    I prefer the classic printed card method. I think when done right the finished model can show far more of the detail from a nice print job, and easier for the builder, than would be possible from painting it alone. Gratings, bolt/rivet heads, rust, weathering and the like can be included much easier if made part of the printed card than in trying to add it later using scratch building techniques. Again, it's your design and model...I'm just enjoying this wonderful thread!

  3. Kevin G

    Kevin G Member

    The sub is looking awesome! I prefer the second method myself, the farther away from paint I am the better. It is your model though and you should use the method you prefer.
    While you are playing it by ear on releasing it or not, I would love to have one on my shelf if you decide to release it.
    I love watching you guys design models, thanks for sharing your talent with us and letting us see what really goes into a model before it ever reaches the paper.
    Keep up the great work!
  4. Gil

    Gil Active Member

    Poll Results, Next Category...,

    Hello All,

    As I already suspected a kit is the unanimous opionion. So a kit it is.

    Now for the scale selection:

    1:32 20.15 in. (51.2 cm)
    1:48 13.44 in. (34.13 cm)
    1:64 10.08 in. (25.6 cm)
    1:72 8.96 in. (22.75 cm)

    Best regards, -Gil Russell
  5. rmks2000

    rmks2000 Member


    Scale doesn't matter to me. I can always resize. But if I was pushed, I'd go with 1/64. This will go great with the Henly and Hajen.
  6. Bowdenja

    Bowdenja Active Member

    Scale is your choice................ reguardless......... can you redo your profiles to print on letter stock........... those are good enough to hang! I for one would like to have them!

    Truly artistic Gil!

  7. Gil

    Gil Active Member


    I'll see what I can do.

  8. If pragmatics count, it's a lot easier to rescale a kit downward than upward.
    I'd love to see it in 1:32.

    Cheers --- Larry
  9. Kevin G

    Kevin G Member

    I have to agree with Larry for two reasons.
    1. As he stated, it is easier to scale down since you end up needing to add details as you scale up.

    2. I LOVE large models :-D the bigger the better!

    Either way, can't wait to see this one come out no matter what the scale!

    I also have to agree with John, all your renders are nice enough to frame!

    Keep up the good work!
  10. Alcides

    Alcides Member

    Gil, the model looks very nice. :)

    and About the method I prefer the tradicional method because I hate painting.:wink:

    Also I prefer the 1:32 scale.

  11. Jim Krauzlis

    Jim Krauzlis Active Member

    As to scale, I would think whatever fits nicely in one's display case or shelf, so around a foot in length is nice; of course if the final files can be rescaled, then whatever fits on the paper. I would think 1/48 scale is just about right, but larger would certainly be fine as well given the size of this model.

    I wonder what it would look like at 1/600 scale?:twisted:

  12. swiftsword

    swiftsword Member

    Flamingo Hints

    Gil - thanks again for your advice on Flamingo! I've tried it out with - I think - good results. And sorry for shamelessly ripping off your great layout!

    And please - do make the Holland in 1:250 as well! I'm planning to make a whole bunch of these oddball vessels from the early days of the USN in that scale. (See below) The ALARM is first, and I've also obtained plans for the USS Katahdin, which will be another interesting model.



    Attached Files:

  13. Bowdenja

    Bowdenja Active Member

    Man I love these profiles!!............. Hey guys I want copies! Really! 8.5 x 11 landscape will look great in my modeling room, whenever I get it!

    Oliver that thing with the sideways paddle-wheel is just about as wierd as they get!

  14. swiftsword

    swiftsword Member

    Yup, that's called a "Fowler wheel" The angle of attack of the paddles where changed as the ship's wheel was turned, which resulted in the ship turning - on a dime, pretty much. I guess agility was a main asset for these early spar-torpedo boats. After all, they were going about in the manner of a bull fighter, trying to poke the big guys with their bombs on sticks. There was one on a 22 ft spar coming out the bow, and two on each side. In addition, the ALARM had a 15" Dahlgren gun mounted in the bow, to "prep" the target, I gather. I'd imagine the discharge of that big boy would have stopped the boat dead in the water :)

    Regarding the Fowler Wheel: it didn't work. That is, the steering functionality worked fine, but the ship didn't make more than 6 knots. Bit weak for a torpedo boat. No other vessel was fitted with one, and the ALARM was later converted to a Mallory steering screw. (No idea how that worked out) However, the Fowler Wheel was the forerunner of the much more successful Voit-Schneider drive.

    I owe a lot of this information, including vessel plans, to Doug Wilde, over at



Share This Page