Landing Craft October What Size?

[Ray Wood 3Participant @raywood3]

Hi All,

Taught at school & home by dad Imperial

Worked 51 years in Metric in construction industry

I still think in Feet & Inches

I find the Imperial measurements much easier to use for our modelling scales 1/12th 1/24th 1/48th & 1/96th

I just google everything conversion wise these days

Still it's a personnel thing right !!

Regards Ray

[Chris FellowsParticipant @chrisfellows72943]

When I first started work as an architectural technical I drew mainly at 1:48 and 1:96. When drawing in metric and carrying out building surveys I would estimate things at height I couldn't measure in feet and inches and convert to metric.

Over time though I found it easier to estimate in 100mm increments and unless I was working off old imperial drawings I rarely used imperial again. Mm and cm are just so much easier to work with rather than eighths and sixteenths etc!

I agree that imperial correlates with the most common modelling scales as many models pre-date our metric era but they are the same size in the end whether imperial or metric!

I still can't think in km or litres though!

Chris

[Colin BishopModerator @colinbishop34627]

Much source material in the form of plans of historical vessels, particularly naval vessels from Victorian to the post WW2 period is in Imperial dimensions so anyone building them has to be familar with Imperial. That will never change.

Imperial won't die out for a long time yet. Just think of all those structures like bridges which are built to and bolted together with Imperial components.

The construction industry still uses Imperial as much of the current building stock was built to imperial dimensions. Go into a DiY store and you buy hardboard sheets which are 1200mm x 610mm but actually 4' x 2'

Often we are still actually using Imperial which is disguised by being converted to Metric.

Colin

[Richard SimpsonParticipant @richardsimpson88330]

I once sailed on the last ships to be built with Doxford engines in the UK. They were three cylinder opposed piston, medium speed. As they were the last ditched attempt by the British marine engine manufacturing industry they ended up as a hash up between traditional British practices that had been successfully used for many years and modern metric practices in an attempt to compete with the likes of Sulzer and Wartsila. They were a nightmare to operate and to work on. Sat in the control room one day over a cup of tea, having the usual moan about the engine, the Chief, a young and very switched on chap, suddenly came out with the line "I don't know what your problem is, every inch of that engine is metric!"

As for Colin's comment with regards to imperial dying out, don't forget that one of the biggest economies in the world is still using imperial measurements and steadfastly refuses to even consider going metric. Try buying a coil of 12mm copper pipe in the USA from a ship chandler, with suitable compression fittings. You will get half inch whether you like it or not! And, yes, it's just enough of a difference to ensure it won't fit with 12mm!

[Chris FellowsParticipant @chrisfellows72943]

All valid points, but if it exists then it can be measured in metric. I surveyed many pre and post war properties, nearly all in metric. The only time you really had to worry about imperial was if you were trying to match bricks. For extensions though, this was usually disregarded though as bricks, unless reclaimed weren't available and so block bonding or wallplates were used to join new to old. In building sizes for materials unless manufactured are rarely as stated anyway, unlike engineering!

I still have my imperial scales, well all my drawing equipment and my 30foot/10metre tape as well as a laser measurer accurate to +/- a few mm over 100m. Bit better than what estate agents use!

Chris

[David Marks 2Participant @davidmarks2]

Regarding the Free Plan due to be included within the November 2023 issue of the magazine, and following earlier discussions on this Thread, I have sent an email to Lindsey, the editor including the following two requests:

Calibration Scale(s) in both Metric and Imperial added to the border (Horizontal and Vertical) of each sheet of the Plan: Metric in 25 mm increments with every fourth one identified i.e. 0 – 100 – 200 mm etc on the Bottom and Left Hand edges and Imperial in 1 inch increments with every fourth one identified i.e. 0 – 4 – 8 – 12 inch etc on the Top and Right Hand edges.

Define the Overall (O/A) Length and O/A Beam of the model together with the extremities for each. This would be best done on the Plan View i.e. looking down of the model from above and only needs to be shown once. Both the O/A Length and the O/A Beam should include any protrusions from the main hull. So for Plover the protrusions to be included in the O/A Length are the Pusher Knees and Pads at the Bow and the tip of the Rudder at the Stern. For Plover, the O/A Beam is just the width of the Hull as there are no protrusions but on some models there could be rubbing strakes and/or spray rails that protrude from the Hull.

[ashley needhamParticipant @ashleyneedham69188]

Hi David. I totally agree that a calibration scale would be the best way forward. Instant info on any fitting on the boat available at the prod of a calliper. No problem resizing, as the scale would remain with the resizing. A simple scale would have made all the difference to this thread!

I always include in my articles a brief overview of the boat, and these facts usually appears in a little box somewhere.

o/a length, width, height (specified as to what bits in the case of height if there are masts and so on)

weight either with of without battery and motor type/battery type.

I can understand the choice of scale to produce modest dimensions, but 1:40 is not conducive to populate the craft as military kits are usually 1:35, while plastic figures (like I collect) are usually 1:32, and this is the reason we chose 1:32 as the scale to make ours at. Airfix figures at this size are plentiful on e-bay, kits similarly and there is not much difference between 35 or 32 to notice much.

Cheap bags of 50mm ish size figures would be likely suitable from Poundland, but you would have to hunt around for vehicles to match them, even vaguely size wise. Not the end of the world though as simply making the control cabin a bit bigger would instantly resize the craft to larger figures!

Ashley

[David Marks 2Participant @davidmarks2]

Ashley

From your list of wants, I have covered everything except the weight as I have not bothered to weigh the thing myself, indeed I have never weighed any of my models. Indeed one of them was Plaxtol which is my version of David Metcalf's Plaudit. With just the motor batteries, speaker for the sound unit etc., I had visions of the thing sinking but the bathtub test revealed that it sat in the water without even the need to include any ballasting. However, going back to offering in the November 2023 magazine it is a bit heavy as it contains 4 Kg of sheet lead to achieve a Freeboard of 20mm, but on the drawing I have recommended a maximum Freeboard of 30mm as anything above 30mm would (in my opinion) look unrealistic.

[ashley needhamParticipant @ashleyneedham69188]

David. For craft that need to be built light, I bother weighing them, but for displacement type models..warships etc, I would not bother. Usually they need some ballast and so I would not necessarily think you need to know the weight of them?

Theres freeboard for the right look, and then there’s a realistic freeboard that allows you to operate them on a lake.

my little Sans Pareil has an 18mm freeboard…and that’s way too much! But anything lower would mean the thing would be decks awash all the time. I know a lot of them at the time we’re very wet, but it does a model no good to be that wet.

Ashley

[Grahame Chambers 1Participant @grahamechambers1]

The LCM plan as supplied needs to be enlarged 145.5% to make it the correct size, hopefully that's useful info.

[Colin BishopModerator @colinbishop34627]

Lindsey has been discussing republishing at the correct size with Glynn.

Colin

[Chris EParticipant @chrise]

Digital subscribers have a win here. Once you realise that the plan was meant to be A3 size the rest is easy. Print the two pages A3 landscape & Bob's your uncle! Just adding a note to that effect on the archive plan & other digital sources should be very easy.

Print subscribers can obviously scan and then print A3 landscape.

I appreciate what Lindsey is trying to do but for non subscriber print buyers it is probably too late as not everyone buys every issue or reads this forum.

[Dave ReedParticipant @davereed72029]

Hi All,

Just to stick my oar in as a beginner to model boat building…

I've seen this issue come up before for other plans and agree with many that a scale on the plan is the way forward. An additional thought is that a short note at the end of the build article pointing to this forum would help builders find helpful posts such as this.

Taking it one step further, a specific post could be created (like Ashley's Bumper assist post) where builders could discuss the build and assist each other.

Dave

[Chris EParticipant @chrise]

Yes – the opinion of beginners as to what would help them is, I believe, very valuable.

To be fair to those providing the plans many do have threads devoted to their builds. Ray Wood 2, for example, is particularly good at this and questions about other plans are generally answered pretty quickly and helpfully by the community. Unfortunately not all plan authors are regular contributors to the forum.

You have certainly found a thread about the landing craft plan!

Edited By Chris E on 19/09/2023 15:56:41

[ashley needhamParticipant @ashleyneedham69188]

Just knowing what to do with the plan as per the mag print should be enough I would have thought.

Grahame says enlarge by 145%, any print shop will scan and print to that, or simply to A3.

Simply knowing a few salient dimensions would be enough for most of us but Lindsey made a point that some cannot work to a plan unless every last thing is proportioned, beginners, or those new to the task.

Ashley

[Ray Wood 3Participant @raywood3]

Hi All,

The centre fold A 3 pull out plans concept has been around for donkey's years going back to Vic Smeed's design's in Model Maker magazine the pre-runner to Model Boats. It's rather a shame these were lost and not passed on for sale, I did a series of 4 designs during 2018 – 19 for Graham Ashby & Martyn then editors. The one I like best I can't find Mini Mist a smaller version of Vic's Silver Mist

I'm sure if the current production team went back through the older issues they would pick up some tips ?

Regards Ray

[John W EParticipant @johnwe]

Hi there Ray

Could you tell me what month & year of Model Boats mag that plan of the MTB is in?

Much appreciated.

John

[Ray Wood 3Participant @raywood3]

Hello John,

July 2018 issue , quite a fun little boat as I recall

Regards Ray

[John W EParticipant @johnwe]

cheers Ray – I have located my plan and magazine – mmmmm another one to add to my build pile maybe.

John

[ashley needhamParticipant @ashleyneedham69188]

Ray, you could have designed a cover for the clockwork keyhole on the side….

Ashley

[Author]

Posts