[ Post a Response | The SteelNavy.Com Message Board ]
Re: Iowa Class Plans
Posted by Tom Bates on February 15, 2020, 16:50:39, in reply to "Iowa Class Plans
Hi, I collect ship drawings as a hobby and I very interested in some blueprints for the iowa class. I hope you could help me. I been trying to track down some plans of a iowa class #1 machinery arrangement drawings #2 Detailed builders GA plans#3 Any system drawings ( fuel, steam, water etc.)Would you have any of these scanned - if you do I would greatly appreciate it if you could share ( i would share any of my archive of 500+ ga ( and some machinery) plans of naval and merchant vessels. Thanks - Tom my email is TomLbates@gmail.com
I have been scanning what remains of the significant Iowa class blueprints. Once they get organized, I expect that the U.S.S. New Jersey will put them online. As mentioned suggested above a few people have come by with removable drives to get raw data dumps.
I have not yet seen the book. As I am working on one of my own I will not do an in depth critique if and when I see it. Everyone has erers and misteaks in books. However, I make the general criticism I have made repeatedly before that computer generated images are becoming a gimmick in naval books. That is not to say that computer generated images are bad per se. They are great for illustrating concepts that are not otherwise viewable. But what we are seeing is computer renderings for the sake of computer renderings.
I have two main sub-complaints about the rendering trend in books. First, renderings should not be a substitute for photographs. It is impossible to come up with a computer model that shows every possible detail on something the size of a ship. When renderings are used as photographs, details get lost. A detail that gets lost by the author can be a detail that is important for the reader. IMHO, a rendering should convey to the reader what kinds of details have been omitted.
Second, many renderings showing up in books are pointless and just take up space on the page. If you have a deck plan, extrude bulkheads and partitions, rotate, and render, you have conveyed no more information than you would if you had just used a 2D plan. In fact, a 2D plan is usually clearer.
I appears to me that Osprey was the main driver of this rendering trend in their small paperback series books. That had spread to AOTS once Osprey bought the series. Even NIP is doing it now.
In regard to some of the details mentioned in this thread, I can't tell you if the book got them right but I can tell you what they should be like.
At the end of the twin keel there is a large casting that includes the shaft outlet. In cross section the casting is shaped like a "T" where the descender is one of the keels and the cross stroke is the horizontal hull.
I have yet to see a kit get the docking keel right. But this is its vertical plan. I don't know why this area of the ship remains such a mystery as the documentation is available.
This is my own quick and dirty rendering of the Third Deck. The original plans include 3D data (X/Y/Z coordinates). This comes from that data. I have gone through the Third Deck with a laser measure and spirit level so I am confident this is correct.
This is the original plan for Frame 202.
The area of the hull at the rudders are forgings. There is a large, thick, basically rectangular plate at the hull. Above, there is a heavy mounting for the rudder. The longitudinals and frames extend over the plate and are welded to the mounting.
I posted this image a few days ago showing the plating. This is my own diagram that I created using the 3D coordinate data in the plans to get the seams. The overlaps and plate sizes are the result of digging (the existing plans are in bad shape and frequently unreadable).
For fun, here is my own rendering of the Iowa Class hull structure. Not quite finished.
SteelNavy.Com Home Page