Destructive deconstruction - The Chinese Russian Carrier gives in

Hi Robert! Some notes that I found on your model aircraft carrier; state that it was designed with a safety interlock. The motors will not run unless BOTH propeller shafts sense being in the water. I was wondering why there was no obvious on/off switch.. and that's why.

I also found an interesting image on the web which shows an alternate means of powering-up the model while dry-docked...   Does yours have this feature? Operated by touching the two contacts with a finger; it's shown on the deck, rearward of the superstructure.

Thanks George.  From your link:

Often the enemy had weapons which you didn’t and coveted.

The Luger was a prime example.  As I have mentioned here before "War is a stupid way to solve problems" ..or words to that effect.  I hate war be it civil, domestic, or foreign.  "Waged by the elite suffered by the masses."  Even today we have a couple of litttle guys rattling their nukes.  Crazy, absolutely crazy.

roddie, you have a gift for finding things that I either don't look for or can't find.  Probably taken from the box.  Sort of understandable even in Chinese lingo.  I was wondering what those two things were, thought maybe resistors or crystals.  

I don't get the "Detachable bracket".  It is held on with two screws and has no function that I can see.

More pictures, I really mangled the thing.  Not by choice.  That deck was not intended to be removed.  Mid-ship area was tongue/grooved and cemented.





Marked and cut:

rsv1cox wrote:

roddie, you have a gift for finding things that I either don't look for or can't find.  Probably taken from the box.  Sort of understandable even in Chinese lingo.  I was wondering what those two things were, thought maybe resistors or crystals.  

I don't get the "Detachable bracket".  It is held on with two screws and has no function that I can see.

I like the model.. and the differential-steering system via twin-screws (sans rudders) has always interested me.

Chinglish... Once you read enough of it... you actually become fluent. Yea.... the "detachable bracket"... We'll figure out what it's for. Maybe a "WALL_MOUNT"!!!!  

I searched [HT-2828] on google. There's a myriad of Hobby vendors that give their own descriptions/specs. on this cruiser. That's where I read about the safety-interlock/boat must be in water to run statement. One of the YouTube vids shows a kid holding an instruction manual which was stated to be in the English language. I haven't found this manual yet.. but it probably says "Don't try to remove the deck"..

Below photo; I'd guess that those 22-24ga black wires connect to the deck; to the finger-switch/dry-dock interlock.. and may need continuity if your motors won't run. (just a thought.. )



Below photos; show a red + (power wire?) which looks to be cut..





I'd like to see if you can get the electronics to work as designed. Gluing the deck to the hull was probably an effort on the manufacturers part, to help keep water out. They weren't concerned about "guys like us".. who enjoy taking things apart.

Those two wires



connect to the decks finger thingy wires.  I don't know if they were broken, or if I broke them while probing around with the screwdrivers. Probably me.  Maybe these pictures will show them.  My wash/clean job.  Checking for watertight integrity.  







Yes, finger thingy. White blob to left with the 22 guage black wires coming out.



I hard wired and tested each motor individually with the battery, they both work fine.



Check out the ballast.  Overall for a cheap thing (back then $59.00 new) not too bad.

Ah, A new day.

Getting ready to jumper this thing to check the transmitter/receiver functions and one of the leads to a motor broke off.  Soldering time.  



But first I have to figure this - finger and put it in the water thing.  The only reason for this hole in the stern is to let water in, so it must have something to do with it, but there are no electrical connections only a canistor which looks to be ballast.



So, if I put a piece of tape over it and add some water..............



Sukhoi 34 about to lift off.  Perhaps my French SPAD a better platform than the troubled Admiral Kutzhenoiff (sp) Russia's only (maybe) operational aircraft carrier.  At last check it was DIW.

Bob, your model ship has interesting design features incorporated, more sophistication, someone intended it to be more than just a toy.

Admiral Kuznetsov is an interesting concept. Versus our Navy where it is a mobile floating airport and arming/servicing facility, they call it a heavy aircraft carrying cruiser.

Westerners attempt to compare it with US carriers, but I believe Russia had a different intent of it being a special operations carrier, filling a nick.

It belching smoke makes me think it may be using cheaper Bunker-C oil (the dregs of the refinery process) to fuel it boilers, which is considerably cheaper than Navy distillate fuel.

China took its incomplete brother and has spun off an improved version carrier without the belching smoke.

Russia focused its investment in its submarine fleet. With its very wide borders to cover and limited military resources to cover, I think it is more conducive to keep enemies guessing and have a sub pop off surface to air missiles to bring down their enemies.

I find it interesting that through the years, some have lambasted the Cinese for its inferior military equipment.

I think of it as military training aids to learn tactics. Now they have the latest and greatest.

That is what got the US through WW2, until we had better, more superior equipment to end the war with.

I read how the British and it's Commonwealth made do with the Gloster Gladiator biplane until better aircraft came onboard.

Third photo shows a Ruskie PPSH, not a Tommy submachine gun

Levent Suberk wrote:Third photo shows a Ruskie PPSH, not a Tommy submachine gun

Yes, I noticed that.  Very crude when compared with the finely crafted Tommy Gun.  

While going though Russian and Chinese Carriers I found this picture.



They are all carrying Soviet era semi-automatic ceremonial SKS's designed by Sergei Simonov.  All the Baltic countries under Soviet rule and China manufactured them.  I have the Yugoslavian model - Chrome receiver cover, chrome trigger guard, magazine cover, and bayonet.  Very flashy.  I also have the standard Romanian and Chinese models.  Replaced by the ubiquitous select-fire AK-47.  

And also George....Yes not a nuke!  



Tried to get the Carrier motors to run.  Couldn't.  Everything hooked up, power to the carrier (red light on) finger on the "resistors" water in the back toggle the transmitter and nothing.

Levent Suberk wrote:Third photo shows a Ruskie PPSH, not a Tommy submachine gun

Thanks for correcting me, Levant. Weapon recognition is not one of my strengths.

Also interesting in the photo are plumbing pipe fittings and other metallic odds and ends strewn in the pile with what looks like a building in the foreground under construction.

Makes me wonder if this was a posed photo op(portunity).

Bob, you definitely are ahead of me. I don't have the interest in firearms my father and brothers have.

My arsenal is all the saxes, keyboards, ukuleles, guitars, mandolin, etc. Even did the rusky national anthem on sax one cold Winter night in front of a department store for the Salv. Army when customers tapered off.

Yeppers, Bob, the rusky Admiral belching smoke.

GallopingGhostler wrote:

Levent Suberk wrote:Third photo shows a Ruskie PPSH, not a Tommy submachine gun

Thanks for correcting me, Levant. Weapon recognition is not one of my strengths.

Also interesting in the photo are plumbing pipe fittings and other metallic odds and ends strewn in the pile with what looks like a building in the foreground under construction.

Makes me wonder if this was a posed photo op(portunity).

Bob, you definitely are ahead of me. I don't have the interest in firearms my father and brothers have.

My arsenal is all the saxes, keyboards, ukuleles, guitars, mandolin, etc. Even did the rusky national anthem on sax one cold Winter night in front of a department store for the Salv. Army when customers tapered off.

Yeppers, Bob, the rusky Admiral belching smoke.

I took it as a previously captioned photo George, probably Levent too.

Beating swords into plowshares George. I doubt if it will ever happen. I don't see the evil side of firearms. I only see functionality and beauty of design.

Oh, BTW...........



Said to "Works."

rsv1cox wrote:
Tried to get the Carrier motors to run.  Couldn't.  Everything hooked up, power to the carrier (red light on) finger on the "resistors" water in the back toggle the transmitter and nothing.

Robert, I'm thinking the back section of the hull which floods; is meant to provide some dynamic ballast. There's no conductive material there for providing continuity for the motor-circuit.

The drive-shafts/stuffing tubes would provide the necessary conductive-continuity only when the hull is floating in water. Are there any signs of where wires were soldered onto the brass stuffing tubes? I see what looks like "hot-melt glue" on and around those tubes; which would provide some stress-relief for the wires.. if they were soldered onto them.

I would personally BYPASS the finger-switch. Have you tried to connect all those black-wires together? That would "in theory" bypass both interlock systems.

Thanks roddie. I think your on to something. Those little black threads are actually wires on each prop shaft. The conductivity of water may complete the circuit.

The manufacturer was overly concerned about safety. On the later model they increased the warning sign on the stern and molded the propellers in red. They really didn't want you to put your fingers under there.

Yes, my next effort. Short those wires together.

rsv1cox wrote:I don't see the evil side of firearms.  I only see functionality and beauty of design.

It is the heart of man that emminates evil motives. The gun is only an accessory. Those who criminalize the accessory as the cause are either totally deluded or have an agenda. I've noticed those pushing such do not address pursuing true justice to heinous crimes.

Knives, sharp tools, hammers and even automobiles have been used as accessories. Goes back to the heart.

I guess, push comes to shove, you can redo the power system updating it to modern motors and controllers, and R/C gear.

GallopingGhostler wrote:

rsv1cox wrote:I don't see the evil side of firearms.  I only see functionality and beauty of design.

It is the heart of man that emminates evil motives. The gun is only an accessory. Those who criminalize the accessory as the cause are either totally deluded or have an agenda. I've noticed those pushing such do not address pursuing true justice to heinous crimes.

Knives, sharp tools, hammers and even automobiles have been used as accessories. Goes back to the heart.

I guess, push comes to shove, you can redo the power system updating it to modern motors and controllers, and R/C gear.

It always upsets me George when I hear "gun violence" expressed on the news.  It's not gun violence anymore than it's Oxycodone violence which kills many, many more people per year than guns do.  It's people violence.  A gun, hammer, or knife just sits there until a person picks it up with an evil intent.  With Oxy there is just less blood but the result is the same.  

Today, we live in a world much different from the one I grew up in so I know the difference first-hand.  I watched the evening news then as I do now.  It's amazing how the character of this nation has changed in the past 70 years.  Now people are told that they are "entitled" back then they just got to work.  

Thankfully, here on the CEF we have diversions..........So, my dual engined, foreign made, plastic boat with little airplanes on the deck keeps me sane and happy.  

I'm thinking about adding one of my old Futaba radios George. Perhaps a couple of shafted Babe Bees too.