Mark P

I would create the coils separately. Glue the free end of the tackle to the deck and then make the coil and glue it over the end of the rope so that it looks like the coil and rope are one.
 
Russ

Good Morning Vladimir;
 
She's coming along beautifully. Thanks for sharing the pictures and your progress. There is a lot of good detailing there, and a nice method of building the boats.
 
Keep up the good work; I look forward to seeing what you will do next.
 
All the best,
 
Mark P

Good Morning Vladimir;
 
She's coming along beautifully. Thanks for sharing the pictures and your progress. There is a lot of good detailing there, and a nice method of building the boats.
 
Keep up the good work; I look forward to seeing what you will do next.
 
All the best,
 
Mark P

Good Morning Vladimir;
 
She's coming along beautifully. Thanks for sharing the pictures and your progress. There is a lot of good detailing there, and a nice method of building the boats.
 
Keep up the good work; I look forward to seeing what you will do next.
 
All the best,
 
Mark P

Dear all,
Last chapter,  Captains gig. 
 
Irony of life do magics. Its strange that such small boat would bring me most joy of entire mammoth project on scale vessel. I have lits of small leftovers so i decided to make captains gig as a last point before wrap.
If someone is interested i can describe this method i tried. I observed mold works - so i bought small boat model for few euro. Completed bulkheads  Filled up with balsa wood and voila - mold ready. - than i bended ribs/  to be oversized / and just simply clamped  them with some rubber ring fasteners. / girls clamp their hairs with those/ ...
.....rest is usual as any clinker....
Even she is not symetrical gave me fun. 
 
 
 
 

Good day everyone, 
Im posting some updates from last twoo weeks. There is proper flooring completed on all decks at this point, I aimed for symetry of bibbing on forecastle deck. I installed new sheer and painted proper "cemented dark grey strake stands are moored into, i quite like what it looks like after i twisted metal sheet to prpoper topraip curvature facing outwards. ...i need to fill bowsprit / floor gap though...  also showing how did i worked on forecastle from start to finish. Poop deck floor is properly curved along the gangway...and met in center/ probably not like prototype but...well...Toilets have dark paneling as seen on famous picture of cutty moored at melbourne wharf. 
I see now that proper decking is probably one of most essential parts of boats designing / structural and functional object covering vast amount of space in ship. It looks majestic now..
 From now on I will install functional machinery, etc....i have still work on remaining 2 rowboats ongoing, capitain gig and dinghy. so that will come further. This time i will try to put on the floor osmo top finish that should not color the floor. Willl see the outcome. Many thanks for watch etc... V. 

To try and remove the cupping, wet the top of the concave side only thorougly.  Then set it down with the concave side down.  Place some weights on it.  It should remove some of the cupping depending on how severe it is.  You can also iron it.
 
some folks prefer to place the concave side up after wetting.  I dont think it matters and i have done both.  The important thing is adding weight while it dries.  There are many videos online that show the process.  If its a hot sunny day this can be done outside on your driveway or sidewalk.  This works well with plywood also. 
 
Whenever I see some boards cupping in my stacks of boards I try to flip them upside down and place them on the bottom of the stack.  This also works but takes a lot of time.  If you dont catch the cupping early it is very hard to remove it.  Catch it as it starts and flip it over and it will correct itself before setting for good.
 
 
 
 
 

I don't know if you have them where you are, but many lawn and garden stores carry square vinyl fence post covers that around 4 to 6 inches square.  I've found them ideal for storing wood as they stiff and I can stack them high. I do use the longest ones I can find and cut them half so I have two pieces for storage.

Ok guys, been looking for this term in all of my books for what it means and have come up short.  It such a great term that they havn't even put it  on Wikipedia but probabley show up in the future. 😲😆😜.  O forgot good job Mark just love your updates.

Hi druxey,
 
I think whenever possible, we should use proper technical terms like "wiggly thingies". It helps with clear communication!😊
 
Mark

I agree that the 'wiggly thingies' (great technical term!) were for spits at varying distances from the heat source.

HI eveyone,
 
Working away. I have installed the foremost port spirketting, using the idea from Rob Napier of SWOPEM (Situation Where One Piece Equals Many) in 18th century ship model construction. You can see the  hooked scarfs inscribed in the single spirketting piece, which allowed me to fit and stain this piece outside the model, then install for a clean line to the waterway. I will hide the vertical joints between these large spirketting pieces behind the standards.
 
Clamping was challenging; I made a shaped block for the outboard side at the centerline, which hooks over the stem to keep it in place while placing the clamp. I also had to use some pins in hidden places to keep the piece tight to the stem and to the waterway while putting the clamps in place.
 


 
While waiting for stain and glue to dry, I continued to work on the stove predating the Brodie stove. Here is all the information I have on my NMM plans for the Bellona ca. 1759:
 
 

 
It matches almost exactly in dimensions the stove shown in the NMM plans for the HMS Dorsetshire of 1757, which has more detail. Check out the massive nozzle to the left:

 
Note in both cases the 4" substance sitting between the stove and the deck below. Mark P.'s original contract from this pre-Brodie stove period clearly calls for a lead-lined tray shaped at the edges by cants around the stove, and says nothing about brick. Looking at the model of the Princess Royal of 1773, 20 years later than the Bellona but a little before the Royal Navy switch to the Brodie stove, the model indicates what Rob Napier interprets as masonry on the base, painted this nice cream color and with a roughly 1 foot square paving pattern (see below). But also notice that it has a black cant around the outer edge. This seems to accord with the drawings of the Bellona and the Dorsetshire. So I wonder if the brick sits over the lead tray but was not mentioned in the contract, or if there were several ways this was done before the Brodie stove, sometimes with lead only, sometimes with masonry.
 

 
Given the certain information of a contemporary model that is consistent with my Bellona drawing, I have decided to go with this attractive cream colored base. Whether it is masonry or not I will leave to the imagination of the viewer!
 
Now, on to some interesting details at the roasting end of the stove, on the right side of the elevation. In the Dorsetshire drawing, the fire grate for the roasting area sits to the right and at the base of the dotted curved line. It appears to be open all the way up to where the chimney starts to angle in. Right in the center of this open space appear to be four horizontal round bars seen as circles in this elevation.
 
We can also see these in the Rob Napier's photo of the Princess Royal stove, below. The location of these would seem to prevent the use seen later in the Brodie stove of arms that can be swung in and out of this fire for holding pots. Indeed, the Princess Royal stove seems to show a shallow pan at the top of the horizontal bars; was this for frying? The pan does not show in the Dorsetshire drawing.
 
Also, note in the Dorsetshire drawing 3 wiggly shapes projecting out from the face of the fire, with one, three and then two hooked shapes for holding a horizontal spit bar or bars, perhaps? they can's swing in over the fire, since the bars are in the way. Did they roast on spits hanging at different distances from the fire, to control the heat? There is definitely a tray for drippings under all of these spit bar holders. So were these wiggly projections just bolted onto the sides of the stove, like the simpler spit bar holders in the later Brodie stove? That will be my best guess at this point.
 

 
All for now!
 
Mark
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Good Morning Gentlemen;
 
Just as a matter of caution, and for future reference, the ring-bolts shown in the drawing in Allan's post above look like ladies' earrings: very delicate and lightweight (no reflection on Allan; but whoever drew it appears to have been in error)
 
The contract for 'Warspite', 1755, one of the first 74s, states that on the gun-deck (which would be for the 32 pdrs) the ring bolts each side of the gun-ports are to have rings with an internal diameter of 5", and to be made of 1 3/8" diameter iron.
 
On the upper deck, for the 24 pdrs, as in the illustration, the rings are to be 4 3/4" internal diameter, and to be made of 1 1/8" diameter iron.
 
As a rough approximation both these indicate that the metal forming the ring is around one quarter of the size of the hole in the ring.
 
Which would look much more capable of restraining a 2 ton plus cannon on recoil. As these ring-bolts are for the breechings, as are the ones in the carriage cheeks, I would believe it a fair supposition that they should be the same.
 
See below a plate from Robertson's mathematical treatise of 1775: (yes, I agree, not the first place one would look for gunnery-related items, but a very good contemporary source, nonetheless)
 

 
All the best,
 
Mark P

Not quite at the building stage yet (my new work desk apparently arrives 15th October at which point I can switch my home office from my workroom back to the house and start building).
 
I do have some slight progress. Thanks to the generosity of fellow MSW member Mark P - who kindly offered to use his larger printer to print out a lovely full size copy of my base board plan (to avoid having to try and do so on my A4 printer with resultant possible join errors) I now have a lovely base plan on the building board ready for work to begin.
 

 
lovely. I can't wait
 
 

Good Morning Gary;
 
Thank you for the pictures of the earlier stages of building. Excellent quality work as always.
 
Mark, the jointing of the two strakes of spirketting is a 'tabled' joint, and is referred to in some contracts, either for spirketting, or for deck clamps. If you do have the Berwick draught which Gary mentions, look at the method of jointing the string in the waist to the forecastle deck clamp; it's very interesting.
 
All the best,
 
Mark P

Good Morning Gentlemen;
 
Just as a matter of caution, and for future reference, the ring-bolts shown in the drawing in Allan's post above look like ladies' earrings: very delicate and lightweight (no reflection on Allan; but whoever drew it appears to have been in error)
 
The contract for 'Warspite', 1755, one of the first 74s, states that on the gun-deck (which would be for the 32 pdrs) the ring bolts each side of the gun-ports are to have rings with an internal diameter of 5", and to be made of 1 3/8" diameter iron.
 
On the upper deck, for the 24 pdrs, as in the illustration, the rings are to be 4 3/4" internal diameter, and to be made of 1 1/8" diameter iron.
 
As a rough approximation both these indicate that the metal forming the ring is around one quarter of the size of the hole in the ring.
 
Which would look much more capable of restraining a 2 ton plus cannon on recoil. As these ring-bolts are for the breechings, as are the ones in the carriage cheeks, I would believe it a fair supposition that they should be the same.
 
See below a plate from Robertson's mathematical treatise of 1775: (yes, I agree, not the first place one would look for gunnery-related items, but a very good contemporary source, nonetheless)
 

 
All the best,
 
Mark P

Hi every one. Finally got my camera charged up and took a few photo's, hope you enjoy them. The figures came from shape way and ideal of using them came from Chuck. Spent the day painting them  and  have white hair like their owner. 😁Gary

Hi Richard,  For making I bolts, I mount a small length of brass wire ( .020) or slightly larger in a piece of dowel.  then bent the end into a slight  hook.  I  cut brass wire into 1 or 1 1/2 Lengths..  then loop the wire  over the the hook and turn the wire to make the eye with pliers or something similar .  I use 26 or 28 Gauge wire.  All my builds are 1/96.  I hope this is understandable- Hal

Richard,
You can buy 1/4 pound spools of copper wire down to 40 gage (0.003") at McMaster Carr.   For 32 gage (0.008), this is about  2000 foot and costs a little over $7 plus shipping.   https://www.mcmaster.com/copper-wire/mirror-like-multipurpose-110-copper-wire/  They have a number of types of wire available.
Allan 

Good Morning Gentlemen;
 
Just as a matter of caution, and for future reference, the ring-bolts shown in the drawing in Allan's post above look like ladies' earrings: very delicate and lightweight (no reflection on Allan; but whoever drew it appears to have been in error)
 
The contract for 'Warspite', 1755, one of the first 74s, states that on the gun-deck (which would be for the 32 pdrs) the ring bolts each side of the gun-ports are to have rings with an internal diameter of 5", and to be made of 1 3/8" diameter iron.
 
On the upper deck, for the 24 pdrs, as in the illustration, the rings are to be 4 3/4" internal diameter, and to be made of 1 1/8" diameter iron.
 
As a rough approximation both these indicate that the metal forming the ring is around one quarter of the size of the hole in the ring.
 
Which would look much more capable of restraining a 2 ton plus cannon on recoil. As these ring-bolts are for the breechings, as are the ones in the carriage cheeks, I would believe it a fair supposition that they should be the same.
 
See below a plate from Robertson's mathematical treatise of 1775: (yes, I agree, not the first place one would look for gunnery-related items, but a very good contemporary source, nonetheless)
 

 
All the best,
 
Mark P

Richard, as others have stated, it can be a bit fiddly. I use a pair of small round nosed pliers with one end filed down to a fine point. You can make very small hooks and rings with them. For hooks, I make the ring, then bend the it back on itself over the eye and snip to make the hook opening. Hope that helps. 

 

Good Morning Gentlemen;
 
Just as a matter of caution, and for future reference, the ring-bolts shown in the drawing in Allan's post above look like ladies' earrings: very delicate and lightweight (no reflection on Allan; but whoever drew it appears to have been in error)
 
The contract for 'Warspite', 1755, one of the first 74s, states that on the gun-deck (which would be for the 32 pdrs) the ring bolts each side of the gun-ports are to have rings with an internal diameter of 5", and to be made of 1 3/8" diameter iron.
 
On the upper deck, for the 24 pdrs, as in the illustration, the rings are to be 4 3/4" internal diameter, and to be made of 1 1/8" diameter iron.
 
As a rough approximation both these indicate that the metal forming the ring is around one quarter of the size of the hole in the ring.
 
Which would look much more capable of restraining a 2 ton plus cannon on recoil. As these ring-bolts are for the breechings, as are the ones in the carriage cheeks, I would believe it a fair supposition that they should be the same.
 
See below a plate from Robertson's mathematical treatise of 1775: (yes, I agree, not the first place one would look for gunnery-related items, but a very good contemporary source, nonetheless)
 

 
All the best,
 
Mark P

Good Morning Gentlemen;
 
Just as a matter of caution, and for future reference, the ring-bolts shown in the drawing in Allan's post above look like ladies' earrings: very delicate and lightweight (no reflection on Allan; but whoever drew it appears to have been in error)
 
The contract for 'Warspite', 1755, one of the first 74s, states that on the gun-deck (which would be for the 32 pdrs) the ring bolts each side of the gun-ports are to have rings with an internal diameter of 5", and to be made of 1 3/8" diameter iron.
 
On the upper deck, for the 24 pdrs, as in the illustration, the rings are to be 4 3/4" internal diameter, and to be made of 1 1/8" diameter iron.
 
As a rough approximation both these indicate that the metal forming the ring is around one quarter of the size of the hole in the ring.
 
Which would look much more capable of restraining a 2 ton plus cannon on recoil. As these ring-bolts are for the breechings, as are the ones in the carriage cheeks, I would believe it a fair supposition that they should be the same.
 
See below a plate from Robertson's mathematical treatise of 1775: (yes, I agree, not the first place one would look for gunnery-related items, but a very good contemporary source, nonetheless)
 

 
All the best,
 
Mark P

Good Morning Gentlemen;
 
Just as a matter of caution, and for future reference, the ring-bolts shown in the drawing in Allan's post above look like ladies' earrings: very delicate and lightweight (no reflection on Allan; but whoever drew it appears to have been in error)
 
The contract for 'Warspite', 1755, one of the first 74s, states that on the gun-deck (which would be for the 32 pdrs) the ring bolts each side of the gun-ports are to have rings with an internal diameter of 5", and to be made of 1 3/8" diameter iron.
 
On the upper deck, for the 24 pdrs, as in the illustration, the rings are to be 4 3/4" internal diameter, and to be made of 1 1/8" diameter iron.
 
As a rough approximation both these indicate that the metal forming the ring is around one quarter of the size of the hole in the ring.
 
Which would look much more capable of restraining a 2 ton plus cannon on recoil. As these ring-bolts are for the breechings, as are the ones in the carriage cheeks, I would believe it a fair supposition that they should be the same.
 
See below a plate from Robertson's mathematical treatise of 1775: (yes, I agree, not the first place one would look for gunnery-related items, but a very good contemporary source, nonetheless)
 

 
All the best,
 
Mark P

Good Evening Gary Sir;
 
It all depends upon what sources the author uses. Don't fret too much; certainly the floors were once covered with brick. I did read somewhere, don't remember if it was a modern book, or a contemporary document, that brick stoves were done away with because the maintenance cost of them was very high.
 
Re the joints in the lead, these would almost certainly be what we over here call 'welted' seams, where the edge of one sheet is completely enclosed in a folded edge of the adjoining sheet, and then the two are beaten flat. 
 
All the best,
 
Mark