Chuck Seiler

Alright guys. The flag was printed and made in the usual fashion. The difference between this and other flags i have made is in how it was attached to the flag stick. Instead of using a halyard, i simply tied the flag at several points to the stick.

The flagpole on the ship:

Chuck: This was the correct terminology in the 18th century. The meaning of words changed over time. Camber only applied to a deliberate droop of a deck at the bow, otherwise the longitudinal curve, concave up, is sheer, as you wrote.
 
Hope this clarifies things!

The deck 'droop' at the bow was called - wait for it - camber. (Deck beams and decks 'round up';  decks do not camber across.) The usual reason for this forward droop was so that the cables came aboard above the deck without the hawesholes being placed to interfere with either headwork or a wale. In this case it would help control recoil.

Planking Techniques for Model Ship builders by Donald Dressel. 

This is the Storming of Corruna, 1445. Notice the ladders, and how they are constructed exactly how i made mine. The ladder is not glued to the sterncastle yet, and won't be until the rigging is done- too much risk of breaking it off. I also will leave the forecastle ladder off until then. 
 

Evergreen also makes styrene strips.  However, if I was going to do what you are doing, I would use wood.  You will get better compound curves.
 
    As Steven mentioned, the deck of a nef is higher than that of a longship.  The nef is a cargo ship whereas the longship is not.  Even the Viking knarr, which the nef is closer to than the longship, has a lower deck.  Checking my Werner Zimmerman nef plans against a knarr, I find the deck is almost at the top of the gunwale.  Also as Steven mentioned, you would want to put some under deck thru-beams to support the deck.
 
    The attached photo shows the thru-beams better than Steven's photo.  I don't know where I got the pic, so I cannot properly credit it, but I believe it is of the Zimmerman model.  The thru-beams are circled.

 
    The curve of the bow and stern would have to be altered to reflect the proper nef angle and probably to raise it up high enough to accomodate the additional freeboard,

I partially agree.  The supports would have to hold the weight of the men and the structure.  The supports shown, while spindly, are still sufficient to support that weight and more if the weight is bearing straight down.  Lateral sheering forces come into play when the ship rolls.  The English Channel can be rough at times and I don't know if sailing was suspended during heavy seas.  I would think a roll of more than 30 degrees would put quite a lateral strain on the supports if not braced.
 

    ...on the other hand, as I said before, with one exception I have never seen these braced.

Maybe they were just naturally stable and seaworthy vessels, which could be why we haven't discovered a wreck yet. 

I partially agree.  The supports would have to hold the weight of the men and the structure.  The supports shown, while spindly, are still sufficient to support that weight and more if the weight is bearing straight down.  Lateral sheering forces come into play when the ship rolls.  The English Channel can be rough at times and I don't know if sailing was suspended during heavy seas.  I would think a roll of more than 30 degrees would put quite a lateral strain on the supports if not braced.
 

    ...on the other hand, as I said before, with one exception I have never seen these braced.

I'd say it depends - some of these ships were owned by very wealthy people, and others represented the Cinque Ports, tasked with the defense of the realm (and the prestige of their home port). Look at the ornateness of royal ships in the 17th and 18th centuries. So I think the general run of the mill nefs weren't all that ornate, but some would have been.
 
Regarding the battlements, just make sure you check the heights against the scale - how tall is a normal person in relation to the walls? If they only come up to his knees, they're not going to be much use in protecting him. If he can't see over them, not much use either.

Unfortunately, at this time artists didn't show people to scale against the ships they were in. The more important you were, the bigger you were shown. Even the Winchelsea seal shows them too big, though a lot closer to reality than some of the others.
 

Steven

OK, taking on board (sorry!) the constraints imposed by the plastic model, that it's impossible to achieve all the changes that may be desirable for historical accuracy etc, plus the public the model is intended for (i.e. people who don't know - and probably wouldn't care - about the things that distinguish a nef from a longship with castles added), I think it's just a matter of seeing what's possible - to get as close as you can to what you have in mind - and don't sweat the small stuff (even, though it pains me to say it, to the point of leaving the mast step as it is).
 
Steven
 
PS: You might consider changing the date a bit - the earliest date I can find for a nef with castles is 1225 (though the seal of Dunwich is dated at circa 1200, that circa covers a lot of ground).

Evergreen also makes styrene strips.  However, if I was going to do what you are doing, I would use wood.  You will get better compound curves.
 
    As Steven mentioned, the deck of a nef is higher than that of a longship.  The nef is a cargo ship whereas the longship is not.  Even the Viking knarr, which the nef is closer to than the longship, has a lower deck.  Checking my Werner Zimmerman nef plans against a knarr, I find the deck is almost at the top of the gunwale.  Also as Steven mentioned, you would want to put some under deck thru-beams to support the deck.
 
    The attached photo shows the thru-beams better than Steven's photo.  I don't know where I got the pic, so I cannot properly credit it, but I believe it is of the Zimmerman model.  The thru-beams are circled.

 
    The curve of the bow and stern would have to be altered to reflect the proper nef angle and probably to raise it up high enough to accomodate the additional freeboard,

Evergreen also makes styrene strips.  However, if I was going to do what you are doing, I would use wood.  You will get better compound curves.
 
    As Steven mentioned, the deck of a nef is higher than that of a longship.  The nef is a cargo ship whereas the longship is not.  Even the Viking knarr, which the nef is closer to than the longship, has a lower deck.  Checking my Werner Zimmerman nef plans against a knarr, I find the deck is almost at the top of the gunwale.  Also as Steven mentioned, you would want to put some under deck thru-beams to support the deck.
 
    The attached photo shows the thru-beams better than Steven's photo.  I don't know where I got the pic, so I cannot properly credit it, but I believe it is of the Zimmerman model.  The thru-beams are circled.

 
    The curve of the bow and stern would have to be altered to reflect the proper nef angle and probably to raise it up high enough to accomodate the additional freeboard,

If you mean styrene sheets then yes, of course. Evergreen makes sheets as thin as .005 in. (0.13mm).
 
On cutting styrene, for a straight cut, score it first with a sharp knife. The styrene will break cleanly on the scored line.
For curves, I use scissors but cut wide of the line and sand the sheet to the final shape.

Perhaps make a new deck out of wooden planks? If you widen the ship and lift the deck as I mentioned, the existing plastic deck will possibly be too narrow anyway. (just part of my evil plot to steer you to the Dark Side of working in timber).
 
To me as well, but it's a matter of aesthetics and personal choice.
 
Can I recommend against that? I've seen pics of models with triangular castles, but the pictorial evidence suggests they were rectangular, or at the most trapezoids tapered towards the ends, as the castles weren't big and heavy enough to warrant tapering to a point at this time, as they were later with carracks (even the early carracks had rectangular or polygonal forecastles). Regarding supporting the castle against the sternpost, I can't see that there would be anything wrong with that. There was probably a period of transition between free-standing and integral castles when that was tried out.
 
Took me a while to get the reference - of course, it has St Mark's body on board. But I'd call it a reliquary, not a hearse. No, this is c. 1150; cogs hadn't yet been developed in the Atlantic and certainly hadn't made their way to the Mediterranean. They seem to have come into use in the 14th century - at the very earliest maybe the end of the 13th century. My ship is a nave, or perhaps a nave (ro)tonda, a round ship; so-called to distinguish them from long thin galea sottile (galley).
 
I'm afraid they're oarports. Nefs don't seem to have had them at all, so I suppose you'll have to close them up - perhaps car-bog would do the trick.
 
Hmm, not sure I agree with this. Not as strong, for a start - as the vertical force (weight of the castle) acts on a non-vertical column it would tend to make the column "overturn" (pivot around the lower support). And this would be exacerbated by the motion of the ship in the waves loosening the connection. As I see it, these supports were vertical and somewhat inboard - the deck beams would be amply strong enough to support the columns, particularly if the structure is stiffened with horizontal beams at deck level as shown below.

 
Steven
 
 
 
 

ready for the new title? just watch. 

Ok, I like the idea. I would incline toward a nef - if only because they appear so rarely in modelling. (Oh, and I might have a personal interest, I suppose).
 
A couple of points. First the name. If it's a nef, I wouldn't call it Beowulf. Though written down (probably) in the 11th century and in a Christian mileu (references in the text comparing Grendel to Cain, for example), the story describes event from many centuries earlier, which is probably when it was first composed, but equally probably not written down until the 11th century. Having said that, you're at liberty to call it anything you want - it's your model. But as nefs are a phenomenon of the late-13th and early/mid-14th centuries, I'd be thinking of a name more appropriate to the period. Easy to say, not so easy to do. At the moment I can't think of any known ships' names from this period, but later ones seem to have been either religious or royal - Holigost, Grace Dieu (both early 15th century), Great Michael, Mary Rose, Peter Pomegranate (after the coat of arms of Catherine of Aragon - mid-16th) for example. If I think of any more appropriate to the time I'll chime in again. The ship which sank and drowned King Henry I's only son in 1120 (leading to a civil war over the succession) was known as the White Ship, but I believe that was a description, not its name. Then there was William the Conqueror's ship Mora, but that's back in the 11th century, and the names of Viking ships such as Ormen Lange (Long serpent) are earlier still. Oh, just found the names of two English ships captured by the french in 1338, in raids that culminated in the battle of Sluys, 1340 - towards the very end of the nef's period, when cogs were taking over - the Christopher and the Cog Edward - as you can see, one Biblical and the other royal.
 
Secondly there are two kinds of vessels that get categorised as nefs - the earlier ones with free-standing castles and the later ones where the castle is somewhat incorporated into the hull. Choose whichever one you like more.
  
 
In the first type take note of the shape of the stem and sternposts. They are VERY characteristic of nefs and of no other ship. There are more examples in my build log. See also https://www.pinterest.com.au/lowe1847/mediaeval-nefs/ And also note that many of the earlier type have only a single castle - always at the stern.
 
Regarding the hull shape, as it's a plastic model there's nothing you can do to change it, so just go with what you've got. But I believe you could alter the stem and stern somewhat to be closer to a nef. 
 
To make it resemble a cargo ship more closely you might think of building up the sides somewhat, and raise the deck to allow more cargo storage. And I'd get rid of the (admittedly beautiful) mast step - whatever shape it was by the late 13th century (and we're talking maybe 300 years of evolution) it's more likely to have been hidden below decks. 
 
I suppose that's all for now, off the top of my head. If I think of anything else I'll let you know.
 
Have fun with it.
 
Steven

Today I completed the initial fairing of the frames ( minus the fore/aft cant frames). I took it out of the building jig to admire my work and realized how difficult it would be (for me) to properly align everything without it. I'm going to fine tune the fairing and remove any remaining char, then on Friday my lovely wife and I will be boarding a cruise ship in Seattle and heading to Alaska for a week of relaxation. Sort of like shore leave but...not ashore

My plan was similar to yours-general fairing (faring?) before assembling, then fine tuning once assembled.  IIRC, you have to do some fairing or else the frame will not fit into the jig.

Hi Chuck,
Thanks for the advice on the cant frames. I am filing and sanding the forward frames this week and saved the cant frames for last. Did you do all your fairing prior to attaching the frames to the keel? My plan is to fine tune it after they are attached. 
v/r,
Rob

Rob,
 
    Welcome to the Shallop Build.  I have planked the hull and fine tuning before working the interior.  I have not started a buildlog because........ anywho
 
    A couple recommendos: 
 
1.  Be careful with the cant frames.  Several people (including myself) had problems with those.  I found that, while the frame building jigs for the square frames worked great, the jigs for the cants had alot to be desired.  I ended up building the cant frames onto the hull, using the framing jig as an aid.  Hard to explain but once I started it, it made sense.
 
2.  When you fair your frames, be sure to take it to the line...and maybe a few sandpaper swipes beyond.  I was not as observant and when I planked, many of my planks ended up being a millimeter too short.  😪
 
    Good luck.  I look forward to your build. 

Good day all,
 
After watching a you tube build series of the shallop (Thank you Olha)I decided that this was the kit for me. It seems to be challenging, but not so difficult that I'll give up in disgust (time will tell)
 
I posted a photo in the "At a glance" topic this morning and then decided, "What the heck, I might as well start a build log as well".
 
As you can see, construction is already underway. One of the things that drew me in was the use of jigs. Keeping things in alignment is critical and has caused me fits in the past. Once the jig was built and the 3 piece keel was together I began working on the frames. another jig is provided to ensure proper alignment during their construction. The pieces have a laser line that shows how much fairing is needed. I took my time to look at the instructions and to rewatch the video to ensure the pieces were placed correctly in the jig before gluing with PVA. I wrote "bow" and "stern" on the jig to remind me which way to insert the pieces. The instructions, while very clear, contain no text. Once the glue had dried I removed them and used files and sandpaper to remove the char and begin fairing. I stopped a bit short of the mark and will finish the fairing once the frames are glues and I can check them with a plank.
 
Looking forward to your comments and questions,
 
v/r,
Rob
 

Can't help on the absence of the banner, but they still seem to be in business as I ordered some stuff from them the other day and it's on its way.

What happened to the "Ships of Pavel Nikitin" banner ad?  I was looking for it and it seems to have disappeared.

Hi Allen,
 
To actually donate, you have to go to the home page and click on the donation link.  The link I listed takes you to Jim Hatches' plea for funding.  I thought that people might like to know more about why MSW needs funds before they give.  It literally costs thousands of dollars to run this site and this year we have only been receiving a total of $50 a month from donors (and it's the same 3 or 4 donors that are giving each month!).  It would be nice if other people pitched in.  I know times are hard right now, but surely people can spare $5 to support this great modeling forum!  We're not asking anyone to give a lot (if you would like to, though, we won't turn you down), but if everyone gives a little bit, that would help.
 
Mary