Chuck Seiler

I wasn't aware that there were paddle wheelers in the middle ages.  😁

Wonderful work!  I have partially built a cog/kogge that appears to be based on the Bremen Cog.  You build log gives me inspiration to finish it.
 
    I find it interesting that the hulls of the ships depicted on the Rye/Damme seals closely resemble the Bremen cog hull, but the free standing fore and stern castles more closely resemble those of nefs a couple hundred years earlier.  I am also intrigued by the shrouds.

Wonderful work!  I have partially built a cog/kogge that appears to be based on the Bremen Cog.  You build log gives me inspiration to finish it.
 
    I find it interesting that the hulls of the ships depicted on the Rye/Damme seals closely resemble the Bremen cog hull, but the free standing fore and stern castles more closely resemble those of nefs a couple hundred years earlier.  I am also intrigued by the shrouds.

The rigging.
 
The rigging is less complicated than the rigging on more masted ships, but is basically the same.
A big difference is the absence of lanyards and deadeyes. During my research I came to the solution that this construction is an invention which dates from the first half of the fifteenth century. Original mediaeval pictures show everywhere an other construction which is surprisingly the same as used on ships with latin sails, which were used until the last part of the nineteenth century. This cog was build in 1320, so long before the invention of lanyards and deadeyes.
 
One of the reconstructed cogs was build in Kiel in Germany. While testing  its sail capabilities it appeared the ship could sail up to 70 degrees by wind abeam. In this position the sail would grate over the shrouds. The shrouds on that ship are equipped with lanyards and deadeyes, which I believe is not correct, so the shrouds could not be removed in case of grating.
Shrouds on ships with latin sails can be removed while sailing. A part of the shrouds on leeward can be removed while the ship is sailing abeam. This is possible with the help of the construction as drawn in the sketch nr 1. A stick (Dutch; knevel) can be pulled out in the connection of two parts of the shroud which both end in a noose. On both sides of the ship are mostly four shrouds as drawn in nr 2. The shrouds windward can of course not be removed, but with some of the shrouds leeward it is possible.
 
 
 
1                                                                                                                                                  
 
2
 

The model without the yard, but with the shrouds.
 
On port-side the four shrouds are all fastened, on starboard only two. The other two are hanging alongside the mast. In this case the wind will come abeam the portside.
This construction is on ships with latin sails always usual, but it is also possible on cogs. Old mediaval illustrations of ships show this solution.
Ships with latin sails have a different rigging because of the possibility of setting the sails and yards in other positions which move around the foreside the masts. But the shroud construction is the same as on cogs.
It is obvious that ratlines are impossible with this type of rigging. Ratlines in shrouds can not be found on ships before the first part of the fifteenth century.
 
The rest
 
On the model I made two anchors. Made of brass. I sawed them from brass plate, thick 2,5 mm. After filing and sanding in the correct proportions,  blades of thin brass,  were soldered on it. After that I painted them in colour Matt  46, from Revell. All iron pieces on the models I make are painted in this color. Never black.
 
The sailors on the model are from “Lehman HO pirates 90-2025”. Usually I do not place figures, but this model goes to a museum here in town. For visitors it is in this way easier to compare the human proportions.
 
I never paint my models, only the sails.
 
The finished model gives an impression of how those ships looked like. It is a reconstruction, so there always will be the possibility of other opinions.
 
The following pictures give an impression of teh finished model.
Cogs had an unsusual construction of the hull. The ends of the  beams inside the ship came out the side of the ships hull. This can be seen on the next illustrations.
 

 u

Great work.
I found this on the Dutch forum. 
 
https://www.modelbouwforum.nl/threads/bouwverslag-modelbouwkit-dwarsdoorsnede-van-een-17e-eeuwse-koopvaarder.286012/
 
https://www.modelbouwforum.nl/threads/nieuw-een-virtuele-rondleiding-op-een-17e-eeuws-nederlands-schip.276679/#post-4153895
 
 
 

This weekend I completed two simple steps:  installed the garboard strakes and laid the initial planks on the port (completely planked) side.  Since both the tasks required the model to be inverted, I made a little MDF box that I could clamp the model to without putting any stress on the frame members.
 
The garboard strakes went in without difficulty.    Likewise with the planking: planking this model is about as simple as can be since the hull profile is completely uniform through the modeled section.  

 
I am happy that my modified solution for the keel rabbet worked out; I think the resulting angle of the garboard strake with the adjacent plank  looks a lot more authentic than the kit's arrangement.

 
A pinas's hull planks meet with scarfs rather than butts according to the drawings in Witsen (and possibly it's written down somewhere, but I don't have a reference).   Anyhow,  I did make one scarf as an experiment which is barely visible on the righthand photo above, between the two rightmost clips.  The joint came out well, but once the area was sanded,  the joint became invisible, so maybe I won't bother to do more.    I will probably make a sample piece next weekend and see if visibility is enhanced once it's stained.
 

 
The next task is to install 17 more pairs of lower futtocks between the pairs already on either end of the model.  In preparation for that, a large activity this weekend was removing char.  The char's all gone now, and I've started dry-fitting the pieces into position - you can see them above.   The requirement is to have all the outer and inner surfaces of the futtocks in the same plane.   That will be achieved if they all sit snugly in the (temporary) comb jigs and the tops of all the futtocks are the same height.   Which, for me, is easier said than done.   Once I get ready to start using glue on them I will need to move very deliberately.   I'm not completely settled as to how I will handle the glue.  I've thought about painting thinned glue into the gaps after the pieces are in position, but I worry that will mess up the stain when I get to putting on the finish. So, I'm leaning towards glue first then install. And practicing a lot.  The thing is, this is something I have to do 34 times and any redoes will be unpleasant to perform.  (Plus, this problem will come again on the next level of framing.)
 
Not related to the glue up, but I realized at the end of the futtock de-charing party that I only have to clean half of the framing pieces up to display standards:  the port side of the model will be planked over, inside and out, so its frames just need to be prepared well enough to glue.
 
Thanks for looking and for any advice you might have on gluing in those futtocks.
 
Bob
 
 

The painting process is part of the building process.  Agreeably, early on it is just a matter of applying paint and giving it color.  Later on it becomes:  what to paint and what to leave natural, what type paint, what color (for instance, there are a bazillion shades of red), how to get the perfect finis, and so forth.

Although, since we only use a portion of our brain, I would like to think those spare neurons step up and replace the dead ones.  That's my story and I'm sticking to it.  Unfortunately, at my age, the brain cell boot camp isn't cranking out the new recruits like it used to.

Well then, let me introduce myself here.
My name is Ralf and I come from the beautiful Palatinate, 56 years old.
Like many others, I started building plastic models as a teenager. Ships, planes, cars, everything you could get back then. I think it all started with the Enterprise aircraft carrier that I got for Christmas. I should mention a Porsche 935 from Tamiya which I often dismantled and repainted over the years.
The thing with the wood came about when my teacher at the time gave me the Gorch Fock from Graupner and said go for it.
His brother-in-law was first officer on the ship.
Graupner in the mid-eighties meant opening the lid and looking at the bare wood. You still had to do a lot of carving and sanding, there was no CNC or even lasering.
Now you know, if the sky doesn't fall on my head, I'll see you here and there over the next few years
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

Although, since we only use a portion of our brain, I would like to think those spare neurons step up and replace the dead ones.  That's my story and I'm sticking to it.  Unfortunately, at my age, the brain cell boot camp isn't cranking out the new recruits like it used to.

Although, since we only use a portion of our brain, I would like to think those spare neurons step up and replace the dead ones.  That's my story and I'm sticking to it.  Unfortunately, at my age, the brain cell boot camp isn't cranking out the new recruits like it used to.

Although, since we only use a portion of our brain, I would like to think those spare neurons step up and replace the dead ones.  That's my story and I'm sticking to it.  Unfortunately, at my age, the brain cell boot camp isn't cranking out the new recruits like it used to.

Two of the reasons for preserving an obsolete ship:   
sentimentality - a cultural symbol -  purposes that both Constitution and Victory serve quite well
true historical exhibit - as direct evidence and data for what the ship actually was in the instant of time it purports to represent. 
 
If the Ship of Theseus - had been repaired by using the same source material (species of tree, etc.), with the identical shape, and attached using the method that is identical to the original - even if none of the actual molecules are those of the ship as launched - it would be just as valid as if it had been teleported.  The information would be identical and equally valid.
Both Victory and Constitution are failures by this standard.   Constitution underwent "improvement" and "modernization" probably about every 20 years while on active serve  and after it was saved from the breakers, been manipulated and adjusted to the preconceptions of whatever committee was in charge when repairs of the effects of time, oxygen, microbes, electromagnetic radiation, was required.   Victory has seen its share of the same.   Both are chimeric rather than being a frozen instant of time.
 
Would that we had now, and in the past,  a more elaborate and minutia obsessed version of HAAMS  for every vessel of some importance. 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A medical expert informed me that brain neurons are not replaced, so as they die off, so do "you" - your intellect, that is.

I think the taller ones go aft.   Here's a midships view of the pinas Witsen, (from Ab Hoving's "Plans Set for Modelers").   Speaking of those pieces, though, I am wondering how I will clean them up - they look so fragile. 
 

 
Bob

Here is the wooden template, as mentioned.  I have built it up to the second futtock and ran a support piece across to prevent from snapping.  The bottom of the support piece is even to where the bottom of the orlop deck-beam ledge will be.

Here, the template is temporarily attached to the partially complete hull (for demo purposes).  When I finally get around to adding second futt, I will use comb and dab of glue to hold template in place, and use micrometer to ensure bottom of ledge is even.

@Chuck Seiler Wedges and rigging it will be then!  (Thanks for the kind words!)
 
As far as the rigging goes the "ayes" have it @Dr PR @GrandpaPhil - Chapelle and "The Search for Speed Under Sail" are the plans to follow going forward.  Appreciate the assists as always!!

I like your jig.    I'm going to need something like that, too and it helps a lot to have these photos.
 
Bob

Both.  On my crappier builds, glue will do.  In a model as well made as yours, wedges and rigging.

Both.  On my crappier builds, glue will do.  In a model as well made as yours, wedges and rigging.

Glue isn't needed. After all the rigging is installed the masts and bowsprit aren't going anywhere!
 
I prefer to install the cradles for the bases of the mast on the keel/keelson and frames for just below the deck planking while the hull is open to work on. I get everything aligned so the masts are aligned and raked correctly. Then when the masts are finally inserted into the hull they will be aligned correctly.
 
The same is true for the bowsprit. It should have a heel and tenon that fits tightly between the bitts/knightheads, timberheads (whatever you want to call them). This should prevent the bowsprit from slipping backwards between the posts, and it should hold the bowsprit in alignment. If the bowsprit can slip between the posts drill a hole down through the assembly and install a pin to hold it in place.

I am fairly new to the hobby, so I can’t speak to longevity.  On my first build I use PVA, but I don’t think I needed to.  On my second build I didn’t use any glue.  The bow sprit, foremast and main mast went in straight and are held there by the shrouds.  The mizzen mast wanted to lean a little so I used some wedges to get it straight and then relied on the shrouds to keep it straight.  

A show of hands please - do you folks glue the masts and bowsprit in place or do you use wedges and let the rigging hold them in place?
 

In the pictures below you can see the two frames glued up on the keel.   The keel was laser etched to help with alignment,  and I was careful during the glue up to ensure the frames were perpendicular to the keel and level.   When the glue dried I flipped the assembly over and ran the spider test again - i.e. made sure that all four futtocks were touching the glass.
 

 

 
Then I glued in all of the other floor timbers.   The kit comes with four spacing "combs" that are used to ensure that frames are spaced exactly right.   With the combs, which can be used at any convenient point along the frames,  installing the remaining floor timbers is a simple task.
 

That brings this log up to date with the state of my build.   I hope I get some time on it this weekend,  but it's not looking too promising at the moment.
 
Thanks for looking!
 
Bob

After assembling the keel and stand, the next step is to assemble the floor timbers and lower futtocks for the forward and after frames.    This is a critical step: the shape of the rest of the hull depends on the accuracy with which these two assemblies are made.  The kit supplies a printed section of the hull and the instructions say to lay the three parts over their locations on the drawing, and glue it all up.  There are no other assembly aids to ensure the positions are correct.    
 

 

 
To do this,  I started with a piece of tempered glass to have a dead flat, perfectly smooth working surface.   I taped the printed section onto the glass and then a sheet of mylar on top of it.   The floor timber was stuck to the mylar with double-sided tape over its location on the drawing.   On top of that timber I laid the two first futtocks and then carefully checked (with a small square) that each was in the right position over the drawing.   Then I stuck a number of wood blocks to the mylar at strategic points to make a jig that would hold the three frame pieces in place during glue up and - most importantly - to ensure that the second assembly was identical to the first.
 

 

 
After both frame sections were glued up,  I temporarily clamped them to the keel and turned the structure upside down on the glass:   the tops of all four futtocks touched the glass and there was no wobble at all.    Comparing the two assemblies front to front showed that, within my ability to measure, they were identical.   But, when I compared them front to back there was about 1-½ mm difference at the turn of the bilge.  I thought about that for a while, but decided that it probably doesn't matter if the two sides differ slightly - the two sides are going to be constructed quite differently anyhow since one side is planked and the other just open frames.  The deck beams, of course, might have a different opinion - we'll see.
 
Bob