Chuck Seiler

Most kits come with deadeyes and partially completed chains.  Usually, the upper link (the link that goes around the deadeye) is pre-formed, with the bottom cut for insertion of the deadeye.  Wire is provided for the builder to form the other two links but the entire assembly has very little strength and the cut ends of wire are ugly.  The only way to make this assembly stronger and better looking is to solder the links closed.  I prefer silver soldering, even though regular soldering will give sufficient strength.  The benefit of silver soldering is that the metal is fused together rather than connected by a dissimilar metal, tin.  This makes it easier to bend the part without worrying about the solder joint breaking.  The downside is that there is a learning curve and the tools are more expensive.  Silver solder also blackens well.  There are also low melting point silver bearing solders (Tix) which can be blackened. 
 
The measurements for all the parts of a British warship were determined by the Admiralty.  There are reference books that contain this information such as Steel’s Tables.  An easily read version of the tables is sold in the NRG store.  The main mast diameter is given on the plans as 18”.  Using the information from the tables, I determined that the main stay is 9” and the shrouds are 5.5”.   Lines are measured by their circumference. The diameter of the deadeye is 1.5 times the size of the shroud or stay it is attached to, in this case 8 ¼”.  A spreadsheet comes in handy in determining all the measurements.
Let me start by saying that my metal work has a bit to be desired.  The chains are made from 1 ¼” wire, which is 22 gauge.  I temper the wire by drawing it through a gas flame until it glows red.  This makes the wire more malleable and removes any factory applied coating.
 
The deadeye chain is the same length for all the deadeyes.  Make one and use it as a template for the others.  I wrapped wire around the deadeye, leaving long tails, and inserted this into the slot in the channel.  The tails were cut long enough to be able form the loop below the channel.  I removed the deadeye and applied a finish. 

The lower links are all the same length.  From the plans I knew that the toe of the lower link is bolted 5” below the top of the wale and that its overall length was 9”.  Two T-pins were inserted into the soldering board and the wire was wrapped around them, with the cut ends on the side.  The middle link is different for every shroud because each is at a different angle to the mast as seen in the two pictures below.  The link becomes longer with greater angulation of the shroud.  You can see the difference in the shroud angles and how this would affect the length of the middle link.


To determine the angle of the chains, I put masking tape on the hull above and below the channel.  A loop of rope was placed over the mast head and inserted through a slot in the channel.  The angles made by the shroud were transferred to the tape.  I dimpled the wale where the toe of the lower link and the lower preventer chain bolts will be located and removed the tape.

A hole was drilled through the wale where the toe of the lower link would later be bolted.  The lower link and deadeye were temporarily installed. The length of the middle chains was determined by trial and error.  With the deadeye and lower link in place, I formed the middle link from rope the same thickness as the wire and transferred those lengths to wire.  I formed the middle link and soldered it closed, keeping the joint on one of the long sides.  Then I inserted the lower link through the middle link and soldered it. 

A T-pin was pushed into the soldering board and used to form the lower link toe.  The lower link is also bent at the toe, allowing it to lay flat against the wale. 

Finally, the wire for the upper link was passed through the middle link and  soldered.  The deadeye was inserted into the loop and the wire was crimped around it to fit into the channel slot, placing the solder joint in the slot camouflaged it.  

And here are the ten chains, ready for blackening.  The blackening chemical did not damage the wood deadeyes. 

 
After blackening, the chains were installed.  I have a piece of wire temporarily holding the lower link to the wale. 

The preventer plate prevents the bolt securing the lower link from going all the way through the toe. It was made from square bar stock that was forged to the correct shape.  Mine are made from sheet brass, cut and filed to the correct shape.  Just like the middle links, they varied in length. The top of the plate makes a step over the bottom of the lower link toe to cover it. To determine the distance between the bolt holes on the plate, I measured the distance between the toe bolt and the previously marked lower preventer plate bolt and added the diameter of the wire the link was made from.  The sequence is shown in the drawing below. After they were finished, they were blackened and installed.  

To hold the upper links in the channels, a strip of molding was placed over them.  Next up, the rigging begins.

 

Philly at the Fair.
 

I got some horrendous "blooms" from reflection.  Sunday (when I am back at the Fair) I will see If I can remove the case and get some shots.  Meanwhile, I tried to blot out the worst of them.
 

I managed to eek out an honourable mention.

I suspect some of that 40k+ number are those that joined, stayed for awhile and just never returned.

I suspect some of that 40k+ number are those that joined, stayed for awhile and just never returned.

I suspect some of that 40k+ number are those that joined, stayed for awhile and just never returned.

That free Zoom presentation for NRG members with Ian McLaughlan on "The Sloop of War" last month or so was fabulous.  Worth the cost of admission right there.  
 
I know I wouldn't be nearly as far without the MSW and NRG family - you guys rock.  Member if you can or want, and just continue to post and share if you can't or don't want to.
 
Oh yeah, and like $2 off on NRG's uber-legible "Steele's Tables" was awesome as well.
 
Love this corner of the internet.

I suspect some of that 40k+ number are those that joined, stayed for awhile and just never returned.

I suspect some of that 40k+ number are those that joined, stayed for awhile and just never returned.

I suspect some of that 40k+ number are those that joined, stayed for awhile and just never returned.

I'll tell you a good model to start with that many on the forum may agree with ...

In my opinion, that which makes a log good also makes it hard to keep up.  I have often gotten bogged down on a model because I am taking so much time and effort to get pictures at the right point, get thoughts on paper and compile a good post.  I don't know if that ever came through in my logs, but I tried.
 
    Here is what I think makes a good post:
 
    Explain what you are doing as you go along.  Looking at pictures of how your model is progressing is nice, but looking at the process you are using to get to that point is even better.  How did you make that thingamabob?  What problems are you having?  Detailed info on how you make something can be enlightening.  There is a fine line between going into TOO much detail and no enough.  I have seen things that I have tried to make many times and I cannot get them to look that good.  How did you do it?  I guess that is what IMs are for.
 
    A lot of pictures.  Close ups, full model, different angles, high resolution.  The latter is important particularly when illustrating a lot of detail.  I find it frustrating to click on a photo to blow it up, only to find it is not very large or poor quality.  My rule of thumb when I was a newsletter editor was I should be able to expand the photo to 200% and still get good detail.  Different angles are good.  I have been trying to find some shots of where the wales come together at the bow, both sides.  I cannot find many.  Most shots are of one side or the other, but not both.  Same goes for other areas we don't normally see.
 
    In my opinion, a very good example of a good build log is Dan Vadas' "VULTURE" log.
 
PS.  His VULTURE cross section isn't bad either.

I think it is because they have a few moments to take in the entire model, whereas you have had hours to create, then agonize over that mistake (and the 3 mistakes you made trying to correct the one mistake).
 
I look at my PHILADELPHIA model and look at the many rope coils.  A casual observer would say "Wow!  A lot of rope coils" and move on.  I will look at it and remember how THAT coil took 3 tries to make.  THAT coil replaced the one I made and somehow lost.  THAT coil I accidentally glued to my finger.

Roger,
 
    Well said.  You are EXPECTED to make mistakes on your first one, that's why is should be something like the Virginia Pilot Boat (or whatever is on sale).  I have had several early models where I have essentially made twice.  Build a part, throw it away, build it again.  Build an assembly, tear it apart, build it again.  The value is in the learning.

I would not recommend this.  I believe I would have been ill served if I had been forced to go into the kiddies pool until I learned how to swim when I first signed aboard.  Being able to see the various levels of accomplishment helped highlight what I was getting into and let me know there were many like me.  Meanwhile it also gave me a goal to strive for.
 
    Looking at the build logs of some of the more accomplished modelers helped me learn the terminology and gave me an appreciation for the quality that could be achieved.  I was also able to take away little pieces of "how to do it".  I may not be able to build a whole model like a master, but I can plank like one (that's my story and I'm sticking to it), or I can paint like one, or make thingamabobs like one.
 
    Throwing out a question while bobbing around in the main pool ensures that everybody sees it.  If there was just a beginners section, the question might only be seen by other beginners and those veterans who might specifically be there to do some mentoring. 
 
    I see nothing wrong with the way it is now.  Just my 2 euro's worth.

Jud,
 
    I strongly disagree.  I take Chris' original post for what it is, a warning.  I provide the same warning anytime I speak to a perspective modeler, whether it be at a club meeting or at our Ship Modeling booth at the county fair.  Most people don't realize how difficult building a wooden ship is and how many sub-skills need to be developed before you can do a bang up job on a complicated model. 
 
    As seasoned modelers, we owe it to them to give them reasonable advice. 

Something that we offer to members are the Virtual Workshops we offer throughout the year on Saturday mornings (10:30 AM Central).  We record the workshops and within a week or two they are available on the website for members to view as often as they want.
We have a new workshop on May 4 on Basics of the Air Brush.  We also have a two part one on June 15 on Creating Realistic Working Sails and Creating Furled Sails.  Check out the recordings in the Events section of the website.  Also, they are priced right - FREE!  All members will get an email with the Zoom link real soon.

Rum comes later in #6 "Alcohol is your friend, part 2-When all else fails"

In this topic consisting of several episodes, I am going to tell you something about the construction of this ship. Although it is very small in real life, and many times smaller on a scale of 1:87, it was a fairly difficult job to get it done and it is based on a lot of research.
At the beginning of June 2018, I started building a model of the ship on which Willem Barents sailed to Nova Zembla in 1596. The Northern trade route had to be found, but that failed and Barents had to spend the winter on this island in the Arctic Ocean with 16 other crewmenbers. But the year after they returned to Holland.
Shortly after this event, drawings were made of this ship that served as illustrations for the travelogue of Gerrit de Veer, one of the members of the crew.

 The two ships of Heemskerk and De Rijp. The commander was Barents, who was on Heemskerk's ship. The names of the ships are not mentioned anywhere.
 
As a result, reconstruction attempts were made to find out what the ship looked like. Ab Hoving has written a book with fine detailed reconstruction drawings, which form the basis of the construction of the model with which I started.
By the way, I am not supposed to call this model “the ship of Barents”. I never build models of ships that had a name, but only build ship types. In consultation with Ab Hoving, we decided to call this type an "Early Pinas". A Pinas is a very well-known type that was built frequently, especially after 1600 in Holland. This ship dates from just before that time, around 1590, and at that time a number of later inventions had not yet been applied.
Since I have built more ship models on HO scale, so 1:87, it was logical that I would do that again. The models can then be compared in terms of size.
Installing the rigging took a lot of time, also because it was all still unknown territory for me.
 
In the previous 40 years, I did long-term research on Latin-rigged ships that sailed around the Mediterranean, and built models on a scale of 1:87 as a result of those studies. The rigging and hull construction are vastly different from square-rigged ships.
This was my first square-rigged ship. At first I looked despondently at the drawings of the rigging, but after a while I understood all the functions. Repeatedly, I had to remove it again and try again.
 
Ab Hoving was always ready to provide me with the necessary advice. His help was indispensable because he had also carried out the entire research on this ship and had described it in his book;
HET SCHIP VAN WILLEM BARENTS. Een hypothetische reconstructie van een laat-zestiende eeuws jacht  (A hypothetical reconstruction of a late sixteenth century yacht).ISBN 90-6550-772-8
 
Many of the techniques that can be found here are also described on my website; www.constantwillems.nl
And the same applies to this model; it is a reconstruction, so there is a chance that the ship looked different in details.
 
 
The construction of the hull
 
A start was made with transferring the trusses, obtained from data from Hoving's drawings, to paper. Those drawings are on a scale of 1 : 75 and it was a simple action to take those drawings to a copy shop where they were transferred to scale HO., 1 : 87.
 
Like all my models, I built this boat mainly from pear wood.  Part of it is made of paranapine. It is built on rafters of plywood thick 3 mm. Actually a bit too thick but I tried to imitate the lip welds of the original construction and then a wide enough surface is needed to make those welds on those rafters.
 
The trusses as I first drew them
 
I always work with half-trusses, as can be seen in the drawing.
When all the half-trusses on the port side are glued to the central  truss, all imperfections on that side can be repaired very accurately by filing away excess material. When everything is satisfactorily secured, I start with the other side. To this end, moulds are made from the already glued trusses, which are carefully sawn out and glued to starboard. Thus, everything is completely equal on both sides.
 
The longitudinal truss is made of plywood 1.5 mm thick. The bow, keel and stern are made of pear wood. These parts were glued all around against the longitudinal truss so that on the port and starboard side there is still above those parts 0,75 mm to support the ends of the planks. The locations of the numbered half-trusses are indicated on the longitudinal trusses, as shown on the drawings in the book.
 
Because the longitudinal truss is quite thin, it can bend easily, so it was screwed onto a board and I added small distance partitions between the rafters. At the bow arrived a filler piece of balsa wood that had been filed into the right shape to give the planks at the bow the correct shape. After unscrewing the longitudinal truss, it turned out to be an indeformable unit and the other rafter halves could be glued.
 
When everything was in place, on both sides of the longitudinal bilge, I made the stern. The construction has quite a few bends and to make that easier, a mold was placed on the work board to make the right shapes.
 
The top piece was made of balsa wood. The black hole is the interior of the cabin where a window was later added. The lower timbers have already been installed here, which already gave the framework a lot of strength. The transom is of one mm. plywood with the planks glued on top in the right pattern. Later, the openings were added.
The support boards between a number of trusses are painted black. They are behind the open, or closed,  gun ports.
The struts for the bulwarks were made of plywood. This is only necessary  to attache the  planks above the deck which form the bullwark. Once they are glued on, the  plywood pieces were carefully removed and then be replaced by the struts in the correct dimensions and material.
 
The top of the bulwark was called the rahout (Dutch word; ra is yard, hout is wood). On an early pinas it was customary to lower the yards on the bulwarks in order to stow or strike the sails. This is how the name rahout came about. On later ships, the sails were stowed or struck on the hoisted yards.

On the build board for my Prince de Neufchatel build.  Nice bit of bling!  Really appreciate the cool products!
 

 

 

I am not that familiar with it.  I am sure somebody here has some experience with it.  What ship are you working on?

Yo!  It's my Philly suburbs upbringing.

I am not that familiar with it.  I am sure somebody here has some experience with it.  What ship are you working on?

'It's yellow and color and comes in a box.  Any other questions?'

'It's yellow and color and comes in a box.  Any other questions?'

For what it's worth, I would never use basswood for anything but filler.  When I was working on the NRG planking half hull, I had alot of problems with the basswood planking.  I switched to yellow cedar and was much happier.  It is relatively inexpensive and soft like basswood, but slightly harder.  I find it works better than BW and finishes VERY nicely.