Landlubber Mike

First planking is slowly coming along.  I have seven or so strakes glued from the keel, and decided to switch and start from the gun deck down.  This is what Pete recommended in his helpful Euromodel notes, and was the approach Keith Julier took in his Period Ship Handbook 2 (which has a chapter on the kit).
 
This is my first time working on a multi-deck level warship.  To help ensure that I had a smooth guiding line for the gun ports, I decided to run the top of a planking strake along the top line of the gun deck template.  When checking for symmetry, however, I noticed that in some areas, the outer edge of the gun deck template between the bulkheads was at a different height from one side to the other.  I think what happened was that with all the dry fitting, the two pieces of the template ended up having a slight bend to them, and although generally symmetrical where they were glued at the bulkheads, the outer edge of the templates between the bulkheads ended up differently.  
 
I was a bit worried about this, as not only would I have asymmetry, but the cannons would be all over the place in terms of height it I cut the gun ports out along the proper line.
 
So, what I ended up doing was gluing spacer blocks between the templates and the bulkhead bracer blocks that I had installed before.  In some cases I used the blocks to raise the edge of the templates, in some to lower, and in some to help change the the sweep.  A real pain, but I'm glad I took the step.  Now, the gun deck has a smooth sweep from stem to stern, and is symmetrical on both sides.
 



 
I was thinking about selling this kit and moving directly to scratch building, but I'm glad I decided to stick with it.  Not only is it a beautiful model, but I've been learning a lot along the way.  Maybe some of these things matter less with scratch building (like the bowsprit housing and my recent gun deck alignment adventure), but I think the general lessons learned, especially how to think ahead, will come in handy.  The Euromodel kit is great too in that it gives plenty of optionality to detail the kit as much as you'd like, so I'm sure that will help if I should happen to want to scratch build in the future.

First planking is slowly coming along.  I have seven or so strakes glued from the keel, and decided to switch and start from the gun deck down.  This is what Pete recommended in his helpful Euromodel notes, and was the approach Keith Julier took in his Period Ship Handbook 2 (which has a chapter on the kit).
 
This is my first time working on a multi-deck level warship.  To help ensure that I had a smooth guiding line for the gun ports, I decided to run the top of a planking strake along the top line of the gun deck template.  When checking for symmetry, however, I noticed that in some areas, the outer edge of the gun deck template between the bulkheads was at a different height from one side to the other.  I think what happened was that with all the dry fitting, the two pieces of the template ended up having a slight bend to them, and although generally symmetrical where they were glued at the bulkheads, the outer edge of the templates between the bulkheads ended up differently.  
 
I was a bit worried about this, as not only would I have asymmetry, but the cannons would be all over the place in terms of height it I cut the gun ports out along the proper line.
 
So, what I ended up doing was gluing spacer blocks between the templates and the bulkhead bracer blocks that I had installed before.  In some cases I used the blocks to raise the edge of the templates, in some to lower, and in some to help change the the sweep.  A real pain, but I'm glad I took the step.  Now, the gun deck has a smooth sweep from stem to stern, and is symmetrical on both sides.
 



 
I was thinking about selling this kit and moving directly to scratch building, but I'm glad I decided to stick with it.  Not only is it a beautiful model, but I've been learning a lot along the way.  Maybe some of these things matter less with scratch building (like the bowsprit housing and my recent gun deck alignment adventure), but I think the general lessons learned, especially how to think ahead, will come in handy.  The Euromodel kit is great too in that it gives plenty of optionality to detail the kit as much as you'd like, so I'm sure that will help if I should happen to want to scratch build in the future.

First planking is slowly coming along.  I have seven or so strakes glued from the keel, and decided to switch and start from the gun deck down.  This is what Pete recommended in his helpful Euromodel notes, and was the approach Keith Julier took in his Period Ship Handbook 2 (which has a chapter on the kit).
 
This is my first time working on a multi-deck level warship.  To help ensure that I had a smooth guiding line for the gun ports, I decided to run the top of a planking strake along the top line of the gun deck template.  When checking for symmetry, however, I noticed that in some areas, the outer edge of the gun deck template between the bulkheads was at a different height from one side to the other.  I think what happened was that with all the dry fitting, the two pieces of the template ended up having a slight bend to them, and although generally symmetrical where they were glued at the bulkheads, the outer edge of the templates between the bulkheads ended up differently.  
 
I was a bit worried about this, as not only would I have asymmetry, but the cannons would be all over the place in terms of height it I cut the gun ports out along the proper line.
 
So, what I ended up doing was gluing spacer blocks between the templates and the bulkhead bracer blocks that I had installed before.  In some cases I used the blocks to raise the edge of the templates, in some to lower, and in some to help change the the sweep.  A real pain, but I'm glad I took the step.  Now, the gun deck has a smooth sweep from stem to stern, and is symmetrical on both sides.
 



 
I was thinking about selling this kit and moving directly to scratch building, but I'm glad I decided to stick with it.  Not only is it a beautiful model, but I've been learning a lot along the way.  Maybe some of these things matter less with scratch building (like the bowsprit housing and my recent gun deck alignment adventure), but I think the general lessons learned, especially how to think ahead, will come in handy.  The Euromodel kit is great too in that it gives plenty of optionality to detail the kit as much as you'd like, so I'm sure that will help if I should happen to want to scratch build in the future.

Friends, I'm a bit stuck in terms of a color scheme for the hull.  I was originally going to go with  a similar approach that Kenji Nakajima's build took (first picture at the top of my log) and go with mostly black and either walnut or pear for the brown areas, with boxwood accents.  But, after seeing Chapman's plans for the Venus and the two builds for the Göta Lejon, I'm thinking of trying something different.  In particular, I'm really taken by the color scheme on this model:
 

 
 
If I went that route, does the blue strip running across the full hull look odd?  Does it look odd to have the dark brown areas just above that blue stripe?  I haven't seen too many ships with this color scheme, but it seems like these Swedish ships might have had a slightly different color scheme from other European ships.
  An alternative is Chapman's color plan of the Venus, which is similar, except it looks like a black stripe runs across the top of the hull, but there is a red stripe at the top near the quarterdeck:
 

 
 
Alternatively, I could go with something like this color plan, where it's mostly black and pear around the gunports, with blue at the top of the hull at the quarterdeck and forecastle:
 

 
 
Any suggestions or preferences would be greatly appreciated as I try to figure things out.  To avoid the use of paint, I'd do the hull below the waterline in holly, wales in black, and that middle band around the gunport likely in pear (I think box might be a little light for my tastes).  It's just what to do with the other areas of the upper hull that I can't decide on  Thanks!

Thanks guys, really appreciate the support.  Jason, I'll have to do a little more research
 
I spent some time with the kit the last few days.  First I test fit the bulkheads with the keel, and was happy to see that there was a nice snug fit without the need for much opening of the slots.  So, a good start on things.
 
Then I read Pete's build notes - a very nice resource for Euromodel builds.  He correctly pointed out that the mast slots in the keel are incorrectly positioned.  Not only are the slots positioned too far back, but the main mast and mizzen masts are at the wrong rake.  Pete did say that the foremast needed to be repositioned another 3mm, but at least with my keel, it seemed like the foremast slot was maybe off only 1mm or so, if at all, and was at the correct rake.  Interestingly, the keel matches Plan Sheet 17, but not Plan Sheet 3.  My guess is that Plan Sheet 3 is correct, after looking at other plan sheets in the kit and taking a look at Chapman's Plate XXXI.  So, I redid the slots for the main and mizzen masts, which included adding some scrap plywood so that the masts would fit snug in the slots.  Thankfully Pete pointed this out, as it was an easy fix at this stage.  
 

 

 
 
I had heard of people having issues with the plans not matching up, and that does seem to be the case unfortunately.  Interestingly, the stem matches Plan Sheet 17 (first picture below), but not Plan Sheet 3 (second and third pictures).  You can even see how the bulkhead slots on the plans don't match up with the slots in the keel:
 

 

 

 
 
The stem is pretty close, but this brought back painful memories of the Corel Unicorn kit, which I abandoned in frustration because the plans were all over the place, and on top of that, did not match the Chapman plans in the Architectura in having a hull that was too tall by a factor of something like 20mm.  So, I spent some time taking various measurements (gunports to waterline, waterline to bottom of keel, etc.) against Chapman's Plate XXXI.  In my edition of the Architectura, Plate XXXI is smaller than the Euromodel plans by a factor of approximately 2.3.  I am very happy to say that the Euromodel plans appear spot on with the Chapman plans in terms of hull dimensions!     
 
I do want to say that I don't want to come across as overly critical of the kit or anything.  Just wanted to point these items out so that others that might be following this log might avoid any confusion with their kits.  Aside from a few inconsistencies, the plans seem very true to Chapman's Plate XXI which is a big relief.
 
Next I started work on determining where to install the mounting screws for the pedestals.  I've been using #6-32 zinc plated machine screws with a nut epoxied into the keel.  They seem to fit nicely through the pedestals I bought from Model Expo, and I can get the screws in 3" lengths.  The stern is a bit lower than the stem, so I started by marking the waterline, and then positioned the pedestals approximately 25% of the way from both the aft end and fore end of the keel.  This worked nicely in that the pedestals were safely between bulkheads.  I'm still considering color schemes, so I'll drill the holes for the screws/nuts once I figure out the wood to be used for the keel.  Here's a quick photo I snapped, with some bonus artwork in the background from the real artists in the family
 

I haven't been able to find much on Swedish frigates on the period.  One ship I did come across is the Göta Lejon from 1746.  I found plans as well as two beautiful models.  It's obviously a bigger ship (I think a Third Rate), but it shares a lot of the design characteristics seen in Chapman's Plates XXXI and XXXII of his Architectura.  This, along with the Venus pictured a few posts ago (and the closed waist), make me lean towards thinking that the ship in the plates is a Swedish vessel.  
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

Provenance of Kit
 
There has been a lot of discussion on what ship this kit is supposed to represent.  What is clear is that the kit is based on Plates XXXI and XXXII of Chapman's Architectura, with the only details being that these plates are included in the section of "Privateers":
 

 

 
 
Euromodel states it's a French vessel that was launched in 1747.  However, it appears that the ship at the following links is likely the "true" La Renommee for that period:
 
http://ancre.fr/en/monographies-en/20-monographie-de-la-renommee-fregate-de-8-1744.html
 
http://maquettes-marine.pagesperso-orange.fr/renommee/renommee.html
http://www.shipmodels.com.ua/eng/models/elite/renomme/index.htm
 
From what I've read on a Russian ship model forum, in Boudriot's research, Admiral Paris, a Frenchman, in his Souvenirs de la Marine (which was published in 1879), was copying over plans from Chapman's Architectura and mistakenly labeled it the Le Renommee, when he was intending to say something about the anchors or stern or something being similar to the Le Renommee. That mistake has been passed down, and may have been passed down into this kit.
 
Then there is Keith Julier, in The Period Ship Handbook 2, who believed that the kit represents a frigate of the same name that was built in 1793.  That vessel only had 32 guns, while the kit supplies 40.  It clearly can't be that ship because the Architectura was published in 1768.
 
Then there are others that think it's actually a Swedish ship named the "Jupiter" because of the figurehead and certain stern details.  On page 106 of Wolfram zu Mondfeld's  "Historic Ship Models" is the exact picture of the stern which is labeled as the Swedish privateer from 1760. The German site below, as well as a Russian model ship forum I came across, also think it's a Swedish ship. I can't find anything on a Swedish ship named the Jupiter though, and a query to the Digitalt Museum in Sweden came up empty.
 
http://www.line-of-b...regatte-jupiter
 
 
I'm by no means a naval historian at all, but all this is very interesting.  One thing I was thinking was whether there were particular features of this ship that are uniquely French, Swedish, Danish or other.  I would surmise that you could look to plainly visible things like the figurehead, ornamentation, flags, etc.  Then there are structural items such as how the stern is constructed, height between the decks (for example, I learned in researching the Unicorn and Lyme that they were based off of French frigates, which had a lower height between the decks than seen in the typical English ship of that time, as well as had shorter railing, etc. on the quarterdecks).  I thought maybe the open stern would provide a clue, but Plate III shows a very similar but smaller (and unfortunately, unknown) ship, and Plate LI shows another with a similar open stern that is of an English East Indiaman.
 
One clue might be the waist.  I've done a lot of research on the waist of ships because the Corel Unicorn clearly uses the wrong waist for a British frigate of that time.  From the Gardiner books on frigates, the waist of ships in the 18th century was generally open during the early to middle part of the century, and gradually started closing up as the 19th century approached.  I think this principle clearly applied to British ships, and likely French ships as well (I don't have any books on French frigates, but flipping through the Ancre monographs for ships at the time, all seemed to have similar open-waisted ships to the British).  Gardiner seems to have essentially limited his studies to British frigates, as his last book, the "Sailing Frigate," uses pictures from the NMM.  In that book, he shows the development of the filling in of the waist, and shows a similar closed waist with row of light gratings similar to Plate XXXII with the Lacedaemonian (SLR0674 from the NMM), a ship that was circa 1812: 
 
http://collections.r...ects/66635.html
 
 
What's curious is that Plate XXXII shows a very closed waist which wasn't used by the British until the beginning of the 19th century.  So, I don't think Chapman copied it from the British.  Then take a look at the Venus, an actual Swedish frigate that was designed by Chapman and built in 1783 (it was captured by the Russians in 1789):
 

 
 
A smaller ship for sure, and obviously post-dates the Architectura.  But look at the general design with the gunport rows, small windows at the quarterdeck, the name badge just under the row of windows on the stern, and in particular, the waist and main deck with the rows of gratings (again, not seen in British frigates until the beginning of the 19th century).  It looks like the little younger sister to Plate XXXI!
 
All this is not at all meant to disparage Euromodel.  The kit is clearly based on, and true to, Chapman's plans.  As we know, actual ships sometimes differed from the plans, ships were captured and converted, etc.  In any event, whether Chapman himself designed the ship in Plates XXXI and XXXII or copied it from elsewhere is anyone's guess, but I would lean towards this being a Chapman design given the early adoption of the closed waist and line of gratings.  Now, whether the ship in Plates XXXI and XXXII was in fact built or not is also anyone's guess.  And does this make this a Swedish ship?  
 
In the grand scheme of things, does any of this matter?  The kit makes for a very nice model of a mid-18th century frigate with really beautiful lines that I will have a lot of fun building - regardless of whether I put a French or Swedish flag on her in the end

First planking is slowly coming along.  I have seven or so strakes glued from the keel, and decided to switch and start from the gun deck down.  This is what Pete recommended in his helpful Euromodel notes, and was the approach Keith Julier took in his Period Ship Handbook 2 (which has a chapter on the kit).
 
This is my first time working on a multi-deck level warship.  To help ensure that I had a smooth guiding line for the gun ports, I decided to run the top of a planking strake along the top line of the gun deck template.  When checking for symmetry, however, I noticed that in some areas, the outer edge of the gun deck template between the bulkheads was at a different height from one side to the other.  I think what happened was that with all the dry fitting, the two pieces of the template ended up having a slight bend to them, and although generally symmetrical where they were glued at the bulkheads, the outer edge of the templates between the bulkheads ended up differently.  
 
I was a bit worried about this, as not only would I have asymmetry, but the cannons would be all over the place in terms of height it I cut the gun ports out along the proper line.
 
So, what I ended up doing was gluing spacer blocks between the templates and the bulkhead bracer blocks that I had installed before.  In some cases I used the blocks to raise the edge of the templates, in some to lower, and in some to help change the the sweep.  A real pain, but I'm glad I took the step.  Now, the gun deck has a smooth sweep from stem to stern, and is symmetrical on both sides.
 



 
I was thinking about selling this kit and moving directly to scratch building, but I'm glad I decided to stick with it.  Not only is it a beautiful model, but I've been learning a lot along the way.  Maybe some of these things matter less with scratch building (like the bowsprit housing and my recent gun deck alignment adventure), but I think the general lessons learned, especially how to think ahead, will come in handy.  The Euromodel kit is great too in that it gives plenty of optionality to detail the kit as much as you'd like, so I'm sure that will help if I should happen to want to scratch build in the future.

Thanks for everyone that offered thoughts on what to do with the last bulkhead.  I ended up adding two planking strips to it, then fairing the bulkhead back to the original line on the aft side.  Seems to have worked very well - I now have a firm, wider surface to glue the end of the planks to, while having a nice smooth transition to the stern.
 

First planking is slowly coming along.  I have seven or so strakes glued from the keel, and decided to switch and start from the gun deck down.  This is what Pete recommended in his helpful Euromodel notes, and was the approach Keith Julier took in his Period Ship Handbook 2 (which has a chapter on the kit).
 
This is my first time working on a multi-deck level warship.  To help ensure that I had a smooth guiding line for the gun ports, I decided to run the top of a planking strake along the top line of the gun deck template.  When checking for symmetry, however, I noticed that in some areas, the outer edge of the gun deck template between the bulkheads was at a different height from one side to the other.  I think what happened was that with all the dry fitting, the two pieces of the template ended up having a slight bend to them, and although generally symmetrical where they were glued at the bulkheads, the outer edge of the templates between the bulkheads ended up differently.  
 
I was a bit worried about this, as not only would I have asymmetry, but the cannons would be all over the place in terms of height it I cut the gun ports out along the proper line.
 
So, what I ended up doing was gluing spacer blocks between the templates and the bulkhead bracer blocks that I had installed before.  In some cases I used the blocks to raise the edge of the templates, in some to lower, and in some to help change the the sweep.  A real pain, but I'm glad I took the step.  Now, the gun deck has a smooth sweep from stem to stern, and is symmetrical on both sides.
 



 
I was thinking about selling this kit and moving directly to scratch building, but I'm glad I decided to stick with it.  Not only is it a beautiful model, but I've been learning a lot along the way.  Maybe some of these things matter less with scratch building (like the bowsprit housing and my recent gun deck alignment adventure), but I think the general lessons learned, especially how to think ahead, will come in handy.  The Euromodel kit is great too in that it gives plenty of optionality to detail the kit as much as you'd like, so I'm sure that will help if I should happen to want to scratch build in the future.

Thanks for everyone that offered thoughts on what to do with the last bulkhead.  I ended up adding two planking strips to it, then fairing the bulkhead back to the original line on the aft side.  Seems to have worked very well - I now have a firm, wider surface to glue the end of the planks to, while having a nice smooth transition to the stern.
 

First planking is slowly coming along.  I have seven or so strakes glued from the keel, and decided to switch and start from the gun deck down.  This is what Pete recommended in his helpful Euromodel notes, and was the approach Keith Julier took in his Period Ship Handbook 2 (which has a chapter on the kit).
 
This is my first time working on a multi-deck level warship.  To help ensure that I had a smooth guiding line for the gun ports, I decided to run the top of a planking strake along the top line of the gun deck template.  When checking for symmetry, however, I noticed that in some areas, the outer edge of the gun deck template between the bulkheads was at a different height from one side to the other.  I think what happened was that with all the dry fitting, the two pieces of the template ended up having a slight bend to them, and although generally symmetrical where they were glued at the bulkheads, the outer edge of the templates between the bulkheads ended up differently.  
 
I was a bit worried about this, as not only would I have asymmetry, but the cannons would be all over the place in terms of height it I cut the gun ports out along the proper line.
 
So, what I ended up doing was gluing spacer blocks between the templates and the bulkhead bracer blocks that I had installed before.  In some cases I used the blocks to raise the edge of the templates, in some to lower, and in some to help change the the sweep.  A real pain, but I'm glad I took the step.  Now, the gun deck has a smooth sweep from stem to stern, and is symmetrical on both sides.
 



 
I was thinking about selling this kit and moving directly to scratch building, but I'm glad I decided to stick with it.  Not only is it a beautiful model, but I've been learning a lot along the way.  Maybe some of these things matter less with scratch building (like the bowsprit housing and my recent gun deck alignment adventure), but I think the general lessons learned, especially how to think ahead, will come in handy.  The Euromodel kit is great too in that it gives plenty of optionality to detail the kit as much as you'd like, so I'm sure that will help if I should happen to want to scratch build in the future.

Thanks for everyone that offered thoughts on what to do with the last bulkhead.  I ended up adding two planking strips to it, then fairing the bulkhead back to the original line on the aft side.  Seems to have worked very well - I now have a firm, wider surface to glue the end of the planks to, while having a nice smooth transition to the stern.
 

First planking is slowly coming along.  I have seven or so strakes glued from the keel, and decided to switch and start from the gun deck down.  This is what Pete recommended in his helpful Euromodel notes, and was the approach Keith Julier took in his Period Ship Handbook 2 (which has a chapter on the kit).
 
This is my first time working on a multi-deck level warship.  To help ensure that I had a smooth guiding line for the gun ports, I decided to run the top of a planking strake along the top line of the gun deck template.  When checking for symmetry, however, I noticed that in some areas, the outer edge of the gun deck template between the bulkheads was at a different height from one side to the other.  I think what happened was that with all the dry fitting, the two pieces of the template ended up having a slight bend to them, and although generally symmetrical where they were glued at the bulkheads, the outer edge of the templates between the bulkheads ended up differently.  
 
I was a bit worried about this, as not only would I have asymmetry, but the cannons would be all over the place in terms of height it I cut the gun ports out along the proper line.
 
So, what I ended up doing was gluing spacer blocks between the templates and the bulkhead bracer blocks that I had installed before.  In some cases I used the blocks to raise the edge of the templates, in some to lower, and in some to help change the the sweep.  A real pain, but I'm glad I took the step.  Now, the gun deck has a smooth sweep from stem to stern, and is symmetrical on both sides.
 



 
I was thinking about selling this kit and moving directly to scratch building, but I'm glad I decided to stick with it.  Not only is it a beautiful model, but I've been learning a lot along the way.  Maybe some of these things matter less with scratch building (like the bowsprit housing and my recent gun deck alignment adventure), but I think the general lessons learned, especially how to think ahead, will come in handy.  The Euromodel kit is great too in that it gives plenty of optionality to detail the kit as much as you'd like, so I'm sure that will help if I should happen to want to scratch build in the future.

Thanks for everyone that offered thoughts on what to do with the last bulkhead.  I ended up adding two planking strips to it, then fairing the bulkhead back to the original line on the aft side.  Seems to have worked very well - I now have a firm, wider surface to glue the end of the planks to, while having a nice smooth transition to the stern.
 

I was just telling someone the other day who was building miniature display tables that he needed to look at Byrnes' tools.  I went to Jim's site to copy the link, and happened to see the sled on his website  - I plan on placing an order this week!  His tools are incredible and well worth it if you can swing the price.

I was just telling someone the other day who was building miniature display tables that he needed to look at Byrnes' tools.  I went to Jim's site to copy the link, and happened to see the sled on his website  - I plan on placing an order this week!  His tools are incredible and well worth it if you can swing the price.

I was just telling someone the other day who was building miniature display tables that he needed to look at Byrnes' tools.  I went to Jim's site to copy the link, and happened to see the sled on his website  - I plan on placing an order this week!  His tools are incredible and well worth it if you can swing the price.

Thought that I would post a picture of the Byrnes saw sled that I purchased from Jim and Donna as I haven’t seen it shown elsewhere on the site.
 
As with any of the Byrnes equipment, it is beautifully made of aluminum and the slot riders are made from plastic and a very nice fit into my saw.
 
You do have to remove your fence to use the sled, but that’s only a few seconds work and two screws to remove.
 
 
ben

Unfortunately I no longer have that shop setup . I've moved house several times since I was there, and am "reduced" to working from a single workbench. I still have all my tools, but anytime I need to do something on the lathe or mill I have to drag it out of a cupboard . Another reason why I got into Card modelling .
 
Cheers, Danny

MIKE/DANNY:
 
I got the DRO set up on my mill and liked it so much I bought another unit without the display for my lathe. 
 
Danny you have a really neat set up on yours.  Did the encoders come with the red handwheels when you bought yours, or did you fashion them somehow later.  I really hated to give up my Adjustable-Zero red handwheels but the DRO comes with some generic looking black wheels.  

Thanks Mike. If they hold up for any length of time I think it will have been worth the little bit of time it took to make them. And the curved one work great on the concave sections of the bulkheads.

Looking great Peter.  This is going to be a fantastic model!

Those look great.  I've just been taking balsa blocks, and using rubber cement to attach sandpaper to them.  Yours put mine to shame

Looking great Peter.  This is going to be a fantastic model!