JSGerson

I did some digging and found these plans from the US Navy: 4520302001 - Crew’s Head (located on 2001 CD not available anymore) 4648371b - Crews Head Area Modification Sheet (located on present CD for sale) I had to reduce the size/resolution in order to post them. If you would like the full size, PM me with your email address and I will get them to you. Jon

A view of the bow from the angle in your last image are exceedingly rare due to the fact that the public is not allowed to go there. I have been looking for those same images as you for the last couple of years in anticipation of my building the Connie as my next project. Here is what I have so far

You made the right decision. The way you know that is you feel much better now that is is done. If you are going to do something, you might as well take your time and do it right. You saw the problem and you fixed it when it was easier (not necessarily easy) to fix (now vs later). It's a hobby, there is no rush, and in many cases there is no "right" way, just "your" way. Jon

There has been a lot of discussion in the past about rope coils. Now, I am the last person you would want to ask about them. I am not a sailor and, as I have mentioned in the past am working on my first real build. The following quote is something I kept as part of my personal library of model building knowledge. Unfortunately I neglected to record whom I got it from, but I present it here on it's own merits: Sorry to "throw cold water" on such an interesting topic, but nice as those flat coils lying on the deck of a model look, did they really have them on full size ships? I mean what would happen when a heavy sea washed over the decks? You make a good point. 'Decorative' as rope coils might look on the decks of a model, this wasn't normal ship practice. There was a good reason for this – it encouraged rot. Everything was done on board ship to minimize wear and tear (which after all means money spent) and this included the running rigging. Wherever possible rope coils were hung from the belaying pin they were associated with, or perhaps from a cleat if a large rope, so that no part of it touched the deck. Apart from gravity, this also allowed air to circulate around it and so dry it. Ropes left lying on deck would probably never dry out, being repeatedly wetted by either salt or fresh water. If you consider a deck (with rope coils laid on it) which has just been rained on, or a sea has come over the side, the deck itself might gradually dry out, but you can bet that that part of it under the coils will still remain wet or damp – an ideal situation for rot to set in. Apart from that a heavy sea coming aboard would also leave the coils in a hopeless tangle, so coils on deck are also a safety hazard. From experience, the only time you would normally see a large amount of rope on deck, is when the ship is either setting or furling sail, or engaged in some maneuver such as tacking or wearing. At these times, you have to be very careful where you put your feet, and you should never stand on a rope in this situation if you can avoid it – in case it moved without warning. The last order normally given after such an operation was to 'tidy up the spaghetti' – i.e., coil up, and hang the running rigging from its pin. I should mention that this practice is followed today, even though the rope concerned might perhaps be modern Polypropolene, which will probably also deteriorate eventually.

I have pictures of SIXTY different models (and some of their build logs) of the Rattlesnake and not one of them is the same as the next. As we all have realized, it is up to the model builder to determine how the model is to look. You do what you think is best for you. Enjoy your build Jonathan

Ah yes, the buckets. I've wondered about those. You are correct, Hahn did not make a bucket rack nor for that matter, buckets. Since I was (at the time) following very closely to the practicum, I didn't make any either. Had I paid more attention to the kit plans, I might have added them as an added interest, There are other items like all of the gun tools necessary to clean and prepare the guns, the cannon ball racks, etc.; I guess that's the modeler's choice. The hull boarding steps on Hahn's model line up just forward of the rail cap scroll. On my model, the ladder is a bit aft of the rail cap scroll which I believe yours will too. So the sailors would have to step on the rail cap and step down to the ladder, a bit awkward I'll admit, but doable. Until you mentioned it, I hadn't paid it much attention. The gangplank post is permanent as well as the gangplank. And by the way, you are not the first to notice the tight quarters under the gangplank for the gun crew. Based on discussions I've read in other build logs, it is more than likely these guns were not used very much or maybe even left vacant. A similar argument can even be made of the most forward gun ports. There too, the working space for the gun crews is very tight. Jonathan

You stated : "... the Hahn plans don't have a turn post under the fixed platform, just metal brackets to provide support." If by "turn post" you mean a vertical support holding the fixed gangplank, it may not be clear in Hahn's plans (which I assume you have) but if you look at the Hahn photo above, there is a post under the hand rail stanchion by the ladder. There are no metal brackets used. As for the fixed gangway, it appears that my quarter deck is higher than yours which allowed me to step down to the gang plank. In your case, maybe you could fudge a bit by using thinner planks and support beams just enough to fool the eye. Here is a image of what I did. As I look at these 3 yr old images, there is a whole lot I wish I could do over. Hopefully my skill level has improved a bit. Jonathan

The debate as to whether or not to add the temporary gangways has been going on for a long time. In the Nautical Research Journal. Vol. 39, No. 1 March 1994 article, Rattlesnake, a 20-gun Privateer by Harold M. Hahn, he states in part: George F. Campbell produced a set of Rattlesnake plans for model builders which bear a 1963 copyright date. Those plans, coupled with a kit produced by Model Shipways, firmly established her popularity with model builders. Campbell also showed gangways and guardrails in the waist. His reconstruction differs from Chapelle's in the number and placement of posts and supports for the gangway, but both showed a construction that I disliked. The gangway surface is shown above the level of the bulwark cap rail in the waist, a design that didn't appeal to me. I believe it resulted from an incorrect interpretation of the conditions shown on the Admiralty drawing which itself is at fault. The original draftsman, when drawing the sheet of deck plans, showed the platforms extending forward from the quarterdeck with a jagged ending generally used by draftsmen to indicate incomplete sections. In order to faithfully record information from the Admiralty drawing, I copied this detail on my plans along with the note "Fixed part of the Gangway." Actually on the sheer and profile plan, the platform is shown to end just beyond the turned post that supports the handrail; the deck plan should have shown a straight line at that point. The raised level of the gangways as reconstructed by Chapelle and Campbell undoubtedly results from the fact that the fixed platform is shown at that level where the turned post is mounted on it. The platform is a short step down from the quarterdeck which has pronounced camber. The model builder will find that when the platform is constructed to parallel that camber, the surface where it meets the bulwark is at the top of the waist cap rail. This can be observed in the photographs of my model. In his earlier book, The History of American Sailing Ships, Chapelle expresses uncertainty about what kind of extra platform or gangway might have been indicated by the note on the Admiralty drawing. Gangways are not usually found on small ships like Rattlesnake. As a result, he attempted no reconstruction made at that time. He continues… I have done my best to avoid adulterating the information found in original Admiralty drafts. This means that the model builder using my plans will have to do a little research and decision making of his own. My decision was to omit the gangways. Since I was and am following Robert Hunt’s practicum which is based on Harold Hahn’s plans, I did not add the gangplanks.

Love the tutorials!!!! Jonathan

Many thanks for your patience to stop and explain things to the likes of me 8-) Jonathan

More questions if you don't mind. I assume the "chafing fish" is the shell like covering over the mast. As it appears to me, it looks like a smooth thick veneer surface covering half the circumference in the lower potions and completely around the mast in the upper. You chose to build this up from strips of long tapered wood going around the mast almost like a long thin wooden barrel. How did you achieve that and squeeze it to such a tight fit? I have no idea what the plans mean when you stated "just add filler." What did that mean - lather on wood filler and carve it? As a novice, I might have wrapped a thin card-like or polystyrene sheet material around the mast to achieve the effect. Obviously yours, being well executed, is a far superior method. Jonathan

Out of simple curiosity I noticed that the style of steps you made, which appears to match the period style of the Constitution, does not match what is presently on the ship. What were you using as a model for your steps? BTY, you done a beautiful so far. Any more details as to how you made the round eye bolt "thingys"?

That helps a lot Ken. I'm still putzing around with the yard rigging now and should I feel like I'm going out of my mind, I may just do what you did just to get my hands back on wood parts again. I initially had visions of duplicating Salty Sea Dog's efforts on his C.W. Morgan Whaleboat Post #375 but that was 1:25 scale. Placing the buckets between the guns sounds simple enough...yeah, right! 8-)

JT - PM sent

I didn't make buckets because when I was at this stage I was still following Bob Hunt's practicum exclusively, not paying too much attention to the kit plans, and he didn't address these. Therefore, I didn't know to provide an area to store them on deck. When I did realize there were buckets, I almost didn't recognize the Mamoli supplied cast metal buckets were in fact buckets. So the model still stands bucketless. What was the process you used for making the buckets?

Chuck, are you considering offering your ropewalk as an item for sale on Syren?

Here is something to consider: the Wood Supplement Packages originally from HobbyMill. If you are following the Robert Hunt Constitution practicum like I will when I start my model of the Conny, he talks about making certain wood changes on the deck: Hatch Combings, Main Rail, Fife Rails, Fenders, Binnacles, and Life Boats. At the time I bought my kit, HobbyMills was still operating (that role has since been taken over by Crown Timberyard) and I could and did purchase all of the supplements for a total of $85. Whether or not Crown Timberyard also offers these packages, I don't know. It might be worth looking into. If you are interested, I could send you the original HobbyMills description which indicates where in the practicum the substitutions are to be made, what they are, and the pricing. Jonathan

Don't feel guilty about not following the practicum to the letter. I'm following Bob Hunt's instructions for the Rattlesnake as a complete newbie and even I deviated from the written word when I though a better sequence was called for. If I remember correctly, somewhere in the my practicum he states that if you find a better way of doing something than he was showing, go ahead and do it. Your doing good, so keep at it. Jonathan

Chuck had two tables at either end of the room approximately 20' apart; one for each end of the rope walk with one end clamped down. The power drill turned the mechanism on the unclamped side which was was held back with one hand to maintain tension. After the unclamped walk had moved a predetermined distance - six or seven inches(?) (determined from past trials), it was clamped down and the other side was used, Because the drill was turning the gears from this side now, the twisting was reversed and the three (or four) lines wrapped around each other creating the rope. After the rope was pulled through some bees wax he was done. The rope did not unravel. Hope this helps Jon

In case I haven't mentioned it to you before, Chuck Passaro former Director of NRG and owner of Syren Ship Modeling Co who make such wonderful miniature rope, uses this very same "cheap" ropewalk. He did make one very important change. He took off the the handles and replaced them with a Philips Head screws so he could turn the mechanism with a power drill. I saw him make a 20' rope from initial threading of the walk to final product in less than five minutes. The drill made all the difference in the world. Just thought you might want to know. Jon

Yeah, I got that security warning too and informed Chuck about it. According to him it's all fixed. I found the build log on this site by searching the key words "ship's wheel" and "constitution". Near the bottom of the list of results on the first page was the build log.

No sails. I'm not that masochistic 8-)

Thanks for the warnings , Scott, I kinda figured there would be surprises waiting for me; I'm learning as I am going. Having never done this before I know there are traps out there waiting to spring at the worst possible moment. Presently I am rigging the the yards off-ship and hope I get most of the stuff on and in the right place. Jon

Have you looked at the Capnharv2's build log: Making a Ship's wheel for the USF Constitution?

You can see a great example of this technique on Blue Ensign's Pegasus build log starting at post 1372