Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Just south of Hamburg, Germany
  • Interests
    18th century history and reenactment, collecting items from this period.

Recent Profile Visitors

878 profile views
  1. Hello Mark, did you see the pictures of the cutter Cheerful from the Rogers Collection? Even at this cutter from 1805 the breech ropes where laid only above the cascable and not turned around it. It seems that the gunners at that time did't fear that it would slip down. At least it looked like on a bazaar, everyone who had a picture with a cannon on it, posted it. But none has any historical sources for that! So I think we are right to do it like the historical sources, Falconer, the Royal George and also the Cheerful model show it. Your cannons looking pretty good. Greater pictures would show that much better 😉
  2. Hello Jan, I think you mean how I managed it? The short version is, with much patience and and strong glasses. The long version is trying and trying. I think it's the 4. generation you see there. Here some pictures who may explain more then words. And that are the guys who did't make it and now had to suffer for some experiments
  3. Hello, today we had an inspection from the admiralty. That is the guy with the red coat. The shipwright try to explain, why the shipyard is't working at all: because the main worker did't feel very good. But he should soon start working again. In the background his assistant controlled the high of the deck clamp. It's pretty low. Here you could stay only between the beams! And here is the new crew. I build them from sheets of brass, wire, plaster , paper and cotton for hair. And of coarse a lot of paint. And yes, these clumsy hands could build such small and delicate things. 😉 But it was't easy. I feel a little better now and hope that I could start working again soon. My main problem is that I'm so spiritless, and the next time I have to build the gun ports for the upper decks. That is nothing that really encourage you.
  4. Hello Mark, I think, you think all too complicated. There is a gun crew, and I think that there are one or two members who have the duty to look after the breech rope. And if there would be any problems, they would have changed that system. Then the breech rope is quite heavy, so I think that they will not move so easily then the ropes we use in our models. 😕 An last, as I wrote before above, that there may be a small rope (or something smaller than that, I have at the moment no name for it) to size the breech rope at the cascable. For a better understanding I made a picture.
  5. Dear Druxey, starts now the same procedure as with the paneling of the outer walls? There also all pictures, paintings and sketches I posted where in your eyes fantasy, artistic freedom or you could’t see anything. But at least it turned out, that I was right. So why are the outer circumstances, the color, the wheels and the cannons now are an argument that all the rest is not true? That model is from 1756, may be a little fancier then an original ship. We don’t know what the artist would show us with this model. The white wash came later and also red wheels on cannons made the floor colourful, not only black one. But they are ok. I never heard something against that. At the Victory these wheels where not painted. We agree with the fastening of the breech rope to the rings bolds at the walls. So it’s also at the Victory. I think Falconer did’t show that knot, because it did’t matter. Every man knows, that there has to be a knot. And he shows clearly, that the rope is only laid over the cascable. And that you could all see at that model, so why it’s not useful? I thought that we are here in this forum to share wisdom to build better models. But if it’s not liked to have an other view, or find something out, I let it. I have nobody to ask how I build my ship, and at least it’s not important for me, how other build theirs. So many build there ships in Hahn style and others in druxey style. I was really shocked to see the double curve you build in your wales. Did you never noticed that you are the only one who build it so? And the port lids, only two models I found have that step around the lid! But nobody noticed that before! And nobody, except mtaylor, liked it. Thank you for that Mark. Druxey, I liked the support I got from you over the time. But you should also be more open for others, who found out something different, or noticed something you have overseen.
  6. Hello Druxey, may be the black rim at the wheels are only black paint. The guns at the GD where 42 pdrs and at the MD where 24 pdrs according to R. Winfield's British Warships in the Age of Sail 1714-1792. They have at the breech nearly the same size. The NMM write, that the model was made 1756 and ok, the color. You like more white ships, without much color. But the ships in those days where colourful. And this was a 1. rate! Please have also a look at Falconer's cross section of a 74 gunner, there you see the same thing.
  7. Hello Mark, with that what I know is Druxey right. Then you could shorten the ropes easily to store the guns during voyages, or move the guns. A good example is the model of the Royal George (1756) https://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/66456.html at the NMM. Here a screen shot And there is no turn of the rope around the cascable. I don't know where, but I remember a picture where the breach rope was sized there with a small rope around the cascable. I hope I could help.
  8. Hello Doris, your work is unbelievable. The yacht and the the crew! That reminds me of this page: https://rococoenminiature.heidecksburg.de/pages/die-ausstellung/shop.php#oben Sorry, only in German and with Flash Player. I have none! I saw a film about this in TV, they have the DVD in the shop. There they show also how they build it, back in the ex DDR. I plan a visit there this year. I forget to mention, it's all in 1:50!
  9. Hello, thank you all for your comments and likes. Mark, I don't know if they also used leather for caulking. But old ropes I think they had plenty. Dowmer, »that gunport practice was only one way« of course there are different forms of gun ports, but for my ship there is only the standard form important. When I'm seriously look at the Bellona pictures, I could't see what you see. Even if I want to see there something. The outer planking of the lid should be of the thickness of the outer planking of the ship. That said Goodwin and Mark P confirmed that. Even when his contracts are from the 1690th. That may have changed with the time. But you could't tell it from these pictures. The pictures from the Constitution are from an other time and the port lids seem to be much thinner. Like these from the Victory, after all the repairs. May be they are at that time always thinner, as Steel stated. And if there are an extra sill, I cant see it. I see there only the stop, normally build by the frames. But only to the sides, not at the bottom. But may be you have there more insider knowledge. But as Mark P said, linings where not build. So, for now we have cleared these facts. The port lids have no steps to there sides, even in later times. The outer layer are of the thickness of the planking of the ship at this place, with a lining of elm 1-1,5" thick. That says, there must be cut an extra rabbet. When in later years the port lids get thinner these extra cut rabbet disappear. Not clear is, how that was in 1745. The list of establishment deals only with the main structure, keel frames and so on. So all other things they took I think from the 1719 list of establishment. Ok, they did't mention there port lids. So we did't know if they are getting already thinner at this time, or in 1745.
  10. Hello Marc, that sounds all very logical. But do you think that all modellers of that time make the same shortcut? And also the painters? I did one side of the ship this way, it's more complicated then making the lid with a step. I think that it's a shortcut of modern modellers. Also when that exist already in earlier times. As I once before tried to say, the lids of the contemporary models seams to have the right thickness. Outer planking the same size then the ships planking with a 1-1,5" lining. So they had to cut back the frames a little. And the rabbet is much les then 3-3,5"= 1,6-1,8 mm broad. May be 0,5mm =1" This 1" or a little more and another 1-1,5" deep, that would be the rabbet I'm speaking about. And it's above the gun deck, so the ship would't fall apart from this. On the other hand, who told us, that the outer planking of the lid is of the same thickness then the outer planking of the ship? I found that in Goodwin's book, but what is the source? I cant remember. What is, when the whole lid is between 3-3,5" thick? The magical number from Steel around 1800! Then Victory's Lids are of the same thickness then the planking of the ships side (it looks so), then no extra rabbet is to cut. If that is also true for the older ships, I don't know. As I said before, they look at the models as if they have the right thickness. One argument we did't discus till now is the fact, that if the inner lining of the lid has the same size of the the outer planking, all for sides of the lid lie in the rabbet. Not only the left and right side and the plank above and below, when the lining is cut back. I think the construction is weaker when the lining is only nailed to the back of the outer planking. Druxey, that are your strong arguments? You could put these two sentence in a grinder, there would't come out more. For those who did't know what we are speaking about, that is all from a book of 641 pages! At least it mean, the lid is not less then 3-3,5" thick
  11. Hello Mark, yes I know, but it's the only ship where you could see it today. Yesterday I searched for the Tricomarlee and Unikorn, but it looks like they did't have port lids. The Tricomarlee has one port closed, so you could see nothing and the other ports lids are not there. A happy new year to you
  12. Good morning, now we are there, where we where before this discussion and as we ever build our models. The only difference is, that to the top of the lid is no stop anymore. You would't find also any model with such a broad rabbet. When yes, they must have the same thickness as most lids, but mostly they are much thinner. I think it's a shortcut as I stated before and most of the contemporary models say I'm right. Why did you ignore that? I mean the contemporary models. Dowmer, why do you think that they did't rabbet into the frames? Goodwin says in his text: that the outer planking of the lid is equal to the thickness of the ships side planking and Y says: variable according to the thickness of the ships side planking. That doset mean automatically, that they are together have the thickness of the outer planking. »None that I can find, show the lid rabbet “let into the ship frame” to make up for the thickness of the lining.« You could see the rabbet all around the port hole on contemporary models. How deep they are you could't see. But deep enough for the lid and that means they have to cut the frames. There are to my knowledge only two models that show a rabbeted lid as Druxey and Mark P will shows us. All other models show lids as the Victory has. Here an other picture of the Victory where you could see the rabbet better. But not at the bottom of the port hole! These port lids seems to me have the thickness of the outer planking of the ship. In this case you haven't to rabbet the frames.

About us

Modelshipworld - Advancing Ship Modeling through Research

SSL Secured

Your security is important for us so this Website is SSL-Secured

NRG Mailing Address

Nautical Research Guild
237 South Lincoln Street
Westmont IL, 60559-1917

About the NRG

If you enjoy building ship models that are historically accurate as well as beautiful, then The Nautical Research Guild (NRG) is just right for you.

The Guild is a non-profit educational organization whose mission is to “Advance Ship Modeling Through Research”. We provide support to our members in their efforts to raise the quality of their model ships.

The Nautical Research Guild has published our world-renowned quarterly magazine, The Nautical Research Journal, since 1955. The pages of the Journal are full of articles by accomplished ship modelers who show you how they create those exquisite details on their models, and by maritime historians who show you the correct details to build. The Journal is available in both print and digital editions. Go to the NRG web site (www.thenrg.org) to download a complimentary digital copy of the Journal. The NRG also publishes plan sets, books and compilations of back issues of the Journal and the former Ships in Scale and Model Ship Builder magazines.

Our Emblem

Modelshipworld - Advancing Ship Modeling through Research
  • Create New...