Louie da fly

I went on board the replica when she was still under construction in Fremantle, Western Australia. It was a wonderful experience, but she was tiny! I have a souvenir - a small oak offcut with the name Duyfken burnt into it. Steven

Hi Jake, from a former (short-term) East Grinstead resident. The Victory is a very difficult model to take on as a first build, but if you persist, and take advice from other Victory build logs, you should make your way through it with success. And if you have questions, don't hesitate to ask the forum members, who are very experienced and helpful. It would be interesting to see photos of your 'O' gauge railway - there's a section for such things at https://modelshipworld.com/forum/73-non-shipcategorised-builds/ Steven

Wonderful work, mate! Steven

Hard to say, and it would depend on the period of the ship. What century? In the 15th century they began to have gun(!)wale-mounted swivels, but unfortunately the contemporary pictures aren't representative enough to show how they relate to the height of the people on board (people are routinely shown bigger than they are). And try as I might, I haven't been able to find any contemporary picture from this period showing someone on board ship firing a swivel gun, or even in the same pic as one (except ones like the pic above where the proportions are obviously seriously wrong). However, what we do have is what I believe are pretty reliable pics of ships with swivel guns mounted directly on the gunwale . . . and others which show what I believe is a reasonably accurate idea of the size of people in relation to the ship . . . This might be of use in working out the height of a swivel gun, at least in the 15th century, but I'm afraid it's not all that helpful. Steven

Nice idea.

Hi JDillon, and welcome to MSW. Trouble is, it would make things very complicated to have separate sections by geography. We have people all over the world. I'm in Australia and we have people all through Europe, the U.S., you name it. But in the "Wood Discussion" and ""Modelling tools" sections, you'll find these kinds of questions being discussed, and you can ask the questions yourself in those sections if you need to. Steven

Thanks, Waldemar. Good advice. Steven

I don't know if this has been posted before, and the linked article is pretty sensational and minimal in detail, but it's a very interesting find: https://www.ancient-origins.net/artifacts-ancient-technology/undersea-mystery-accidental-discovery-ghost-ship-baltic-sea-005992?fbclid=IwAR38jo3ZFy5ByI07vZfPyqLR-Tn5c7HbtWr1PtM-hVVVQVHsfqRVkhGaozI https://www.sea.museum/2016/06/11/ghost-ships-and-a-travelling-man-amazing-wrecks-in-the-baltic-sea and a rather more reliable report: https://www.academia.edu/31169793/Eriksson_N_and_Rönnby_J_The_Ghost_Ship_An_Intact_Fluyt_from_c_1650_in_the_Middle_of_the_Baltic_Sea More links (not sure if this is the same vessel - the date and details of its discovery seem different) https://www.hydro-international.com/content/news/the-story-of-a-17th-century-dutch-shipwreck-in-the-baltic-sea https://gue.com/blog/the-swan-a-17th-century-story-at-the-bottom-of-the-baltic-sea/ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-8713661/Sunken-remains-400-year-old-Dutch-Empire-ship-Baltic-Sea.html https://www.handleproductions.com/the-age-and-the-name-of-a-unique-fluit-wreck-in-the-baltic-sea-resolved/ Steven

Thanks, Dick. The diorama idea is tempting, but I'd have to find somewhere with enough space to put it . . . Steven

Well, I can't understand how the shrouds can have turned out to foul the hull. With pre-cut bulkheads it can't be that you've got the tumblehome wrong. But I'm glad you've found a good solution (in fact that's probably what I would have done in your place). Regarding the lower deadeyes, McElvogue's Book "Tudor Ship Mary Rose" (available as an e-book, by the way - see https://www.amazon.com/Tudor-Warship-Mary-Rose-Anatomy-ebook/dp/B014WSVJKK ) - shows them held by a metal strop, but I don't know whether he has archaeological evidence to back that up or whether it's speculation on his part. Note also that the Mary Rose deadeyes have LOTS of holes for the lanyards - it must have been a quite complex set of tackle. But as you're following the kit instructions, not kit-bashing, that's rather irrelevant. But your shrouds and deadeyes look very good. Steven

https://www.thevintagenews.com/2018/03/09/worlds-oldest-message-in-a-bottle/?fbclid=IwAR0gxDcPAe1qQtmQrS6_45CUfB78Myc1eU6Q8clppthFJyvXgj-ouwwIs0U&chrome=1&D2c=1&A1c=1

I know just how he feels . . Steven

Unfortunately - no, they didn't. Not long after I glued the lines from the forestays on, the wooden "pins" snapped off, leaving me back where I was - or slightly worse off. Now I had to smooth down the protruding remnants of the pins before I could start again. This time I did what I should have done in the first place - I made new uprights with metal pins inserted in them, using brass sequin pins which have come in handy before. As there was a pretty sever splitting risk, I put the pins in first, then carved the uprights around them. I managed to salvage the crosspiece from the second broken set of bitts - the rest (and the original that I'd made back in the day) had to be discarded. I left it with the cross piece glued to only one upright, so I could adjust the width to line up with the holes in the deck. And I thought I might as well do the main bitts as well, before I put a whole bunch of ropes in for the mainmast. Unfortunately, I used the wrong tool - a cobbler's awl - to make the first hole in the deck, and SNAP! - the deck planking broke. So I then had to figure out how to repair the decking, while in the meantime working out how to make the balance of the holes for the pins without breaking anything else. Very difficult, particularly as I had very little wriggle room. I finally decided to use a sewing pin as a "drill". Very laborious - if you've ever had root canal treatment on your teeth you'll know what I mean - but it worked eventually. So here's the resulting hole (where the pencil mark is). After several failed attempts at gluing in a replacement piece for the deck (including taking off the hatch cover and longboat so I could slide a bit in underneath the deck to support the new piece - that didn't work either), I came up with a solution that ended up working - wedge in a piece that was much too thick (so it came up above the deck and then pare it down to deck level. And finally, the bitts are in place, for both fore and main masts. And the hatch cover back in place. Still working on repairs, rather than moving forward. But once I've glued the loose ropes back in place I'll be able to go ahead again (sigh) Steven

Welcome, Chestcutter! I live in Ballarat, just down the highway from you, and there are a couple of others in the general area. Yes, start a build log for your Vanguard. It's a great way to get help and advice, and we get to look at it as it takes shape. Have fun! Steven

HMAS Perth had a Supermarine Seagull (very similar to a Walrus) which was known as the Pusser's Duck (I don't know if that name was used on other ships). It was damaged by bombs in Surabaya and so was unfortunately not available for spotting during the battles of the Java Sea and Sunda Strait. Regarding the colour scheme, perhaps the aircraft museum at Point Cook in Victoria might be able to help. The Walrus they have is yellow, but they might have information on other colour schemes. Steven

OK, so I've decided not to destroy the model - Not just yet, anyway (are you listening Harry?) Instead I've been working on various bit(t)s and pieces. Replacing the mainmast bitts with new ones that have built in "pins" so they won't be pulled off the deck like the foremast bitts were. And re-threading the lines from the forestays onto the new foremast bitts. One bonus - I managed to get them tighter so they were straighter. As I'd previously cut these ropes to length, I had to extend them (by gluing another bit of cotton onto them) to be able to pull them tight - you can see one of them leading aft past the edge of the forecastle, being tensioned by a couple of miniature clothes-pegs. Once the glue was dry, I cut them to length again. And I've added the fore-topgallant braces (I needed to make 8 tiny blocks - two for the pendants, 6 to run the downhauls through - one pair for each of the mainstay, main topmast stay and main topgallant stay) and down to deck level). And of course I'll have to repeat the whole exercise when I come to do the mainmast - (oh, joy.) I still need to finalise all the downhauls that were attached to the forebitts, which are still waving in the breeze at the moment. As I mentioned before, I'll be belaying most of these to the new side railings I've added, so the forces on the bitts are minimised. Heaven forbid that they pull off the deck again! Once that's all done I'll be able to move off the "repair" phase and back onto moving forward. Steven

I'd second Gabek's vote for crochet thread. It comes in various thicknesses and dyes very nicely. The only problem I found with it is that unlike commercial thread for shipbuilding, there's no logical system for knowing exactly how thick the thread is. It's just a series of numbers - 10, 20, 30 etc, with (IIRC) the higher numbers being thinner. So you can't say "I'd like a thread half as thick as this one" - it just doesn't work that way. I'll be interested to know how the thread you already have performs. Just be aware that though synthetic thread lasts longer than natural, it is rather "bouncier" so it may not hang the same way. It can also be harder to get glue to adhere to. Steven

Some more videos I found very informative: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6DZIvMZWzQ&t=584s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlRbcTsm2rc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3jU9Xz_GHE&t=237s Steven

Nice. Steven

This is the most amazing work. It's been quite a while since I looked at this log and the progress you've made is unbelievably good. Steven

They look very good. Steven

Coming along nicely, mate. Make sure you sand down your second planking nice and smooth when it's complete. I was astounded at the difference sanding the planking made in my own model. Steven

More news on the Tallin ship(s) https://news.err.ee/116222/medieval-ships-discovered-in-tallinn-are-rare-well-preserved-cogs

Good to see her back under way again. Very nice work. Steven

Thanks everybody for the likes and supportive comments (very welcome under the current circumstances, when I've been seriously considering throwing the rotten thing against the wall and taking up croquet instead ). Snug Harbor Johnny and Druxey, unfortunately the bitts coming away was a fault on the part of my "current" self - I already knew from previous models that butt-joints are a bad idea but I wanted to keep the original bitts that I'd made back in the day and didn't think about the forces they'd be subjected to. Or if I did, I thought "she'll be right". But unfortunately though we learn from our mistakes, sometimes the lessons don't stick straight away - we have to make the same mistakes again before those lessons really sink in. Roger, you have a point. However, the Great Harry is somewhat later, and while I'm mainly working off the reconstruction picture in Landström's book The Ship, more importantly, the original representation in the Anthony Roll shows ratlines in the topgallant shrouds. And the "feathery" ratlines were mainly the fault of my own carelessness in cutting off the ends cleanly. I still haven't quite finished the foremast rigging - there are a couple of things to do on the topgallant - braces and bowlines - and I'll have to belay again the ropes that were fixed to the old bitts. (BTW, I've decided that for the mainmast I won't be re-using the original bitts - I'll be making new ones with "pins" carved into the bottom of the uprights - once bitten, twice shy). Steven