Louie da fly

Nice model, mate. A soft brush to start with. Not sure compressed air is a good idea. Surprisingly enough, the ideal thing to clean an old ship model seems to be human saliva on a cotton bud/Q-tip. Ship restorers in museums use it, and the Victoria and Albert Museum in London uses it to clean ancient artefacts. I've had great success with it in cleaning my 50-year old model of the Henry Grace a Dieu. The only thing I'd recommend is that rather than refreshing the saliva by putting the Q-tip in your mouth after cleaning (as I did), you put some spit into a little bowl or something of the sort and dip the Q-tip in. Once she's all clean, you can get started on rigging etc. The paint work looks good, and with a bit of luck won't need repair. And in my view a little patina of age enhances the look of the model - shows its history, as you might say. And start a build log - it's the best way to get help and advice - and we get to see your progress photos. The instructions are here (as yours is effectively a scratch build, not a kit) Steven

Welcome to MSW, Pete! That's a beautiful model of the Flirt. When you start on your Beagle, make sure to start a build log. It's a great way to get help, advice and encouragement - and we get to look at your progress photos. The instructions are here: Good to have you on board, and have fun with it! Steven

Thanks for the likes, people. Roger, the paper idea for planking sounds interesting. The wood I'm using (walnut) is almost paper thin but somewhat brittle, but I'm also considering going back to bamboo, which I found very strong and flexible in very thin planks. I agree about the Mary Rose boats - I shared your disappointment and disillusionment. AFAIK no boats have been recovered (I'm sure we would have been told), so I'm assuming they just made them up. I'm far more interested in following the iconographic evidence unless something concrete turns up in the archaeological record. The Anthony Roll and the Embarkation at Dover show boats (one boat in the latter seems to have a transom stern) and there are others if you're prepared to do the work of looking for them. But nothing reliable otherwise. Banyan, I can still see evidence of the neglect; particularly the paintwork still needs to be repaired. I don't mind a bit of patina, but this paint has cracked and peeled. BTW, I think I should change the title of this thread - on reflection it was more like 50 years of neglect. Steven

Beautiful work, Rodolfo. Steven

You're obviously aware of the model's shortcomings. But to me she looks beautiful. Steven

That's a good point, Backer. I hadn't really thought about that - most longboats are at 1:50 or at the most 1:100 - so I suppose what'm doing is rather more of a challenge. Could explain why I'm having so much hassle with it. Steven

Well, I had to pull all the planks off the flat stern and do it again. If you look at the photo of the stern in my previous post you'll see that where the side planks meet the stern planks, the join is a sort of zig-zag. This is because the side planks don't join the frame at right angles they were all somewhat twisted. I was able to smooth off the outside of the planks by sanding them, but the inner sides of the planks were still twisted, forming the zig-zag. I was nearly finished planking the stern, having decided "that'll be good enough" when I decided "No, it really won't - it'll sneer at me every time i look at it." I needed to smooth off the inside surface of the side planking, and that meant all the stern planking would be too short. I wasn't sure exactly what configuration these flat sterns have at the join. I wasn't going to just follow other people's models, but I realised there are existing ships I can work from - I first thought of the Batavia - quite a bit of the stern still exists. Unfortunately the timbers at the join are all so badly worn you really can't see how they were joined. Then of course I thought of the Vasa - much better. Note that the join seems to be arranged so an absolute minimum of end grain is exposed to the elements. So here's my second attempt at Great Harry's stern planking. I'm much happier with it. Port side first - stern planks being replaced: And now the starboard side. Penultimate plank in place: And all finished: Of all the things that went missing in the 50 or so years between making the ship and returning to it, what I most regret losing is the longboat. I made it from very thin slivers of bamboo. I didn't use a plug - in fact I have absolutely no recollection of how I made it - I remember it had a keel (bamboo) and a transom stern, but I don't even remember if it had frames. But it was quite beautiful. Now I'm making a replacement - on a plug - and this time it's double-ended. Although there are contemporary pictures of boats with transom sterns, both those of the Great Harry show double-ended boats, so I'm going with that. This is my first bit of clinker building, and I have to admit I'm not too happy with the way it's going. The strakes are way too wide in my opinion even if you allow for the overlap, and anyway they overlap too much. I'll continue with it and see how it ends up, but I'm seriously considering doing another one. (BTW Druxey, I made the plug taller than the boat was going to be because I was originally going to follow Woodrat's technique of putting frames in first, then changed my mind.) Last thing. The main starboard channel had broken off at some point in the past (the port channel went the way of all flesh). I had intended to keep the starboard one and tried gluing it back on. Unfortunately, with the reconfiguration of the after half of the ship, making the stern considerably narrower, the channel no longer fits. You can see the gap at the after end. I thought about adding a bit of timber to fill the gap, but I think I'll probably have to make a whole new channel. Steven

Jonathan, that's some nice stuff you've posted. I'd heard of this wreck before, but you've added to my fund of knowledge on it. I was looking at the armament issue - Pigafetta mentions swivel guns and "bombards", which are probably guns like these from the Lomellina (Genoese) sunk in 1516 (probably built in 1503 because that's when her predecessor sank) In each case the scale is in centimetres. In these the barrel is built up of iron staves like a barrel and held together with iron rings shrunk on. The Lomellina was about twice the length of the Victoria, and is believed to have had between 10 and 15 guns of this type. So proportionately, the Victoria probably would have maybe 6 or 8 guns - I'd be going for the lower figure. The guns were found in line with the forecastle and aftercastle, not in the waist as I'd have expected. But note the location of the guns in our Catalan friend; however the Lomellina's gunports seem to have been lower down, and perhaps the ones in the Catalan ship weren't as heavy. The Lomellina also had gunports and port lids: External view Internal view Hope that helps. Steven

I'm not that fluent! But I do have it in OE with a word-by-word translation, plus another full Modern English translation. I occasionally open it and struggle along for awhile before I give up in case my brain explodes. But I was very pleased with myself when I recognised without being told that the passage I was looking at in the "Teach Yourself OE" text was the opening of the parable of the prodigal son. And at one point I could recite the Lord's Prayer in OE - forgotten it now. And though it's even more difficult when not only the language but the letter forms have changed so much over the centuries, I managed to translate from a short passage in OE (in the original script) that it dealt with Lot , who it described as Abraham's "broor sunu" (brother's son - i.e. nephew). Of course apart from historical records such as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, much of the text available to us is from the Bible, because that's what clerks (a word which was originally clerics) concerned themselves with and wrote down. But I think that's enough from me - I really don't want to be derailing the thread. Steven

Try it in Old English - this is the first page of Beowulf - 11th century AD. It says HWAET WE GARDE na in gear dagum theod cyninga thrym ge frunon hutha aethelingas eller fremedon. Oft scyld scefing sceathe thraetum monegu maegthum meodo fetla of teah egfode eorl sythan aerest . . . etc etc You can see the "long s" in the words I've put in bold. It goes back a lo-o-o-ong way . . . Note also the way they had not one, but two distinct individual letters and - each of which stands for the sound we now write as "th". Oh, and "w" is written Back to your scheduled programming . . .

It's definitely a step upward, but if you take your time and some care, it's really just a matter of doing more of the same thing over and again. But of course an Elizabethan ship has its own quirks and I'd highly recommend you have a look at Backer's phenomenally researched and carried out Pelican/Golden Hind at https://modelshipworld.com/topic/14188-pelican-later-renamed-as-golden-hind-by-backer-scale-145-galleon-late-16th-century/ for the inspiration, if nothing else. But it's also chock-a-block with period detail Backer's spent tremendous time and effort finding out and shared with the rest of us. Best wishes, Steven

Welcome to MSW, Gregg, from the Far Side of The World! I will echo the recommendations above to start a build log for your new models - it's the best way to get help and advice and ask questions (though we also have a whole section for technical questions). The instructions are here: I'm sure after you do your first two models you'll have picked up very valuable skills (and made your share of the inevitable mistakes and stuff-ups - but lets call them learning opportunities ). And one day you'll probably say to yourself "You know, it's time I had another go at Bluenose." In the meantime, good to have you aboard! Steven

Welcome the MSW, Bob! That's a really nice model, and well worth fixing up. First word of advice - go slowly, don't hurry into anything. There are a few decisions to make - do you want to clean her, or leave her with that (rather beautiful) patina? Next word of advice - do a search (top right hand corner of this page) for the words restoration, restoring etc. You should find some very good build logs of models other people have restored (I'm doing one myself) and pick up some valuable information that should help you in your own project. Third word - start a build log. It's a wonderful way to get help and advice from the friendly crew here. And I'm sure a lot of people will be fascinated by the model and your work on her. Yours is really a "scratch-build", even though you're repairing an existing model - the instructions for starting a build log are here: And look at other builds of similar ship models, check out the "masts and rigging" section of this forum, and look for photos and representations of similar ships as a guide (Google is your friend in this regard, as is Pinterest). And above all, have fun with it! That's what it's all about, after all. Good to have you aboard. Steven

Welcome to MSW - from the other side of the world! By all means lurk till you feel ok with posting - but do start a build log for your puffer when you begin building. A lot of people feel a bit overawed by the whole idea of putting their stuff up for view, in case they get criticised or laughed at, or their stuff isn't good enough to pass muster. Be sure that will never happen to you here - I've never come across such a supportive, positive forum, where everybody is so friendly and helpful. And it's a very good way to get help and advice. The instructions for starting a build log are here: Nice to have you on board!

Welcome to MSW - or at least to the "talk-talk" section - I see you've actually been a member for a good while but hiding your light under a bushel. Any chance of seeing some photos of your schooner? And do you have another one in the pipeline? If so, make sure you do a build log for it - a great way to get help, advice and encouragement. And till last year a name that wouldn't have caused much comment . . . Anyway, good to hear from you. Steven

Welcome to MSW from the antipodes! That St Gabriel looks like having a very difficult hull to shape - all those tight curves! The Occre Golden Hind looks like a good project. It makes a very attractive model. In case you haven't already worked it out, the instructions for a build log are here: Have fun with it, and if you have any questions, the friendly members here are very helpful.

Now the hull has been fully sanded and I'm working on planking the stern just above the waterline. Nearly finished. More photos when I get it all done. And I've finally bitten the bullet to start on the longboat. Built on a plug (which I smothered with butter - hey, it was easily to hand and today's pretty warm - but I wiped the surplus off with a tissue - - to stop the boat sticking to the plug). Waiting for the glue to dry. Next to start putting on the strakes. Steven

Making very good progress, John. That's looking very good and you seem to be solving the problems as they come up very nicely. Steven

Good to see. Hadn't heard from you for awhile and was beginning to worry you'd given up on it. It looks really good - weird but good. Looking forward to the next instalment.

You've made a good start on the rigging, but you're right about the instructions. I think when in doubt, go back to the painting - that's pretty much the best authority (assuming you can see the details sufficiently). I'm sending you a PM with the best copy I know of attached, so you can get as much detail as possible.

Beautiful colour and those rivets are very believable. Steven

I got into building design after the change to metric. But there were still plenty of house plans at 1:96 (8 feet to the inch) which had to be converted to 1:100 - an almost insignificant difference - but not quite! And then you'd find a site plan where the lengths of the boundaries were in links (100 links=1 chain=66 feet - the length of a cricket pitch - because there are 100 links to a surveyor's chain) which had to be converted to metric = 201.168 mm. Close to 0.2 metres - but not close enough! The area of a house is still quoted in squares by salesmen = 100 square feet. But when you are drawing it, you convert to square metres - 9.54 square metres to the square. This one I have by heart, just like a foot is 304.8 mm. Hours of fun! Steven

Well, some of us use metric. My previous model was 1:50, and now my current (restoration) is 1:200. Finished size of the model has to come into it - if the model is too big for the place it's to be displayed you should be looking at a smaller scale. On the other hand if it's too small to see, maybe you need it to be bigger. Stellar exceptions to this are Javier Baron's tiny models of Mediterranean sailing vessels, and some amazing battleships at 1:1500 scale by Joe100. Steven

Beautiful pieces - they'll add a very good air of reality to the whole thing.

I like the logical and systematic way you're approaching this. I think making a model is always a bit of a tension between accuracy and practicality, and when you're "bashing' a kit to make it more historically accurate there's always the question of how far to go. And really, it's your choice - whatever seems right to you. This isn't going into a museum to be scrutinised by academics, it's your relaxation and enjoyment. I've hit the same problem with my Great Harry because I built it before the Mary Rose was recovered, so it's full of details which later turned out to be inaccurate. So I'm always up against the issue of how far to change it from my original concept. My idea in restoring it was to just return it to the way it would have been had I finished it at the time, but I've been very inconsistent, changing some things in line with what I know now and leaving others as they were when I first built her. Like I said - your decision - do what you think is right for you. And maybe one day you will revisit and build another one more in line with what you know now. Steven