CharlieZardoz

Here is a closer look

So you are saying that this is the 2nd John Adams aka of the Vincennes/Boston class? That is plausible given the detailing though unfortunate. So no information regarding her stern detailing survives then? The Lenthall sketch mentions 1859 however the Constitution wouldn't have looked that way by then no? Is that the date the watercolor was made? Also would that then mean that the ship below is the Congress of civil war fame rather than the 1799 ship?

Just for jollies he says. You sir are an amazing treasure trove of information. My sincerest gratitudes. Btw I thought the John adams stern was in that watercolor archive posted a ways back. The one with St louis and the rather unspectacular uss Congress? Let me know I can repost it.

Anyone have thoughts about some of the figureheads of the subscription frigates. Do descriptions survive?

Ah wonderful! Looking forward to the results

Thank you for the praise Dan. I do have some thoughts/reservations regarding which way I want to go, will explain what I mean at the meeting later today we can discuss.

To a degree Gunther perhaps. The main benefit is that you can draw on it and if you cut off too much here and there you can just put some back on with wood putty. While plank on frame may be more precise due to laser cutting, you run into the same problems when filling in the bow and stern and if you are not careful the ribs may be uneven which isn't as much of an issue in solid hull. That said ill be happy when the shaping is finally over lol.

Chuck's planking diagram shows where the planks should line up. After the wale there are 3 planks and then the 4th plank overhangs and begins making the bulwark which is only 2.5 planks in height. On the inside the planks line up causing an interlocking effect. I wanted to plan this now so to make sure I put the bulwark where it should be once I start shaping again.

When done the wale should look pretty much as so with a nice curve that runs somewhat parallel to the deck.

Measure the lines on each side to make sure they are even to each other then use the templates and eye it out. You don't want one wale to be lower or higher than the other.

the method Chuck uses in the practicum to determine where to cut is to basically find the location of the wale. With this I used a piece of scrap wood and began to line it up to where the wale is on the plans.

The stem and stern are a bit tight but that doesn't matter since 1/16" of an inch is going to be shaved off to make room for the planks. Same with the deck which is currently exactly even to the line on the template however I may plank the deck with veneer so just a little sanding rather than slice 1/16" off of the whole top which sounds -er excessive.

Some new updates today yay! So the hull is more or less shaped as it should be, that is until we start carving the ledge where the planking is going to be. Here are some pics to show how the templates fit up now.

Firstly I wanted to commend such an excellent model at such a small scale, great conversion. Next I wanted to just put the question out there is there any significant difference in the hull lines between the Lady Nelson and Jotika's Sherbourne? Aside from a different windlass, one extra row of cannon's and a few differences in deck items/rigging are the overall hull proportions the same or slightly larger. Just curious

Love civil war ships. Looking forward to watching your progress

I'd imagine not but appreciate the confirmation there regardless thank you. Swift I know has a plan that survives, this Virginia schooner however not sure what it was modeled after.

One I am curious about as of today is this Virginia Schooner of 1819 by AL. Looks similar to the Swift with one pivot cannon. A nice looking schooner but none of the plans of schooners from Chappelle's books or Footner's Tidewater Triumph that look quite like her but not exactly. Anyone have any thoughts?

Regarding the HMS Shine kit, I think I figured that one out. The Mantua "Jamaica" kit is most definitely based on the Bermuda Sloop plans. Looking at the Jamaica and the Shine I realized that they were essentially the same model, just in different scale and an extra mast added. I realized that when I looked at the stern decorations on both (the left is Shine right is Jamaica) they are pretty much the same as are the deck fittings and layout. The Shine is touted as 1:45 scale at 26.5" but most likely it is closer to 1:64th since Jamaica is 32" at 1:50 scale. Probably tons of Bermuda style sloops sailing around in the early 18th century with all sorts of mast arrangements. If I ever build one probably best to go off the original plans

Wow look at that thing! lol It looks to me very generic, I couldn't even tell you what century that was supposed to be. The British had tons of bomber ketch's and while it's possible that a plan was used as a reference, doesn't look like they followed it too closely. My advice if feeling the need to build this one would be to use the Granado and Convulsion as a reference and also see if you can locate a book on British ketch's, find one that looks similar enough then modify the kit to that ship and call it a day.

Do you happen to have a picture? Don't see any on google so I assume it's old.

There is wisdom in your words. I've always seen kits as just a practice tool for learning. Wooden ship model building is largely a scratch hobby though many of the newer kits offer much more precision then the old kit companies like sergal or dikar. Just today looking through the Peregrine galley and Royal Caroline kits realizing they are represented at wierd/incorrect scales and I think they even used the same hull frames. I will definitely look up those resources which will surely help me understand more of the history and yes I do understand sailing ships were not regimented like modern day ship classes are so even a "type" of vessel had many variations though I do believe researching those uniquenesses is very much part of the fun. Again appreciate the guidance

Jbshan: yes I know what you mean completely, the Constitution is about 204' overall length but that was never really used in draught plans (connie being about 175' at gundeck). And if we are talking mast end to mast end that's like 304' or something. Daves: Long story short I have a spreadsheet with various ships that I would consider building over the coming years. Certain ship types I plan to build in groups for example the Sultana is a continental schooner from the 1760s. I don't plan on displaying my models static but grouped sailing together in action sequences using that fake water stuff. Other contemporaries to Sultana might be Halifax, Armed Virginia schooner, Marble Head or Chaleur stuff that's similar but also a bit different to contrast design and performance. Each group on the spreadsheet has my top 5 interests like top 5 british frigates or american brigs, baltimore clippers or cutters or somesuch not that I expect to build all 5 but it gives me an idea of where I might be headed in the future and what to pick from. Now other than Ballahoo and Pickle there ain't many british schooners/sloops with actual famous names or kits thereof (that I know of anyways) so that's where the bunch I posted come into play. Maybe the Hms Alert or the Bermuda sloop or maybe one of the kits mentioned if I find they have a history that interests me. In the same way that I just found the Racehorse now i'm filled with all sorts of questions. Where was she purchased? Maybe an american ship like the London/Basilisk or Badger/Pitt? Maybe French or Dutch? I've learned so much about ships in just a years time and its digging like this which is helping me discover all sorts of fun facts about sailing ship history, design and development. Also alot of these old kits were in the 1980s model expo catalogue which has sentimental value to me as I read those magazines hundreds of times as a kid. And most likely I would only use the plans to scratch a model in the scale and detail I want but hey it saves me a few steps in the building process. So yeah thats the short explanation lol

Also just out of fun curiosity I found this one, the HMS Racehorse, which isn't based on the 1757 ship plans (of which there are none), but instead of the 1781 ship that was a purchase. Also the scale 1:47 is an error since at 23" that would make the ship tiny and the draught appears to be over 100' probably closer to 75 or 96 scale even?

I see the website you mean Wayne, I could get lost in there lol 8) Thank you everyone for the explanation of Chapman I think I understand better now what he represents to ship history, pretty amazing stuff! Swedish ships in general are pretty amazing, I've seen a few books, definitely do not get enough credit in their design and contribution to naval evolution. And yeah I have quite a few ships planned to be built down the line so probably best to simply ignore these "decorative" models though I do have a spreadsheet of all model kits and their significance so if I do wind up finding some more information about them I'll post it on this forum For example I can already see that Hunter was based on this Chapman drawing.

Thank you my friend.