davec

The forecastle deck probably had stanchions supporting a line to which netting is fixed.  The object was to prevent sailors from being as easily swept overboard.  I have been unable to find any information as to whether this netting would be located outside or inside of the timberheads.  Any thoughts?  The contemporary model of Atalanta does not show these stanchions.

Ah! Now those bars look convincing. Nice, Maury.

Mark - welcome back!  I enjoyed following your build before, and am looking forward to seeing it progress.
 
Best,
 
Dave

Greg and David-
 
Order already placed.  I am very grateful for all the two for your important contributions to the hobby.  While I am disappointed that you are closing admiralty models, I am very happy that you plan to continue your tremendous workshops.    I have learned a huge amount from them, highly recommend them, and plan to attend future ones.  I thought the one earlier this week was awesome.   
 
I do plan a full Echo build - just need to get the cross section done first.  At three years for an ~6" cross section, how long should the whole build take?
 
Thanks!
 
Dave

Greg and David-
 
Order already placed.  I am very grateful for all the two for your important contributions to the hobby.  While I am disappointed that you are closing admiralty models, I am very happy that you plan to continue your tremendous workshops.    I have learned a huge amount from them, highly recommend them, and plan to attend future ones.  I thought the one earlier this week was awesome.   
 
I do plan a full Echo build - just need to get the cross section done first.  At three years for an ~6" cross section, how long should the whole build take?
 
Thanks!
 
Dave

Greg and David-
 
Order already placed.  I am very grateful for all the two for your important contributions to the hobby.  While I am disappointed that you are closing admiralty models, I am very happy that you plan to continue your tremendous workshops.    I have learned a huge amount from them, highly recommend them, and plan to attend future ones.  I thought the one earlier this week was awesome.   
 
I do plan a full Echo build - just need to get the cross section done first.  At three years for an ~6" cross section, how long should the whole build take?
 
Thanks!
 
Dave

Greg and David-
 
Order already placed.  I am very grateful for all the two for your important contributions to the hobby.  While I am disappointed that you are closing admiralty models, I am very happy that you plan to continue your tremendous workshops.    I have learned a huge amount from them, highly recommend them, and plan to attend future ones.  I thought the one earlier this week was awesome.   
 
I do plan a full Echo build - just need to get the cross section done first.  At three years for an ~6" cross section, how long should the whole build take?
 
Thanks!
 
Dave

Greg and David-
 
Order already placed.  I am very grateful for all the two for your important contributions to the hobby.  While I am disappointed that you are closing admiralty models, I am very happy that you plan to continue your tremendous workshops.    I have learned a huge amount from them, highly recommend them, and plan to attend future ones.  I thought the one earlier this week was awesome.   
 
I do plan a full Echo build - just need to get the cross section done first.  At three years for an ~6" cross section, how long should the whole build take?
 
Thanks!
 
Dave

Greg and David-
 
Order already placed.  I am very grateful for all the two for your important contributions to the hobby.  While I am disappointed that you are closing admiralty models, I am very happy that you plan to continue your tremendous workshops.    I have learned a huge amount from them, highly recommend them, and plan to attend future ones.  I thought the one earlier this week was awesome.   
 
I do plan a full Echo build - just need to get the cross section done first.  At three years for an ~6" cross section, how long should the whole build take?
 
Thanks!
 
Dave

I sanded the bars down to approx. 2.75" and they look a lot better.  The block in the left foreground simply has a couple of "V" grooves (cut in on a full-sized table saw) that hold the bars (or any other straight pieces) in place while shaving or sanding.

 

Thanks for the comments.  Now on to the tiller and rudder.
Maury

More little projects...Capstan bars.  I looked high and low for good images of period capstan bars.  I finally settled on one in Dan Vadas' build.  I like the square end to fit in the capstan head.  The ends were cut on the table saw (with sled) and finished by hand.

 
Rounded off and fitted to capstan.  I may thin them down a bit more...they are a little under 0.09" or 4 1/4" at scale.  Does anyone have a good idea of bar diameter circa 1825?

I think I'm going to put some kind of rack on the inner bulwarks to show storage.  Maybe just a couple of blocks with a rope strap to hold them off the deck.
Maury
 

I worked on the main mast tops.  First the bibbs to support the trestles, then trestles defining the space between the main and top mast.  There are no spreaders evident in any of the source material.

The spacing between the main and Spencer masts will be determined by the partner block on the deck and a block between the trestles (not made yet).
 

The top mast is held in the trestles by a pin (not installed for the photo). The cleats on the aft side of the doubling are for the two fore-stays.  The cap needed to be measured carefully with the centers of the main and top masts aligned.  Holes pre-drilled for all rigging.  The sources differ in some minor rigging plans.
Maury
 

Bodoni it is, after Giambattista Bodoni, an 18th century designer of typefaces. And a handsome face it is, too!

While everything else was going on, I made and installed the boat name and port.  While there is evidence the boat was destined for Norfolk, there is no record of the boat being named.  I took artist's liberty and named her after the designer.   A little research showed a font called "Bodoni" was designed in the early 1800s.  Microsoft Word has that font, so I printed out several sizes (12 - 16 pt) on laser decal paper.  Below is the result.


Up close you can barely make out the decal.  From 2' away it's invisible.
Maury
 
 

Some additional thoughts:
 
The standard-form frigate contract of the late 18th Century contains the following spec:  "To have a wing transom knee on each side 10 inches sided, the knee fore and aft arms 14 feet 0 inches long, the athwartship arms 7 feet 0 inches long, to hook with a long hook scarph to the spirketing and bolted with 13 bolts of 1 1/2" diameter, and 2 of 7/8" diameter in the lip of the scarph."  It is true that this is a frigate contract, so it may be different for a 74.  If you have contract for the larger ship I would be interested in the text.  If not, I suggest getting one from NMM.  The question is: what is the orientation of the hook scarph - horizontal or vertical?  With the number and size of the bolts I put it in the vertical plane, simulating it with a wide score into the spirketing, since such a hook scarph in that plane is invisible - and hard to cut in situ.
 
Whether the fore and aft arm of this knee is straight or curved would, I guess, depend on the relative heights of the transom vs. the spirketing.  In my case the spirketing was lower so the knee was curved to allow the knee leg to enter the spirketing scarph (score) on a parallel line.  On Naiad (see the photos) the knee if left straight could easily have been scarphed into the deck clamps above the spirketing, but that is not what the contract says, so I did not do that.  Actually from the glue residue on the frames, I may have first  bolted it directly to the frames then changed it after reading the spec.  Can't recall.
 
Edited-an after thought on the curve knee:  Curving the knee so that the top face of the short leg is parallel to the wing transom, permits bolts to be driven through.  Angling it down might preclude this.
 
I cannot recall if I had other reference(s) for this.  I think it was just the contract language cited asbove.
 
Ed
 
 

I knew this would get interesting!
 
The only primary sources I have for this are:
 
The image of the half model of HMS Ajax 1767, showing a straight fore and aft arm, without an S-curve. But as best I can see, this model does not have spirketting and the arm appears to fay onto the frames themselves. (I see this in Lavery's Bellona, p. 27.)
The image of the repair Rob Napier did in this area on the contemporary model Princess Royal 1773. Again, a straight arm without an S-curve, and in this one the knee abuts the spirketting. See p. 58.
And then there is Mark P.'s contract for the Bombay Castle, noting a hook scarph to the spirketting. this is 1782, almost a quarter century after the Bellona.
I tried staring down into the image I took of the Bellona at Chatham (see below) but too far in the murky depths to see...
 
Secondary sources are:
Goodwin's drawing of the knee on page 30, abutting the frames, no S-curve. (the members in this drawing have always seemed out of scale to me, by the way).
John Franklin's model of the Egmont 1768 in Goodwin, page 45 showing the wing transom knee as straight and abutting the frames. As far as I can see, he did not include spirketting, or I cannot see a later image of this area that would show.
 
The one common feature is a straight knee, with no S-curve, while the primary sources disagree in showing one on the frames and another on the spirketting. But both primary sources are stylized models to a certain extent, and therefore not entirely reliable as guides one way or the other.
 
I am inclined to think that Ed and druxey, who think like shipwrights solving problems, have the right idea. The spirketting continues aft to the transoms, and is scored for the wing transom knee. otherwise, the upper strake of spirketting would basically stop at the fore end of the knee, weakening its longitudinal strength at this critical aft location.
I think the knee fore and aft arm is probably straight, not S-curved, for this 74.
 
So, the wing transom knees have to increase their transverse dimensions to include the distance they would be set into the scores in the spirketting, leaving them still 6" proud of the spirketting at the fore end, if Goodwin has this dimension right.
 
Ed, your score looks about halfway into the spirketting; I will follow suit!
 
Mark
 
 

That is my interpretation as well, Druxey.  Here are two photos from the Naiad build log showing how I interpreted that.
 
First the score in the spirketing.

 
Then the installed transom knee with the s-curve into the spirketing score.  I did not plank this side under above the structural spirketing.

 
Hope this helps.
 
Ed

Nice idea for the small pieces, Mark.  As for the hand scroll saw, I'll take your word for it.
 
Ed

Using small off-cuts. Since this shipwright is now living in retirement, wood has to be used as frugally as possible. I have boxes of off-cuts from earlier work, because I previously tended to cut pieces out of freshly cut large sheets. I did this to keep fingers away from blades, and also to be long enough to go through the thickness sander. So as I ponder many small parts still coming, like knees, I considered how I could manage using more of my off-cuts.
 
To solve the thickness sander issue, I built a simple sled. I was able to attach a number of off-cuts to it with double sided tape. The tape adds .005" to the height of the top side of the wood to the top of the sled, so I use the depth indicator on my calipers to check the thickness after each pass, subtracting .005" from what I measure.
 
Because my power scroll saw sometimes grabs at small pieces, particularly when they are only caught by one side of the foot, it makes me nervous on little parts. So I have tried using the Knew Concepts hand scroll saw shown below. It is a little slower, but much less nerve-wracking.
 
Wing transom knee. I came across an interesting issue regarding the wing transom knees. Goodwin's book says the knee attaches to the frames, and the thickness of the knee at the fore end of the fore and aft arm is 6". But the spirketting is 7" thick at the waterway and 5 ½" at the top just under the ports. So the wing transom knee would be buried in the spirketting, which does not seem right. Rob Napier's book on the contemporary model Princess Royal shows the wing transom knee fayed against the spirketting. Was this a modeling convenience, and if not, would the wing transom knees have a thicker dimension on the fore and aft arm in order to accommodate the spirketting? and I thought this was going to be an easy piece!
 
Mark
 
 

Druxey, I will have to try the party trick. I will give you full credit at parties if I can do it!
 
Mark, thanks for the information. I will try that against my hull dimensions, and also to the Ajax model closer to my time period, to see if anything significant changed from 1760 to the 1770s and 80s.
 
Mark

Hi Mark;
 
The following is taken from the contract for 'Culloden',  1770:
 
The wing Transom knee to be sided 12 1/2" the fore and aft arm to be 16' in length or to give shift to the after part.  the thwartship arm to be 6' 0" to be Bolted with 5 Bolts of 1 1/4" diam in the thwartship arm, and with 7 no in the fore and aft arm, and with two small bolts of 7/8" Diam in the lips of the scarph.
 
The contract for 'Bombay Castle' of 1782 is very similar,  except that it adds that the knee is to scarph with hook and butt upon the upper strake of spirketting.
 
All the best,
 
Mark P

That is a good trick, Mark. Another (my party trick) is to cut a perfect 45 degree angle without measuring. Again, angle of reflection is the secret! But don't tell anyone.

I am starting to get back into the swing of things, working on the gundeck waterways. Starting my new retirement phase of construction, I resolved to begin cutting as many joints by hand as possible. I had earlier relied on building extensive jigs for machines to control quality, but I have been inspired by the books by David Antscherl and Ed Tosti regarding how to do this with chisels and files. I also took to heart Gaetan's good advice to me a few years ago that the more one repeats a task, the better one gets at it. I learned this when cutting the mortises for the carlings and ledges in the gundeck itself.
So here is the port waterway ready to be installed, with handcut scarph joints. The last photo shows a little trick I tried successfully to keep the chisel perfectly vertical to the cut. I drew a line on the cutting block, which is reflected in the back of the chisel. When the line is straight between the block and the reflection, the chisel is vertical.
 
Best wishes,
 
Mark

Dave, thank you for your kind comment. I am discovering that I have forgotten a lot about the project having been out of the shop for well over a year, and am not quite in the groove for getting going again smoothly. But I am working on it each day. Hopefully, it will start to flow again. Hand cutting scarph joints on the waterways is helping focus my attention!
 
Mark, if you have dimensions for a 74 circa 1760 wing transom, that would be great. The Bellona, I have read, was first called a 70 relative to the 1745 Establishment, but its dimensions are closer to an 80. I believe this is because the shipwright Slade was sneaking a new idea of a 74 through the Admiralty and had to relate it back to the Establishment figures. So it does not always compare well in dimensions to later 74s, in the Repository or Steel dimensions. Part of the fun of building the Bellona!
 
Best wishes,
 
Mark

You are welcome, Toni.  I did use the profile cutter described in Naiad II to make those deadeyes - and the method produced a satisfactory set - with the finish polishing steps.   I have regretted (and apologize) that size and shipping weight issues, the number of drawings with that book, and the large amount of content, limited some descriptions could have been more complete - I think the deadeye description was a paragraph or two (compared to five pages in YA II).  I would have said more about turning speed and emphasized the relief angle under the cutter.  Getting the grinding of the backside of the cutter along the entire profile was not easy.  That, coupled with the larger number of sizes and smaller sizes on YA led me to the single pointed or rounded cutters that required more tool changes and settings, but were able to produce a wider range of sizes - some down to 1/16".  As you probably know from the book, the Naiad deadeyes were Swiss pear.
 
Ed