ccoyle

I'm surprised that Captain Muller allowed that rust bucket to even get close to his magnificent cruiser! 
 
Great upgrade to a very needy kit. One would never guess it's humble beginnings.

I’m awaiting upgrades from Russia for my next major build, but for the next few months it will be Zara 

And finished. I’ve added some images of the ex A-59 alongside Emden for scale 

I have now completed the planking of the 3 stern patterns without any problems. I thought I would share the method I used for shaping the planks for the top stern pattern, which has the window openings.
 
I thought I would start with a picture of my workstation which I had set up for this task. I had all the necessary tools, materials and adhesives ready to hand. I used the thick CA glue to fix the planks to the pattern. I then applied a thin wash of the super phatic glue so it would bond with the joints. I then gave the top of the planks a very light sand so some of the sawdust could, where necessary, bond with the glue.

The first difficult plank to cut to size cover the lower section of the windows. I positioned a plank and then marked the position of the required cut-outs (from the reverse side).

With the position of the cut outs marked I then placed the plank on a piece of tape, so there was less chance of the wood splitting along the grain. In the picture below I have started to  make the first cut ( far right).

The tape backing worked and I was able to remove the cut-outs without any problems.

Once I double checked the plank would fit OK I used the CA glue to fixed the plan to the stern pattern.

I continued to plank, noting that I opted to removed the remaining excess wood around the window frame after each plank had been fitted. The two pictures below show the end results. The first one is before the edges were cut and sanded and then second one is after the sanding. I did adjust the left window (top right) after I took these pictures. After a careful fine sanding of the planked area I will apply a few coats of matt varnish.

Fighting the Great War at Sea: Strategy, Tactics and Technology
 
Norman Friedman
Barnsley, UK: Seaforth Publishing, 2019
24.5 x 29 cm format, paperback, 416 pages
300 B&W illustrations, end notes, sources, index
MSRP £25.00
ISBN: 978 1 5267 6549 9
 

Fighting the Great War at Sea (FTGWAS) is not the sort of book that will appeal to all readers. I’ll get to the reasons why in a moment, but first let’s take a quick look at what’s between the covers. The book is 352 pages of text divided into an introduction and sixteen chapters. The chapters are:
 
1.       A Maritime War
2.       Resources
3.       Blockade, Trade War and Economic Attack
4.       Expectations versus Reality
5.       The Fleets
6.       The Chessboard—Naval Geography
7.       Fleets in Battle
8.       Capital Ships
9.       Inshore Operations and an Inshore Fleet
10.   The Battle of the Narrow Seas
11.   Submarines
12.   Protecting Trade: The U-Boat War
13.   Anti-Submarine Warfare: Tactics and Technology
14.   The Anti-Submarine Armada
15.   Mine Warfare
16.   Lessons for the Future
 
The text is copiously illustrated with black-and-white photographs. Following the main text are a whopping forty-two pages of notes, three pages of sources, and a four-page index.
 
Okay, now let’s get down to brass tacks—what is the armchair historian getting for his money? The first thing that any potential buyer may want to take notice of is the table of contents. If you go back and look at it again carefully, something should become apparent to you, namely that FTGWAS is not a chronological narrative of events at sea. Rather, it is a topical treatment of the war. I didn’t figure this out for myself until I was well into Chapter 7. I had presumed—wrongly as it turned out—that Chapters 1–6 were introductory material. The truth hit me when the first fleet action described in Chapter 7 turned out to be the Yarmouth Raid of 3 November 1914. Immediately I wondered why the text had skipped over the Battle of Heligoland Bight, which took place in August of that year. Out of curiosity, I flipped to the index and looked up every mention of the latter battle. None of the six indexed references was an actual description of the battle. The realization that I was not going to get a chronological treatment of events after all was, for me, rather deflating.
 
It turns out that FTGWAS is not really a history so much as an analysis, and a very thorough analysis, as is evidenced by the lengthy notes section. When read as such, the reader will find that the author has done a very respectable job of breaking down strategy, tactics, weapons development, and the like—all of the things listed in the table of contents. With this in mind, the reader is more or less freed to pick and choose which chapters to read and which to skip, since the material in each chapter can be considered as a stand-alone topic.   
 
But here is something else the casual reader should be advised of: the words “thorough analysis” should give a hint as to the length of the book. It is indeed a very, very long book. This isn’t evident at first glance; after all, 352 pages is not an unusually large number for a history book. However, the text is printed in small type and laid out in two columns, which means that the 352 pages of text are more like 1300 pages of reading. It can be a slog. And did I mention that the book is also large and heavy?
 
Something else about FTGWAS didn’t strike me with full force until I was about half-way through the book, namely that although the book is lavishly illustrated, it does not have a lot of visual elements. By this I mean that there is a complete absence of infographics and ancillary content. There are no maps, graphs, tables, cut-aways, diagrams, color plates, lists of technical data, biographical notes, or any of the other various elements that can make a book visually engaging for the casual reader (I write textbooks for secondary students for a living—can you tell?). That can make the text even more of a slog than just the sheer volume of words alone.
 
As you can probably tell, FTGWAS did not have a great deal of appeal for me personally, but by saying that I do not mean any disparagement. The author definitely knows his subject inside and out, as is demonstrated, as just one example, by his detailed knowledge of the various war plans, fleet exercises, and ship building programs of all the major combatants during the pre-war years. For this reason, FTGWAS can definitely be recommended to anyone who is a serious scholar of the naval side of the Great War. The numerous photos alone will get the rest of us to flip through all the pages at least once—and possibly to even read a few.
 
CDC

Wirklich erstaunlich!
 
Really amazing!
 
 

Fighting the Great War at Sea: Strategy, Tactics and Technology
 
Norman Friedman
Barnsley, UK: Seaforth Publishing, 2019
24.5 x 29 cm format, paperback, 416 pages
300 B&W illustrations, end notes, sources, index
MSRP £25.00
ISBN: 978 1 5267 6549 9
 

Fighting the Great War at Sea (FTGWAS) is not the sort of book that will appeal to all readers. I’ll get to the reasons why in a moment, but first let’s take a quick look at what’s between the covers. The book is 352 pages of text divided into an introduction and sixteen chapters. The chapters are:
 
1.       A Maritime War
2.       Resources
3.       Blockade, Trade War and Economic Attack
4.       Expectations versus Reality
5.       The Fleets
6.       The Chessboard—Naval Geography
7.       Fleets in Battle
8.       Capital Ships
9.       Inshore Operations and an Inshore Fleet
10.   The Battle of the Narrow Seas
11.   Submarines
12.   Protecting Trade: The U-Boat War
13.   Anti-Submarine Warfare: Tactics and Technology
14.   The Anti-Submarine Armada
15.   Mine Warfare
16.   Lessons for the Future
 
The text is copiously illustrated with black-and-white photographs. Following the main text are a whopping forty-two pages of notes, three pages of sources, and a four-page index.
 
Okay, now let’s get down to brass tacks—what is the armchair historian getting for his money? The first thing that any potential buyer may want to take notice of is the table of contents. If you go back and look at it again carefully, something should become apparent to you, namely that FTGWAS is not a chronological narrative of events at sea. Rather, it is a topical treatment of the war. I didn’t figure this out for myself until I was well into Chapter 7. I had presumed—wrongly as it turned out—that Chapters 1–6 were introductory material. The truth hit me when the first fleet action described in Chapter 7 turned out to be the Yarmouth Raid of 3 November 1914. Immediately I wondered why the text had skipped over the Battle of Heligoland Bight, which took place in August of that year. Out of curiosity, I flipped to the index and looked up every mention of the latter battle. None of the six indexed references was an actual description of the battle. The realization that I was not going to get a chronological treatment of events after all was, for me, rather deflating.
 
It turns out that FTGWAS is not really a history so much as an analysis, and a very thorough analysis, as is evidenced by the lengthy notes section. When read as such, the reader will find that the author has done a very respectable job of breaking down strategy, tactics, weapons development, and the like—all of the things listed in the table of contents. With this in mind, the reader is more or less freed to pick and choose which chapters to read and which to skip, since the material in each chapter can be considered as a stand-alone topic.   
 
But here is something else the casual reader should be advised of: the words “thorough analysis” should give a hint as to the length of the book. It is indeed a very, very long book. This isn’t evident at first glance; after all, 352 pages is not an unusually large number for a history book. However, the text is printed in small type and laid out in two columns, which means that the 352 pages of text are more like 1300 pages of reading. It can be a slog. And did I mention that the book is also large and heavy?
 
Something else about FTGWAS didn’t strike me with full force until I was about half-way through the book, namely that although the book is lavishly illustrated, it does not have a lot of visual elements. By this I mean that there is a complete absence of infographics and ancillary content. There are no maps, graphs, tables, cut-aways, diagrams, color plates, lists of technical data, biographical notes, or any of the other various elements that can make a book visually engaging for the casual reader (I write textbooks for secondary students for a living—can you tell?). That can make the text even more of a slog than just the sheer volume of words alone.
 
As you can probably tell, FTGWAS did not have a great deal of appeal for me personally, but by saying that I do not mean any disparagement. The author definitely knows his subject inside and out, as is demonstrated, as just one example, by his detailed knowledge of the various war plans, fleet exercises, and ship building programs of all the major combatants during the pre-war years. For this reason, FTGWAS can definitely be recommended to anyone who is a serious scholar of the naval side of the Great War. The numerous photos alone will get the rest of us to flip through all the pages at least once—and possibly to even read a few.
 
CDC

Wirklich erstaunlich!
 
Really amazing!
 
 

Thanks @Mirabell61 @yvesvidal
 
Coils around the main mast. 
 

Wirklich erstaunlich!
 
Really amazing!
 
 

So I put together the ships wheel. It is what it is. One of the wheel handles broke off as that metal is very soft. I will fix it later. The supplied blue prints were not very good for a template. And it was far from the original on the real ship. But as I tried to make it look like the original, the wood just disintegrated. I'm finding out that you can only make wood so small until it is too weak to support itself. So I made it a bit different but again I think its fine.

Thanks a lot for your interest, ccoyle, and take a seat! 
 
Today I lived in the Copy Shop to get my 1/64 recuced copies in ink. So I managed to copy, mirror and glue together the former plan. 
 

So this night I will add the linings on the individual bulkhead plan and than tomorrow start to cut out in card board. But I am afraid I didn't have bought enough cardboard... 😕
 
So tomorrow I will be able to go to the DIYstore and get (some baseboard for the 1/92 stand and) some thicker cardboard or thin MDF for this project's mock-up model 😁. 
 
Thanks for watching in in here. 
 

Hello All, 
The second planking was done with the supplied 1 x 4 mm walnut strips which were fairly good quality after a light sand. The first plank to be fitted was the garboard strake.
    
    
Then planks were laid alternately above and below the wale and from the garboard strake up.
    
All comments welcome.
Thanks for looking and the likes.
 

Slow progress, but steady she goes.

When considering something as complicated as Soleil Royal’s stern; that is, while trying to figure out how, exactly, to get from here (sheet plastic) to there, I have found it useful to consider the ensemble as a series of layers.  There is a base layer of detail, a middle layer of detail, and a final fine layer of detail. And, in certain instances, there may even be a few additional, even finer layers.
 
In order to illustrate this build-up of layers, here is a more or less sequential montage of the process as it relates to the stern counter:

After each layer is set, be it planking or paneling, the surface is sanded fair and smooth, in order to eliminate any surface irregularities.  Here and there a touch of squadron white was necessary to level surfaces - particularly, on the side sections where any unevenness in the ground would be glaring, as seen through the panel reveals.  The edges of all the panel reveals are micro-beveled, in order to give them a more finished appearance.


I mentioned before that I would wait to define the concave bevel around the crown of the rudder head ornament.  I was waiting until after this bottom moulding of the central panel was installed.
 
Making this moulding, as well as the blank for the lambrequin carving, was accomplished by pressing blue tape across the span and into the joints of the central pedestals so that I could highlight these parameters with graphite.
 
This process doesn’t always produce absolutely perfect patterns - it is sometimes difficult to tell whether the tape is absolutely all the way into the crease - but they are close enough, so that you can fine-tune the fit of parts, after leaving yourself a little margin around your pencil lines - say the additional thickness of a pencil line.
 
In the end, I am very satisfied with the impression that the crown is recessed into the counter.  When I started this whole process, I really wasn’t sure how it was going to come out. This gives me renewed hope that the surgery I will attempt on the Four Seasons figures will work.  Despite the challenges these plastic surgeries present, they are still an enormous time-savings, over making the carvings from scratch.



Hopefully, these pictures provide a sense of the many layers involved in constructing this stern counter area.  There is a lot going on, here, in a very limited space. In recognition of that fact, one must consider just how nitty into the gritty they are willing, or is even sensible for them to delve.  At some point, there is an intersection of will and reason, and that is the place you are aiming for.
 
Take, for instance, the lambrequin carving, as it was drawn by Berain.  He shows 15 full “petals” with half-petals at the ends. Each petal is adorned with a fleur-de-lis, and three pendant tassels hanging from their bottom edge.
 
Thinking back to my experience of carving mould-masters for the frieze fleurs, I estimate that it would be damn-near impossible to carve lambrequin fleurs in this scale.  Theoretically, I could use something like Liquitex gel medium to paint on the fleurs, thus producing a light relief. I am not yet confident, though, that I could do this with any semblance of consistency.  I will try to incorporate this technique a little later, when I represent the tasseling.
 
There is, on the other hand, at least one ready-made source of fleurs that would be perfect for this application; the stock fleurs that are moulded into the kit upper bulwarks!  With these ornaments in mind, the lambrequin petals were scaled, accordingly, and I ended up with 10 full petals, bookended by half-petals.
 
Here is a brief montage showing the steps for creating the lambrequin carving:



Using two-part latex mould medium, I made moulds directly from my spare upper bulwark pieces, and then cast the blanks in white resin.  As opposed to the larger ornaments, for which you must laboriously grind away the excess backing material, these fleurs are so shallow that I could simply shave them off with a honed single edge razor.  With just a little extra cleanup, using a #11 blade, they were ready for mounting.

Once tacked in place with liquid cyano, I brushed the whole lambrequin carving with liquid cyano to ensure total adhesion and to smooth over any surface irregularities of the carving.  The back of the lambrequin carving had to be coved with a rubber profile sanding block so that it would cup neatly to the counter.  I think the scale and overall aspect of the carving harmonizes nicely with the rest of the counter.


Now that I know the full projection of all of these layers, I could begin to make the bottom and top mouldings that frame-in the counter.
 
I had great success with constructing a stacked moulding for the transom moulding, so I decided to take the same approach for the bottom counter moulding.
 
First, I pared away enough of the pedestals, at their base, so that I could pass the first layer of the moulding behind them.  This layer has a tiny coved reveal, and it’s primary purpose is to conceal the inletting of the acanthus bases of the jaumier ornament:

The overhang, at the ship’s sides is exaggerated, for now, but it will soon be backed with a thicker piece of styrene sheet (for a better sense of depth), and then trimmed to the pencil line.  This way, the outboard profile of the counter won’t interfere with the paneling of the quarter gallery, but will instead, help to define it.

The next layer of moulding is a heavier piece with a more pronounced cove moulding.  This is fitted between the pedestals:

The trick, with the above layer of moulding was to fair back it’s bottom edge, in order to create an even reveal for the final component of this triple-stack moulding.  I was hoping to preserve the tiny cove reveal at the bottom of this assembly; as you will see, the results aren’t absolutely perfect, but it still looks good, IMO.
 
So, finally, pre-shaped ¼-round Evergreen moulding runs straight across all of the pedestal base bottoms, leaving just enough space for the scrolled foot appliques that are shaped from half-round Evergreen moulding:

Now that the pedestals are located and the bottom counter moulding is in place, I could finally place the caryatid carvings, which I had previously separated from their base:

Next, I will lay out and fabricate the top counter moulding.  You can see that the projection of the counter/false gallery is quite significant.  This is actually a good thing, as it creates a deep enough shelf for the four seasons figures to sit upon:


Lastly, early in my conversations with various scholars of the epoch, almost all of them commented on the apparent exaggerated projection of the pedestal that supports the figure of Autumn:

Now, granted, as it’s drawn the pedestal only appears to be supporting Autumn, without any indication that you might also be seeing a portion of the inner pedestal that supports Summer.
 
Nevertheless, an interesting thing happened, once all pedestals were in place, at their full projection:

While I’m more or less eyeballing all of this, in terms of how thick the layers should be and how that might impact the final depth of the counter, I do think it is reasonable to say that the central projection of the counter would likely produce a similar side view, in full-scale practice.  I’m not positive whether this is architecturally right or wrong, but it is interesting, nonetheless.
 
In closing, just a few perspective shots showing all of the work on the stern, to date:


This is not a perfect, or exact recreation.  The execution is not flawless. Overall, though, the impression and resemblance is quite good.  That is what all of these successive layers of detail make possible, and there remain a few small details (rudder hinges, lambrequin tassels, etc), before this section of the model is complete.
 
More to come…. Thank you for your likes, your comments and for looking in!

Update
 
Part 18
 

1st Planking Task Completed
I was pleased with how this went, the preformed rabbet in the stem post really helped. I used Super Phatic Glue to fixe the planks to the bulkheads. I really using this glue as it gives a good solid bond, and cures so much quicker than normal wood glue.
 

 
Once I have finished with the sanding I will commence the 2nd planking phase.
I have never used Chuck's edge planking method before but will certainly use it for this project. My bending station has been set up and is go to go. I may go out a purchase a travel iron as the hair dryer I used when testing the method had some issues with thermal overload.
 
 
 
 

I completed the aft top gallant rails. After fabricating the transom piece it was pretty straight forward. I sealed everything with wipe-on ploy and painted black. I first attempted to brush paint tamiya flat black from the bottle but that looked terrible, so I had to sand it back down with some 0000 steel wool. I ended up using a rattle can of tamiya matte black. Floquil was so nice to brush. I think I need to find another paint for brushing. Next its on to the front rails.
 
I'll need to do a little touch up at the joints.

 
The front rails are a little tricker since there is a bit of a curve. I'm debating on whether I want to try and edge bend a plank or just cut one to shape. 🤔
 

I have been studying sail plans for Baltimore clippers - topsail schooners. There really isn't much variation for these ships, even when built in different countries.

 
The lengths of every mast, gaff and spar were calculated from Fincham's rules, found in Howard Chappel's "The Baltimore Clipper" on page 160. These rules are based upon the breadth of the hull (beam) and the Line of Flotation (distance between the forepost and sternpost at the waterline. There are quite a few possible variations, with each dimension giving minimum and maximum ranges, so I used the average values.
 
Note: The normal calculated lengths of the lower masts assumes the masts were stepped on the keel. The lower mast lengths shown here are shorter below the deck (partners) than the length calculated with the rules because that is the way the kit was designed.
 
Then the sail dimensions were generated using Fincham's rules. Sail dimensions and spar dimensions were in very close agreement.
 
The sails are:
 
1. Flying jib
2. Jib
3. Fore staysail
4. Fore gaff sail
5. Main gaff sail or mainsail
6. Fore gaff topsail
7. Main gaff topsail
8. Fore topsail
9. Studding sails
 
Number 6, the fore gaff topsail wasn't normally raised. It would be rigged only when the wind was greater at the tops than on the surface, and only when there was real need to catch as much breeze as possible. It is shown as a "flying" gaff topsail with the forward (luff) edge unattached to the mast. The flying gaff topsail could be raised and lowered from the deck.  A similar "standing" gaff topsail was attached to the top mast , but it had to be furled/unfurled by someone in the top.
 
In some cases a different triangular sail (main topmast staysail) was rigged on the main topmast stay in lieu of a fore gaff topsail.
 
Number 7 was the real problem. The Main gaff topsail is shown in several different configurations in the eleven books I have that show schooner sail plans and rigging. In some cases an ordinary gaff topsail was used, similar to the fore gaff topsail.
 
Many drawings in the books show the configuration in my drawing with the upper leading edge of the sail lashed to a spar. This configuration has been called:
 
spar gaff topsail
yard topsail
gaff topsail American fashion (with the spar vertical as shown in the drawing)
gaff topsail Swedish fashion (with the spar close to horizontal, like a topsail)
Cornish topsail
gunter or sliding gunter sail
spritsail (later fore and aft rigs only)
 
Whatever it was called the rig could be raised and lowered from the deck, similar to the fore topsail. There are actually two variations of the "American" style. In some cases the point of attachment of the lift to the spar is above the center of the spar, so gravity works to keep the sail aligned (the spar may even be attached to the mast cap). But the rig shown here has the lift attachment point below the center of the spar so the sail is hoisted even higher. For this to work the tack (at bottom forward corner of the sail) must be hauled down hard after the halliard is secured.
 
In yachting the spar gaff topsail is used to extend the sail higher than the mast top in order to catch a bit more wind. Every part of the Baltimore clipper's rig was designed to catch as much wind as possible, because speed was the reason these ships were built. So it seems this configuration was favored because it was easy to rig.
 
Not shown in the drawing are the ringtail (driver) and bonnets that might also have been used. The ringtail is essentially a studding sail for the mainsail, with a ringtail boom attached to and extending from the boom just as studding sail booms are attached to the yards, and with the top of the sail hoisted to the gaff by a ringtail yard. Bonnets were additional lengths of sail cloth that were attached to the bottoms of the fore and main gaff sails to add sail area. These are sometimes called water sails, although in some books water sails for schooners were triangular sails like jibs that were attached to the bottoms of the gaff sails.
 
I think the sizes of the flying jib, jib and fore staysail look a bit odd - only the jib was listed in Fincham's rules. I'll have to work on this some more. But for now I have a good idea of how many running rigging lines will have to have fastenings on the deck or bulwarks, and that was the real purpose of this exercise.
 
Also, some topsail schooners had a fore topgallant sail and yards (or fore lower topsail and fore upper topsail). However, the ship I am modeling is a bit smaller than the average topsail schooner. The smaller revenue cutters didn't carry the topgallant. The later larger vessels did have the two fore topsails.

Hello to all friends modellers ...

Here is a short presentation of an ancient lady from the 16th century. She originally comes from Ragusa, a town - republic from the Coast of the Adriatic Sea.
 
 
In the begining it would be nice to mention something about Ragusa, nowdays city of Dubrovnik :
Some sources say that Ragusa was founded in the 7th century, named after a "rocky island" called Lausa, by refugees from Epidaurum (Ragusa Vecchia), a Greek city situated some 15 km to the south, when that city was destroyed in the Slavic incursions.
Excavations in 2007 revealed a Byzantine basilica from the 8th century and parts of the city walls. The size of the old basilica clearly indicates that there was quite a large settlement at the time. There is also evidence for the presence of a settlement in the pre-Christian era.
The Republic of Ragusa was an aristocratic maritime republic centered on the city of Dubrovnik (Ragusa in Italian, German and Latin) in Dalmatia (today in southernmost Croatia) that carried that name from 1358 until 1808. It reached its commercial peak in the 15th and the 16th centuries, before being conquered by Napoleon's French Empire and formally annexed by the Napoleonic Kingdom of Italy in 1808. It had a population of about 30,000 people, of whom 5,000 lived within the city walls. Its Latin motto was "Non bene pro toto libertas venditur auro", which means "Liberty is not well sold for all the gold".
 
Merchant galleons, like this one, were used for long trips to overseas areas newly discovered. The most preserved galleons are Spanish and Ragusian, used for the transport of silver from Peru and Mexico. They sailed in groups, fleets, from which the name fleet. At that time the galleons were bigger than the caravel, but smaller than the carrack of Dubrovnik. They weighed 200-500 tons.
The Ragusian galleons, something different from the structural characteristics of the other galleons of the time and of the big and spacious carracks of Dubrovnik, are named Argosies, their name date from Ragusies, adjective of Ragusa (Dubrovnik). How these Ragusian ships were appreciated shows the best the fact that the English made for them a literary expression: Argosy. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Final bit is actually the only aftermarket I bought specific for this kit,  Resin guns, you can see the kit provided ones 

This will be quite an undertaking! I wish you every success as you begin.
 
Cheers!

Very nice model! I believe this one was from a Spanish maker called "Golden Kits."

I have always liked the looks of these boats, and you did a great job on your model.  Congrats!

Looks like I finally got the bevel on the frames just right to maintain the slight curve in the hull. Test fit, tweaked, and bottom glued onto the frames. 


Planking the sides up next....