CDR_Ret

I like to invest a little bit of myself in each of my models. In this instance I literally invested some of myself after accidentally puncturing myself with a piece of wire and subsequently bleeding on my model while I worked on it. Fortunately, all of the affected areas will eventually be covered. 🫤
 

Gregory,
 
Thanks for the obvious question!
 
I don't know about the forward or backwards spin, but I always went up the (inclined) ladders facing them, and down with my back to the steps.
 
External (outside, weather deck) ladders usually had hand rails that continued up to the tops of life rails or life lines around the decks. Internal ladders had nothing like this. At the top there were no handholds.  When you climbed them you just stepped out onto the deck, just like climbing stairs in a building.
 
However, in heavy seas when the ship was pitching heavily over large swells, navigating internal ladders could be challenging. I can remember more than once when I was climbing a ladder in typhoons when the ship dropped out from under me, leaving me floating weightless in the air. But not for long before the deck came up to slam me! With experience you lose your lubber's legs and learn to get along no matter how the ship is pitching and rolling.

On submarines, we always slid down the main stairs between decks on the handrails with hands only. You controlled your speed with your grip. I even saw our COs do this on occasion! For vertical ladders, there were always hand grips positioned somewhere above the top rung to help the transition between ladder and the deck.

About sixty years ago I ran across a copy of To Glory We Steer, one of the Richard Bolitho series by Alexander Kent, in the Plattsburgh AFB library and started a decades-long on and off love affair with the fighting ships of that era. Made a few half-hearted attempts at modeling but was rapidly overcome. Then, about a month ago I ran across an ad in Smithsonian magazine for Model Expo’s Shipwright Series which sounded right up my alley. Currently working on my second attempt at the Norwegian Sailing Pram, waiting on the glue to dry after breaking (again!) the goddam aft transom support and trying to balance my latent OCD/perfectionism with a desire to learn some skills, which will involve tolerating mistakes. The Grand Banks Dory came out fair on the second try (I can only tolerate so many glue-unglue-reglue cycles before I start over from scratch). Gonna make a third attempt later. 
Been lurking the forums and build logs for a week or two and am seeing an improvement in my skill level as a result. Enjoying the new hobby, especially since my back will no longer tolerate golf. 

Hi Wefalck.
 
Thanks for the pointer. In Underhill, Figure 44, there is indeed an image showing the lower topsail yard supporting rod/stay/strut. This is in the context of an iron and steel-sparred ship. The figure shows the upper end of the rod hinged to a hefty lug at the bottom of the center band, as stated earlier. The hinge plane was in line with the yard and vertical. The lower end of the rod terminated at the steel cross support at the base of the topmast.

Scan from Figure 44, page 39, Masting and Rigging the Clipper Ship & Ocean Carrier, Harold A. Underhill, Reprint 1969; Brown, Son, and Ferguson, LTD
 
Interestingly, all the diagrams of the LTS yard (including Fig. 44), show the LTS yard mainly supported by a swiveling crane arrangement, rather than the universal-jointed truss as in the lower yard (and as was the case for Galilee). So a crane plus a support rod for the LTS yard seems to be overkill except, perhaps, in larger ships.
 
I finally found a side illustration of the LTS yard strut in Underhill, Plate 16, on page 80 (there is so much information buried in this book that it is easy to overlook things!). The plate illustration suggests that the lower end of the support strut is simply an eye-in-eye swivel, bolted through the forwardmost top platform crossbeam. So, lacking any other information, that's what I will go with.

Plate No. 16, Ibid, showing the arrangement of the LTS yard support stay or strut.
 
In Galilee's case, the entire weight of the LTS yard, hardware, rigging, and sail rests on this one rod! When the yard tilts, I'm still not sure how that motion is accommodated by this support system.🤔
 
Thanks for the prodding!
 
Terry 
 
@wefalck
@BANYAN

This is a plea for input from the general membership to identify the depicted iron hardware shown below and/or for direction to a source that illustrates (or at least describes) this object:

What's it? The upper end of the rod is attached or hinged to the centerline band of the foremast lower topsail (LTS) yard. The bottom end of the rod is somehow attached to a cross-brace in the decking of the foretop platform.
(Courtesy Carnegie Science Library, September, 1906)
 
The ship it was used in was the US West Coast merchant brigantine Galilee, built at the Matthew Turner shipyard in Benicia, California, in 1891. The reference photos I am using are mostly from the period when the ship was chartered by the Department of Terrestrial Magnetism, Carnegie Institution, Washington, DC, between 1905 and 1908 for geomagnetic data collection in the Pacific Ocean basin. Captain Matthew Turner, by all accounts, was the most prolific shipbuilder on the West Coast during the latter 19th century, and he frequently incorporated in his wooden sailing ships innovations that were common to iron-masted sailing ships during this period.
 
I have a variety of other images, all together indicating that this isn't some kind of running or standing rigging ropework. It's always absolutely straight and typically runs in a direction at an angle to all the other lines in its vicinity. At this point in the ship's life, virtually all iron standing and running rigging had been replaced with hemp in order to minimize the rigging's magnetic effect on the ship's instruments. Only structural iron that was absolutely necessary for the operation of the ship was retained.
 
Other images:

Various depictions of the LTS yard support rod. (Sources: left and right, Carnegie Science Library, c. 1905-1907; center, SAFR, prior to 1905)
 
Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
 
Terry
 
 

Hi Wefalck.
 
Thanks for the pointer. In Underhill, Figure 44, there is indeed an image showing the lower topsail yard supporting rod/stay/strut. This is in the context of an iron and steel-sparred ship. The figure shows the upper end of the rod hinged to a hefty lug at the bottom of the center band, as stated earlier. The hinge plane was in line with the yard and vertical. The lower end of the rod terminated at the steel cross support at the base of the topmast.

Scan from Figure 44, page 39, Masting and Rigging the Clipper Ship & Ocean Carrier, Harold A. Underhill, Reprint 1969; Brown, Son, and Ferguson, LTD
 
Interestingly, all the diagrams of the LTS yard (including Fig. 44), show the LTS yard mainly supported by a swiveling crane arrangement, rather than the universal-jointed truss as in the lower yard (and as was the case for Galilee). So a crane plus a support rod for the LTS yard seems to be overkill except, perhaps, in larger ships.
 
I finally found a side illustration of the LTS yard strut in Underhill, Plate 16, on page 80 (there is so much information buried in this book that it is easy to overlook things!). The plate illustration suggests that the lower end of the support strut is simply an eye-in-eye swivel, bolted through the forwardmost top platform crossbeam. So, lacking any other information, that's what I will go with.

Plate No. 16, Ibid, showing the arrangement of the LTS yard support stay or strut.
 
In Galilee's case, the entire weight of the LTS yard, hardware, rigging, and sail rests on this one rod! When the yard tilts, I'm still not sure how that motion is accommodated by this support system.🤔
 
Thanks for the prodding!
 
Terry 
 
@wefalck
@BANYAN

I just noticed this problem tonight (3-Jan-25), but I was trying to add an image to a PM and noticed that all the usual buttons in the gray bottom margin for selecting and inserting images and attaching files to PMs and topical threads are missing. I can't even include a screenshot because this post is also missing the image/file controls.
 
Is it MSW or my browser/computer?
 
Terry

I just noticed this problem tonight (3-Jan-25), but I was trying to add an image to a PM and noticed that all the usual buttons in the gray bottom margin for selecting and inserting images and attaching files to PMs and topical threads are missing. I can't even include a screenshot because this post is also missing the image/file controls.
 
Is it MSW or my browser/computer?
 
Terry

I just noticed this problem tonight (3-Jan-25), but I was trying to add an image to a PM and noticed that all the usual buttons in the gray bottom margin for selecting and inserting images and attaching files to PMs and topical threads are missing. I can't even include a screenshot because this post is also missing the image/file controls.
 
Is it MSW or my browser/computer?
 
Terry

Ok, this is now fixed. For some reason, the option to allow all file types, was set to 'none'.
 
This isn't something that's been tinkered with, nor has there been any update, so it remains a mystery.
 

I just noticed this problem tonight (3-Jan-25), but I was trying to add an image to a PM and noticed that all the usual buttons in the gray bottom margin for selecting and inserting images and attaching files to PMs and topical threads are missing. I can't even include a screenshot because this post is also missing the image/file controls.
 
Is it MSW or my browser/computer?
 
Terry

Per, it only allows to insert previous photos, not current photos one wants to attach. The problem is not solved for me. 

Hmm yeah somebody hit the wrong toggle, there's no attach images functions.

Same here thought it was something I did lol.
Knocklouder. 

Seems to be system wide, I'm blaming Goober and Pile. 
 
 The issue has been reported, it's a James H. or Chuck issue to fix.  

I just noticed this problem tonight (3-Jan-25), but I was trying to add an image to a PM and noticed that all the usual buttons in the gray bottom margin for selecting and inserting images and attaching files to PMs and topical threads are missing. I can't even include a screenshot because this post is also missing the image/file controls.
 
Is it MSW or my browser/computer?
 
Terry

Hey Folks, Happy New Year!
I'm excited to be back at the table on Pandora and now have new resources at my disposal that I hope will make Pandora my best project yet.
 
The keen observer among you may have noticed that while I began this project in the traditional manner - that is, gathering/lofting plans, building the keel/stem/stern assemblies, and getting the moulded breadth 'shell' built in 3D - I then jumped straight into making the exterior planking and fittings. This probably leaves many to wonder what, if any, internal details I plan on modelling...
 
Well, I'm happy to say that even in its digital form, this Pandora will be a 100% built up model. Every individual frame, beam, plank, nail, bolt, and sheet of copper will be captured in excrusiating detail. It is for that reason that I needed more books in my library. Now, thanks to my family, friends, and loving wife, I have acquired 4 new (old) titles that should help me do justice to this famous piece of Naval history. Among these, the famous Ship Builder's Repository of 1788, shall be indispensable for construction, dimensions, and put plainly: how it all fits together.
 
With all that said, the reason I was working on the outside hull and fittings was precisely because I could work on these parts with relative confidence while awaiting the reference material to do better justice to the frames and interior of the ship. I've nearly finished the external planking and am pleased with the results for the most part.

 
 
The 3-2-1 Pattern and the Rule of 4
The external planking on Pandora conforms almost exactly to the plans. Including the garboard strake, there are 21 'standard' strakes that follow the 3-2-1 pattern I pointed out in my Confederacy project. I know this confused some folks, so I'll do my best to explain how I interpret this pattern:
 
There are a series of vertical cuts that separate each strake along the hull into individual planks (duh!)

 
On Pandora and many other ships I've seen, these cuts are made almost exactly where the station lines are.

 
Except where the planking is sheared off at the bow and stern, each plank is exactly 4 stations long

 
 
Now, the 3-2-1 pattern, as I call it, refers to how the planking is staggered between strakes. It should actually be called the 'Alternating 3-2-1 Repeat-as-you-go-down' pattern. Yuck! But not to worry, it's simple enough to understand:
 
Starting at the foremost cut in each section, move aft 3 station lines to get the location of the next cut in the strake below the one you started on.

 
Next, move forward 2 station lines to cut the strake below that.

 
Finally, move aft 1 station line and cut the plank below that.

 
That's it! Just repeat the process until the whole hull or hull section is complete, using the same station line you started with, only 4 strakes down. This works out well, as every plank is 4 stations long, and every vertical cut in the planking is made 4 strakes above the last one. Hence, the Rule of 4.
 
 
 
Hull Plank Sections:
 
Section #1: Garboard -> Tuck -> Bottom of the Lower Counter
The planking for the first 21 strakes on Pandora follow the method I described above, but even within this first section, the planks are not evenly spaced (i.e. equal siding width) across all station lines. The reason is the tuck

 
The tuck at the stern is at the top of the16th strake. The 16 strakes are evenly spaced from the keel to the tuck...

 
As are the 5 strakes that extend outward from the tuck to the diagonal scarfs that make up the next section of planking. Note that though equal in width to each other, these last 5 strakes are considerably narrower than the 16 that preceded them.

 
 
Upon reaching the deadflat at midship, all 21 strakes are evenly distributed and continue that way all the way forward. When viewed from behind, the cuts from the sternpost and lower counter to their respective place at midship appear more or less as straight lines.
 
FYI - right now the topology is only able to change at the stations, half-stations, and the FP/AP, so more subdivision between these lines will be required to get the strakes to delicately 'curve' as they approach the tuck and lower counter. I do plan on fixing this later - as I will also need this shape to be more accurate when I add the transoms.

 
 
Section #2: Diagonal Scarfs -> Elm Stringer or lower Thick Part
Next comes a series of 3, double-wide strakes (each being the width of 2 normal strakes, or 6 strakes in total). This part of the ship has the sharpest changes in inflection points along the station lines, so for structural reasons, each double-wide strake is cut into nibbed triangles (and inverted triangles), with each apex being 2/3rds the width of the total strake. The apex of each plank is also offset, so that one diagonal cut to the apex is 1 station long, whereas the other is 3 stations long. This way each plank is still 4 stations long. The direction of the offset also alternates between the three double-wide strakes.

 
Note that there is also a 'washout' at the bow and stern where the cuts once again simply split the strakes in half. For the sake of simplicity, I set the washout points to align with the foremost and aftmost cuts on the rest of the planking which is at stations 'R' and '23', respectively.

 
To be continued in next post...

Spent some time today generating the graphics for the PDF on assembling the cannon and carriage today. I know most of you have built one or know how to do it, but someone just coming across the files might not.
 
I have not turned all the drawings into graphics yet, and I do not plan on coloring all the pictures, but I did color the assemble cannon and carriage. I did it mostly so that the letters designating the eyelets stand out, but it also looks cool!
 
Anyway here is one of the "Glamor Shots:.
 

Yessir, to virtually any number of decimal places you desire in either imperial or metric units. I use Blender mainly as a free 3D CAD  program after Sketchup was no longer free to hobbyists.
 
As others have mentioned, Blender has a steep learning curve, but there are helpful, experienced users in our community.
 
Terry

Or you could move to the Dark Side for free and try 3D printing using the Blender extensions.🙂

Yes, sometime in the not to distant future. I can't say when as I don't know the date of the final release of V5.
 
This topic is merely a heads up that it will happen, given with plenty of notice.

Yessir, to virtually any number of decimal places you desire in either imperial or metric units. I use Blender mainly as a free 3D CAD  program after Sketchup was no longer free to hobbyists.
 
As others have mentioned, Blender has a steep learning curve, but there are helpful, experienced users in our community.
 
Terry

Yessir, to virtually any number of decimal places you desire in either imperial or metric units. I use Blender mainly as a free 3D CAD  program after Sketchup was no longer free to hobbyists.
 
As others have mentioned, Blender has a steep learning curve, but there are helpful, experienced users in our community.
 
Terry

Or you could move to the Dark Side for free and try 3D printing using the Blender extensions.🙂