tartane

Well done Dave! Fine detailed work. Is the scale really 1: 72? It seems a lot bigger for me.

The cannonballs are ready. I made them out of aerated concrete. The photo shows how the process went. A block was sawn out and touched up with a box cutter. The bullet had to fit exactly in a mold that has the diameter of the barrel. Then I filled the holes in the concrete with a filler and they were painted in the right color. Next to the cannon there will be a wooden tray with six cannonballs in it. To prevent anyone from taking them, they are screwed into the bottom of the box from the bottom. Attached to the barge is a chain that will soon be attached to the cannon so that no one can take the barge in its entirety. In reality, such a granite bullet would weigh about 500 grams. The carpenter is still working on the wooden carriage. We are waiting for a few parts that a local blacksmith is making.

For all rigging I make, I only use rope that does not contain plastic. This rope can be provided very well with highly diluted wood glue. As a result, the fibers of rope do not stand upright, which would attract a lot of dust. In addition, this rope can be easily attached with the help of wood glue. Providing glue in the rope is very easy. A cup with highly diluted wood glue and a stick with a notch at the bottom. The rope is pulled through and is thus provided with glue. Then wipe with your fingers and let it dry In the picture rope without plastic to which glue has been added and not.

If you are going to apply the planks, it is customary to apply the king planks first. These were thicker and wider planks than the rest of the deck to strengthen the ship's structure. On the deck the six king planks, with the planks in between. The planks don't bend with the shape of the hull, but I made different widths that sometimes interlock. On excavated wrecks you never see nice neat straight planks like we do today. It was not important when a plank tapered as also can be seen everywhere in floors of old buildings in those days, and then often very wide. The tree from which they sawed the planks had not the same thickness everywhere. Constant

5 The gun carriage is made in a carpenter’s workshop. The medieval Dutch name was "lade" (drawer). It is carved out of an oak tree trunk. The barrel is then placed in a semi-circular floor in which the spaces for the rings are also saved. That way, the barrel couldn't move on a shot, the rings stopped it. As can be seen on many old depictions and also on the recovered cannons of the Mary Rose, the barrel was tied to the carriage with rope. In this way, the gun could be taken apart and transported on a campaign. The wheels could also be removed. Behind the breech the wedges. In this way, the breech could be clamped into the back of the barrel. The carpenter warned me that the carriage would be very heavy. I did the math and indeed it would weigh about 650 kilos. Too heavy to carry him up the stairs in the tower to the place where he will stand. We decided that he would cut the carriage in the lenget into two parts. That sounds crazy, but I can imagine that this was also done in the 15th century to facilitate transport. The two parts are then attached to each other by large bolts fitted with wedges. Behind the wedges a white ball, that's the cannonball. I carved it out of a slab of aerated concrete. In reality, it was natural granite or something like that. The ball still has to be provided with the correct color. In granite, the bullet would weigh about 500 grams, so a pound. Constant

4 The Burgundian Tower in Zutphen, the final residence for the cannon. It was built in 1457 because of the threat of war by the Burgundian Empire. The building has the floor plan of a horseshoe with a maximum wall thickness of four meters. In that wall there are three gun emplacements on the ground floor and five on the first floor. Below were heavier cannons. This cannon will be placed on the first floor in one of the gun emplacements. Not all gun emplacements had cannons. In the event of a threat, the cannons could easily be moved inside the building. This also must have happened to the cannons on ships. The many gun ports on Willem Barentz's ship will not all have been equipped with cannons. If you have 14 openings and there are 16 people on that ship, it's already clear A gun gate of the first floor. The gun emplacement for the cannon I am building. The floor plan of the floor, with the five configurations. This cannon will soon be placed in place A. After the renovation, that place will be accessible by stairs, the others will not. The museum is scheduled to be completed by July 13 of this year. plattegrond.tif plattegrond.tif

Foot ropes. There was a question about the foot ropes. They were not depicted from before the year 1600. At the end of the 16th century, many inventions were made in the field of shipbuilding. One of those things was the use of foot ropes. Before that time they were usually not there because the two main yards of the lower sails were lowered on the deck. There the sails were stowed and then the yards were hoisted again. The sails could then be lowered from above. In the Netherlands, the railing had long time the name "rahout" (ra = yard, hout = wood). Which also indicates that the yards were lowered on it. Barentz's ship from around 1595 did not have those footropes either, which was clearly visible in prints from that time. Constant

Of course, everyone is allowed to experiment. After some unsuccessful attempts, I am very satisfied with the result I achieved and I have applied it to my models several times. It took me a while to find the right thickness of the cocktail sticks in a supermarket. I had to have 1 mm thick and that appears to exist. The hammering must be done carefully, as soon as the wood starts to split, stop for a while and provide with glue. After drying, continue again. Constant

The cocktail sticks are not bamboo, that will not work. To make fine oars by hammering you have to do some practice. Constant

A few years ago I built a model of a Galeotta on a scale of 1:87 (HO) built from pear wood. This model required a number of oars of small size. I made them out of thin cocktail sticks. I carefully hammered out the ends of those sticks with the addition of highly diluted wood glue. After drying, sometimes a few more times. See the photo. 1 cocktail stick of 1 mm thick 2 removed the tip 3 the end flattened with a hammer and provided with diluted wood glue 4 Further hammering made the blade longer and could then be cut into the right shape. 5 Fitting the oars with the handles The oars attached to the fuselage. The ship with full sails and the oars up Constant

I do not know if Dutch kids better behave then American kids, but that is the risk one has to take who build a Cannon. Constant

3 After all surfaces were treated, the barrel looked like the photo. The length is 120 cm. The painting was done with two shades of brown and black to get a weathered rusty surface. The inside of the barrel still needs to be made matt black. The mouth of the barrel is a bit rounder, as the examples often show. The breech has to be slid into the back. The breech during the assembly of the parts. Which was entirely according to the method of the barrel. The breech ready to be painted. In the Dutch language, a breech was called a "snelleke". It resembled a beer mug in appearance and the medieval name of a beer mug was "snelleke". In reality, this barrel would have weighed 95 kg but now only 40 kg. This is the situation on this day. It will take somewhat longer before I can show you more Constant

2 The barrel was originally manufactured from long, flat hammered iron bars girded by hoops, the normal way to make gun barrels at the time. The rather small embrasure with a diameter of 200 mm had to be able to allow the barrel with the forged rings to pass through. Existing barrels show that these rings were often only 20 mm thick. I applied this here and so the tube couldn't be much thicker than 110 mm. This results in the internal diameter of the barrel, the caliber. I ended up with 70 mm, after comparing it with existing barrels. All those measurements are approximate, and the barrel had to be made according them. I made the barrel from two PVC sewer pipes, which had the required diameters, namely 115 mm and 75 mm (with an internal size of 68 mm) Pushed together, the outer circumference and the inner diameter provided the required dimensions. The two PVC pipes with spacers around the inner tube. The two tubes pushed together A total of 38 rings of MDF had to be cut out in thicknesses of 8 and 12 mm. I did that manually with the fret- saw. At least three rings glued together now formed a ring. Those rings were slid around the tube in the right places and secured with superglue. The course between the rings was now much too slippery. We agreed that the barrel would have the appearance of an excavated barrel and would therefore be heavily rusted and rusted in here and there. So the slipperiness had to disappear. Around the tube, between the rings, there was first double-sided tape. Very tight thin rope was wound over it, without gaps in between, on the left of the photo. I needed about 145 meter. Then a thin layer of liquid MDF was smeared on top of it, on the right side of the photo. After which it became a rough surface after drying. That surface was filed and trimmed again until a lumpy surface was created, which was then painted in a rust color. The MDF rings were also smeared with liquid MDF at the same time as the gaps. In this way, it became a unity.

Something went wrong, these words belong to the former message A photo of the niche in which such a cannon stood. In the background the loophole with a short slit above it. A photo of such a cannon in the National Military Museum in the Netherlands. Constant

A 15th century cannon as found on the Mary Rose. Scale 1 : 1. Construction, description and research. 1 As some of you will know, I have built a model of the city of Zutphen, where I live, as the city looked like in 1485. It took me five years to build on it and, together with two other people, I also did the long-term research. The construction took 6500 hours and the result is a large model on a scale of 1:500 which also gave us a lot of the history of the city. This model will be given a permanent place in a heavy artillery tower from 1457. A tower with a wall thickness of 4 meters, the Burgundy Tower. The interior of the tower is currently being modified to accommodate the model. In this way, a new museum is being created around the model. There have been a number of gun emplacements in the tower. One of those will now house a full-size replica of a 15th century cannon. This also required a lot of research. Good examples were found in museums in the Netherlands and especially in England. We also looked at the various cannons of the Mary Rose. Obviously, there was no standardization in such artillery. Each cannon was different, but all according to the same principle. I started building that cannon and made drawings in advance. From accounts of the city around about 1450 we know that they were ordered and also what they looked like. They were referred to there as “ Slang” (snake), the name that the replica will also be given. Afterwards, especially after 1500, these cannons were referred to as culverein. But we are not going to use that name because of the specific name in the Zutphen archives. First, the drawing of the cannon in its entirety. The black lines all around are the exact dimensions of the existing gun emplacement from 1457. Within that, I had to stick to the dimensions. The embrasure is round with a diameter of 20 cm. So the barrel had to be able to pass through that. As a result, the caliber of the barrel was also roughly fixed. It looks like one of the cannons of the Mary Rose, but smaller. It should be clear that the cannon may have looked different, but the working method, the caliber, the construction of the gun carriage and the use of stone balls are certain. It is mainly intended to give visitors an idea about a cannon from the 15th century. A photo of the niche in which such a cannon stood. In the background the loophole with a short slit above it. A photo of such a cannon in the National Military Museum in the Netherlands. Constant

Thank you for your explanation, I didn't know that about the guns and didn't find it in the information I can find. I continue to follow the construction of your model with interest, you do that with a lot of craftsmanship, and also come across the problems I had when building my models, and did research on that (but with someone else I'm probably a bit too enthusiastic) In the meantime I also see that the model in Greenich is not correct, the gun ports are not in the right places, according to the excavations. Good luck with the build! Constant

I do not understand what is wrong with talking about shipbuilding. I thought this forum was meant to help each other and create interesting things together. But if the intention is to ban me from this forum and accuse me of inproper behavior please let me know Constant

If you study the excavated guns of the Mary Rose, it becomes clear that the heaviest guns had large dimensions. The heaviest guns were also front loaders and they were placed as low as possible in the ship. To operate such a cannon, a space of at least 80 cm was needed between the mouth of the barrel and the ship's hull. This space is needed to clean the barrel after a shot and to be able to put the bullet and powder in. Then came the cannon itself, of which I don't know the exact length and then there had to be a space behind the cannon to give space to the hoists that had to hold the cannon while loading. On the other side of the ship, exactly the same thing happened. So there had to be as few obstacles as possible in between. You can see on many warships that there were no cannons at the position of the masts. On the MR, the spaces between the gunports are not evenly distributed. It is therefore very likely that the masts were located in the middle of the greatest distances between the gunports. If you know the length of the guns, in this case the length of the barrel, you can calculate the minimum width of the ship. Warships had to be able to sail fast, so the width of the ship was kept as narrow as possible. You might find this useful. Constant

Is anything known about the exact position of the masts on the ship? It doesn't seem to be because only one side of the ship has been recovered. Based on the locations of the gun ports, it is possible to see exactly where the masts stood. Constant

Can this reconstruction contribute anything to the bow of the Mary Rose? It is in the Mary Rose Museum in Greenwich. Constant

Steven I understand that you want to continue building and that this discussion hinders you in the construction of your model. Finally, I would like to state one thing to complete the story. You came up with the photos of a Ghanjah, noting that the halyard went backwards at an angle and could therefore interfere with the latin sail of the aft mast. With a Ghanjah, and with several types in the extended family of Dhows, it is customary that when the ship is on the beach for maintenance, the mainmast is lowered. It then falls backwards into a trench that was kept free for this purpose. As a result, it is impossible to attach the halyard to the base of the mast, and the halyard must be attached further back. In the accompanying pictures you can see a Ghanjah, or a Baghla, or a Kotia, these are the three largest types of the family, which has lowered the mast to the rear. In the picture of the deck you can see that trench in front of you, covered by a plank, before the mast, so without facilities for hoisting the rod, that was not possible. You can also see the capstan on the side, to give space for the mast. I think the crew takes it for granted that the latin sail of the aft mast sometimes gives problems when tacking, which is caused by the possibility of tilting the mast. I wish you success in the further construction and I will follow you with interest. Constant

Most of the pictures you show are fanciful representations of something an artist saw. I can't clearly distinguish the halyards anywhere and mainly see the shrouds. The photos are clear. These are Ghanjahs sailing east of Africa, and they still look as they did when they were designed in the nineteenth century. The youngest were built around 1955 and are still sailing. There you can indeed see the halyards far back, but because this is a ship with two masts, the aft sail was much smaller mainly used to steer more than to provide propulsion. As a result, the sail is also much more manoeuvrable and can be guided over a halyard. In ships with three masts, it is certainly the case that all three sails are used for propulsion, and they are about the same size and then a halyard guided backwards gets in the way. But above all….., you have to make it the way you see it. But may I conclude from this that you are going to use Latin sails? That is not entirely clear to me yet. Constant

The shrouds are pulled tight by a number of blocks. On a few of my models, I've used all four. Depending on the wind direction, a few are sometimes not used if the sail is broken in such a way that it would rub against the shrouds. The shrouds that are left out are then attached to the leeside. See the drawing On port side are all four shrouds in use, on starboard only two. Because of the blocks these are easy to handle. Constant

Steven It's good to see that you're moving forward with your building instructions. After all the discussions, I thought it better to stop doing that so as not to block your story about the construction of the model, also because you didn't respond to the discussion. But fortunately, it has all remained understandable and you are now building again. I wonder what kind of rigging is going to be on it now, I can't quite follow that in your comment. If you are going to follow the latin rigging, there are a few parts of the rig that you have made which stand in the way. I mean the halyards needed to hoist the rod. The way you make it, this can only be done at the aft mast. See the sketch number I. Halyard A can sit well but the halyards B and C will collide with the rod of the aft mast and the rod of the middle mast. On sketch II you can see how it could be done, the halyards are then attached directly behind the masts. If you're going to rig the model square, it doesn't matter. I'm showing two more pictures of a chebec that I built where you can see that the halyard goes along the mast and is attached behind the mast foot. You're building a beautiful ship! Constant

Christiano, Thanks for all the explanations about the ships in the mediterranean. For a long time I have been researching the historical development of the chebec. Its origins, the early chebece, the later chebec and the chebec that was recreated by the French navy. As a result, I build models of Latin-rigged ships. There is also a major development in this, which is always about the ship with the same name. So I understand very well the complexity of these types of ships. They were built for trade purposes as well as for war. Ships that also had to do with this were for example the Tartane and the Venetian/Austrian Galeotta , of which I also built models. In this way I have learned a lot about the rigging of these ships and therefore I would like to advise on the construction of such ship models. www.constantwillems.nl I would like to end this conversation because it is no longer about Steve's topic. Constant