Jump to content

trippwj

NRG Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,144

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by trippwj

  1. trippwj
    Actually, the use of lead water lines was NOT outlawed until the 1970's (and according to the CDC, if a house was built prior to 1986, chances are good that there was a lead water supply line used). I doubt the Navy replaced the lead pipes for the 1931 cruise unless there was an issue concerning the functioning of the system. However, the 1870 date seems more realistic for the type of fittings shown.
  2. trippwj
    Regrettably, those are not included on the 2012 CD version
  3. trippwj
    I suspect that the pump in question is a newer addition (late 19th or 20th century). I need to check again into the description of the "fire engines" for the Constitution (believe it was in a letter from Fox but not sure).
  4. trippwj
    What they said, Augie! As to the adrift part, there are many of us in a similar state!
  5. trippwj
    The fill room you note was the most protected and restricted part of the vessel - this would be where the powder bags were actually filled. The powder bags would be passed via a small slit in a tarp to a receiver outside of the room.
  6. trippwj
    My goodness I am busy today - sorry if it seems I am hijacking your thread, Jay! Hank, in MSW 1 and again when MSW 2.0 came on-line, shared a spreadsheet he had compiled from the Josiah Fox Papers #773 - Hull Data, Here is an excerpt of the 44 gun Frigates (note that the Constitution was not included in the data). I believe the source is at the PEM in the Fox papers. You may be able to make some close approximations to the location of the bitts during the period of interest by relating to the United States and the President.
  7. trippwj
    This plan may take a bit more pondering. It is listed as Ware (1819) Spar Deck Beams, but appears to show both the spar deck (top half) and another deck (Gun Deck?) below it. 15154-.pdf
  8. trippwj
    Jay - Attached are two contemporary drawings that may be of use to you. Ware drawing (1816) of the Constitution Orlop Deck 1819 Ware plan Orlop.pdf Ware (?1820) Frigate United States decks. 87196001.pdf
  9. trippwj
    I would not be so harsh with Marquadt. His AoTS is an attempt to describe and show as built, based on best available information AT THE TIME! Considering how many times the ship has been rebuilt, any type of reconfiguration, including riding bitts, is probable. Do not look at any features today and assume they were always there! If you doubt the Marquadt drawings, find better sources yourself. I have shared many times the most authoritative source (Humphreys, Fox, and various others in the War Department), including links to the scanned documents. Even the venerable Tyrone Martin has gotten things wrong concerning the Connie.
  10. trippwj
    The British were not overly fond of white oak. From the reference above: The white oak (Quercus alba) of America was considered too susceptible to dry rot; and the British completely neglected the possibilities of the invaluable live oak (Q. virens or Virginiana) which grew along the coast of the southern American colonies. In the eyes of the British shipwright, the English Qercus robur, with its rugged individuality, was the best ship-timber in the world. The favouritism did not stop there, for naval contracts frequently specified 'good, sound Sussex oak'. The oaks grown in the clayey soil of that particular county had in the opinion of the English shipbuilders no equal.
  11. trippwj
    By the mid-18th century, the British were challenged for oak - they had a strong reliance on North American (primarily New England) timber - both white oak and pine for spars. With the loss of that resource, they relied heavily on Baltic timber. They had depleted much of their native oak and other good timber over the years - with only a few forests reserved for ship building. Since the maturity time for the trees was outpaced by the consumption rate, they had serious issues to contend with. I am not aware that they had live oak available due to the climatic conditions where it was found (swampy, warmer climes - Georgia and Florida in the US primarily). For a good discussion of the British challenges see: Albion, R.G. 1952. The Timber Problem of the Royal Navy, 1652–1862. The Mariner’s Mirror 38, no. 1: 4–22. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/citedby/10.1080/00253359.1952.10658102.
  12. trippwj
    In the case of the President, it was likely a combination of factors that influenced the scrapping by the British. Due to the on again/off again schedule for her construction, it's possible that a combination of white and live oak was used, as there were very significant challenges getting live oak. When the 3 frigates got put on hold, one of the missions for Fox was to inventory the available supplies at the three yards and coordinate their shipment to the remaining 3 yards. When there was the prompt need to resume construction, what live oak that was available wasn't seasoned, perhaps contributing to the issue with rot. HOWEVER - for a ship of the era, a 20 year career afloat was pretty good, particularly if there were no significant rebuilds done.
  13. trippwj
    Ugh! I prescribe an ice cold adult beverage of choice, a comfortable chair and birthday cake while enjoying a fireworks display. Each revision brings a better result, kindly sir. Your work is amazing! Back to quiet lurking, I remain, Your ob't servant,
  14. trippwj
    Cricket sends: "Thank you, Mr. John!"
  15. trippwj
    More to the point, was Venice using bells! Let me do some digging around in some of the archeological records.
  16. trippwj
    Cricket has made some nice progress on her Pilot Boat Elsa. Only one week left before she heads back to Arkansas - the 6 weeks have flown past!
  17. trippwj
    Tom - Thank you very much for responding to the concerns and suggestions offered here - as you can tell looking through the forum, we have a very wide variety of backgrounds and experience. Knowing that you, as one of the major vendors for tools in our hobby, are responsive and listen is good for all of us - and for the improvement of the technology available. All the best -
  18. trippwj
    All the best to you & the Missus - and continued great work on the Titanic!
  19. trippwj
    Questioning is good, Jay - how else do we learn? Apparently the next big improvement came about in 1810, when the monopoly was toppled with the Lamb and Nicholson stove. This stove came with a much improved still that was capable of producing at least four gallons of fresh water a day. In addition, the new Lamb and Nicholson stove was advertised to use less fuel and the stove was constructed with three boilers. I will, when time allows, see what I can find about that stove as well.
  20. trippwj
    Good point, Jay - as to the pulleys and chains, they appear to be a feature of all models (contemporary and modern) of the stove, so implication is that it was a part of the stove. As to the water, see Macdonald, J. 2004. Feeding Nelson’s Navy: The True Story of Food at Sea in the Georgian Era. 1. publ. Pennsylvania: Stackpole Books (ISBN 9781861762337) for a good description of how it was used. She also provides a wonderful description of the tight space around the stove and the use in preparation of food.
  21. trippwj
    Jay - see the HMS Victory link I posted above as a starting point on the Brodie stove that would have been an addition to the Victory at some point. As to the prevalence of the Brodie Stove - there are many references in British Naval History documents (both recent compilations as well as contemporary documents). According to William Watson, (1968. Alexander Brodie and His Firehearths for Ships. The Mariner’s Mirror 54, no. 4: 409–412. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00253359.1968.10659464): In 1781, Alexander Brodie produced from his Carey Street works a new kind of fire-hearth which greatly impressed the Commissioners of the Navy Board. Without delay they ordered that no hearths and stoves of the old type were to be purchased and they entered into a comprehensive contract with Brodie, granting him a monopoly of the supply of ships' hearths to the Royal Navy. This privilege he enjoyed throughout twentynine of the most arduous years in British naval history. Also see http://uwf.edu/anthropologyapp/mardigras/artifacts/stove/for a discussion of the Brodie Stove and relation to period shipwrecks. Here is a link to some photo's at the Royal Museum of a Brodie stove: http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/37331.html Here is the 1820 arrangements for each deck on the Constitution. Unfortunately, the details of the galley are not clear. 87196001.pdf Back to the question as to whether it worked, all indications are that it worked. how well and how efficiently are other questions - the fact that the Navy Commissioners granted Brodie a monopoly to supply stoves implies that it worked well enough for the intended use!
  22. trippwj
    The Brodie Stove was the Royal Navy standard until improved designs came out around 1810. In the US, we have records indicating that a "Camboose" was ordered for the Boston Frigate Committee (not the Constitution, but rather the subscription frigate) and then purchased by the Salem Committee building the Essex (see Appendices, page 224 in Smith, P.C.F. 1974. The Frigate Essex Papers: Building the Salem Frigate, 1798-1799. Salem [Mass.]: Peabody Museum of Salem.) Why was the galley stove in the Constitution changed? For the same reason many things change - upgrades, improvements and so on. Did the stove work? Apparently! See the example in HMS Victory at http://www.hms-victory.com/things-to-see/galleyfor one extant example.
  23. trippwj
    May I suggest reading the patent on the Brodie stove? Also, of interest, may be a book "Feeding Nelson's Navy". Provides a fascinating study of Napoleonic era logistics, nutrition, and more (including livestock).
  24. trippwj
    Interesting items, Frolick - THANKS! Just for muddying the waters purposes, here is a picture from the following book: Barnes, J. 1897. Naval Actions of the War of 1812. Osgood. https://books.google.com/books?id=gAMpAAAAYAAJ. I am not certain from whence or when this painting evolved! This version is available from a commercial site - not sure, again, from whence it was acquired.
  25. trippwj
    Model Expo sells the plans and instructions for this kit (or at least the current version) for $79. See http://www.modelexpo-online.com/product.asp?ITEMNO=MV31W

About us

Modelshipworld - Advancing Ship Modeling through Research

SSL Secured

Your security is important for us so this Website is SSL-Secured

NRG Mailing Address

Nautical Research Guild
237 South Lincoln Street
Westmont IL, 60559-1917

Model Ship World ® and the MSW logo are Registered Trademarks, and belong to the Nautical Research Guild (United States Patent and Trademark Office: No. 6,929,264 & No. 6,929,274, registered Dec. 20, 2022)

Helpful Links

About the NRG

If you enjoy building ship models that are historically accurate as well as beautiful, then The Nautical Research Guild (NRG) is just right for you.

The Guild is a non-profit educational organization whose mission is to “Advance Ship Modeling Through Research”. We provide support to our members in their efforts to raise the quality of their model ships.

The Nautical Research Guild has published our world-renowned quarterly magazine, The Nautical Research Journal, since 1955. The pages of the Journal are full of articles by accomplished ship modelers who show you how they create those exquisite details on their models, and by maritime historians who show you the correct details to build. The Journal is available in both print and digital editions. Go to the NRG web site (www.thenrg.org) to download a complimentary digital copy of the Journal. The NRG also publishes plan sets, books and compilations of back issues of the Journal and the former Ships in Scale and Model Ship Builder magazines.

Our Emblem ®

Modelshipworld - Advancing Ship Modeling through Research

Nautical Research Guild ® and the NRG logo are Registered Trademarks, and belong to the Nautical Research Guild (United States Patent and Trademark Office: No. 6,999,236 & No. 6,999,237, registered March 14, 2023)

×
×
  • Create New...