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!

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 -

All the best to you & the Missus - and continued great work on the Titanic!

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.

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.

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!

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.

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).

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.

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

Here is the link to the painting: http://prints.rmg.co.uk/art/496525/american-corvette

A Captain in the Royal Navy. 1804. Observations and Instructions for the Use of the Commissioned, the Junior, and Other Officers of the Royal Navy, on All the Material Points of Professional Duty: Including Also, Forms of General and Particular Orders for the Better Government and Discipline of His Majesty’s ships..With an Appendix ; Being a Complete Set of Forms for Watch, Station, and Quarter Bills for Ships of War. Printed for P. Steel. http://books.google.com/books?id=eVwMAQAAMAAJ. A very interesting document. Here is the TOC: I found this next piece quite enlightening - the stations for the men during mooring or unmooring. Note the number on the capstan bars for a 44 gun ship!

For a look at rigging during the late 18th early 19th century, including the how's and why's of it, you can't do much better than Lever, D. 1853. The Young Sea Officer’s Sheet Anchor; Or, A Key to the Leading of Rigging, and to Practical Seamanship (American Edition). E. & G.W. Blunt. https://books.google.com/books?id=HmJJAAAAYAAJ. While he is contemporary and not modern, he is readable and very detailed. Others, such as the Swan Class book and the Petersson books are fantastic but very specific to a type of ship. Lee's and Marquardt are amazingly detailed but cover such a broad period and array of vessels it can get confusing. Combined, those are good modern additions to the library for anyone interested in rigging ship models. Here are some sample pictures from Lever.

Congratulations, Bob - this is surely a model to be proud of! A most beautiful result and a quite educational build as well.

I have always found this from Gen. Eisenhower to be so very true: “In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable.”

Maybe this one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_Gault

Any clue as to the age of the model? very nice model, but unless somewhat contemporary (18th or early 19th century), it is just one builders best guess at what she looked like. This model looks much newer than that.

Following are notes on the Pennsylvania and the Santisima Trinidad in the Humphreys notebook (date to sometime after 1829) Dimensions of the Santissima Trinidad, Spanish three decker – in English measure. Length between perpendiculars 204 feet 9 inches, beam moulded 54 feet Tonnage of Ship of the Line Pennsylvania Made out for Comm Stewart- June 1829 Keel for Tonnage Custom House Measurement 183 feet Beam for Do Do Do 57 ft 9 Burthen in tons Custom House Measurement 3212 18/95 (say 3241 tons corrected tonnage) Burthen in Tons Sheer carpenters (old) measurement 2940 83/95 Tons Length between perpendiculars from the aft side of Rabbet of Stem to fore side of Rabbet of post at crossbeam 210 feet Deduct Thickness of apron & Transom 3 feet 6 inches will leave the length of Gun deck 206 feet 6 inches. Length of Spar Deck 220 feet 8 inches Tread of the deck. Length between perpendiculars 210 feet Beam moulded 56 ft 9 Depth of Hold 22 ft 3 Length of Keel Carpenters tonnage 173 feet 6 inches Beam Do Do 56 feet 9 inches

Bill - Found your build log!

Check out the scratch build of the Annie M. Parker by Canoe21 (Lawrence) - there may be some ideas there.

I concede the older, but respectfully decline to accept any insinuation of wiser!!! In terms of seeking out information on some of these, the Pennsylvania Historical Society in Philly is a good starting point - they have the Humphreys' archives and others, including (I think) those from Marion Brewington. The Peabody Essex Museum has a very nice archive, among others, related to the early years of the Navy in the US. As the Ol' frolicky one mentioned, the National Archives has quite the collection, as does the Naval Academy. The Mystic Seaport Library is more focused on merchant shipping, but also has some fantastic materials on the shelves. Most of what I have come up with is internet sourced - amazing amount of information there, it just takes some digging to get to it! Archive.org and Google Books are amazing repositories, as is the Hathitrust website.

Charlie - You may want to peruse the plans presented in Knox, Dudley, ed. 1945. Register of Officer Personnel United States Navy and Marine Corps and Ships’ Data 1801–1807. Naval Documents Related to the United States Wars with the Barbary Powers. U.S. Government Printing Office. http://www.ibiblio.org/anrs/docs/E/E3/nd_barbarywars_register_shipdata.pdf.

Interesting topic, sir. There could be some spiritted discussion here. Let me start by suggesting that, even in Great Britain, it was not the norm to show the stern decoration on the plans. The level of detail and type of carving would be included in the written specification documents, and then only in general terms. The builder did what he felt was appropriate within cost. The plans were to build by, not to record what the ship looked like, in the US. Next up - the dirth of documentary records, and some possible sources.

Very nice! If interested, it is also available as a PDF at Google: https://books.google.com/books?id=1UcOAAAAQAAJ

Looking sweet, Denis. Not sure if you saw the build by Gene Bodnar over at MSB http://www.modelshipbuilder.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?4038.20 His was a tiny bit larger than yours... "This ship doesn't look all that large in these photos, but it's 71.5" long on 1:144 scale"