trippwj

Very sharp and clean - great job! Enjoy your R&R!

Not much I can add, sir. Very nice work! I heard all this talk about wales so brought my harpoon...guess I better listen better next time!

2 good looking ships, Grant. That case on the Vic is beautiful. That black base should give a wonderful effect.

June 6, 1944. Allied forces dispatch an invasion fleet of nearly 7,000 vessels to conduct amphibious landings in Normandy. The "greatest generation" of many nations shows their resolve during what would be described as their longest day.

The following description is extracted from Publications of the Navy Records Society, Vol. LLVI, 1922. It is the second of 2 volumes published by the society entitled The Life and Works of Sir. Henry Mainwaring, edited by G. E. Manwaring and W. G. Perrin. Both volumes are available at the Internet Archives, https://archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22Mainwaring%2C+Henry%2C+Sir%2C+1587-1653%22 This is a very difficult manuscript to acquire, from what I have been told, so the availability of the dictionary transcribed into this journal is a wonderful resource when seeking the usage of terms in days gone by. Introduction to the section on his Seaman's Dictionary: THE name of Sir Henry Mainwaring deserves an honoured place in our naval literature on account of the unique distinction he holds in being the earliest authority we have in English on seamanship and nautical terms. His 'Seaman's Dictionary,' which is the text-book of seventeenth- century seamanship, was compiled during Buckingham's tenure of office as Lord High Admiral of England, although it was not printed until 1644, when Parliament being in possession of the fleet it was thought ' so universally necessary for all sorts of men,' that it was conceived 'very fit to be at this time imprinted for the good of the Republic. THE SEAMAN'S DICTIONARY OR, AN EXPOSITION AND DEMONSTRATION OF ALL THE PARTS AND THINGS BELONGING TO A SHIP TOGETHER WITH AN EXPLANATION OF ALL THE TERMS AND PHRASES USED IN THE PRACTIQUE OF NAVIGATION A PREFACE SHEWING THE SCOPE AND USE OF THIS BOOK. MY purpose is not to instruct those whose experi- ence and observation have made them as suffi- cient (or more) than myself: yet even they should lose nothing by remembering, for I have profited by mine own labour in doing this; but my intent and the use of this book is to instruct one whose quality, attendance, indisposition of body (or the like) cannot permit to gain the knowledge of terms, names, words, the parts, qualities, and manner of doing things with ships, by long experience: without which there hath not any one arrived as yet to the least judgment or knowledge of them. It being so, that very few gentlemen (though they be called seamen) do fully and wholly understand what belongs to their profession ; having only some scamblingterms and names belonging to some parts of a ship. But he who will teach another man must understand things plainly and distinctly himself ; that instead of resolving another man's doubts, he do not puzzle him with more confusion of terms of art, and so, to appear to know somewhat, will still expound Ignotum per Ignotius. And for professed seamen, they either want ability and dexterity to express themselves, or (as they all do generally) will to instruct any gentleman. If any will tell me why the vulgar sort of seamen hate landmen so much, either he or I may give the reason why they are so unwilling to teach them in their Art: whence it is that so many gentlemen go long voyages and return, in a manner, as ignorant and as unable to do their Country service as when they went out. These words, terms, and proper names which I set down in this book are belonging either to a ship, to show her parts, qualities, or some things necessary to the managing and sailing of her; or to the art of gunnery, for so much concerns the use of ordnance at sea. And those which are familiar words, I set them down, if they have any use or meaning about a ship other than the common sense; and in expounding them I do shew what use, necessity, commodity, discommodity, wherefore and how things are done, which they import; and there- with the proper terms, and phrases, with the different uses, in any kind appertaining to that word; which for better and easier finding out, and to avoid confusion, I have brought into an alphabet.

Sal - Excellent work on this. The Phantom is a nice first build - and I am taking notes to help motivate my boys to work on theirs!

Greetings one and all. I got to spend a great deal of quality time during May with the Emma C. Berry. All frames have now been installed, and temporary batten installed along the deck line for support. This will eventually be removed as the inside structure is installed. The crew at the shipyard has been working hard on the frames and also on improving the build yard. Unfortunately, the tide was rising more rapidly than they anticipated necessitating a relocation in the shipyard. (Yes, I am embarrassed to say, I did discover that she does float). After a quick repositioning for one last bow-on shot. Note I will need to do a bit of work on the aft 4 frames on the starboard side (you may be able to pick out the flat spot near the stern_ Exercising great amounts of hindsight, the photo shoot relocated to higher ground. And one final shot - I thought the shadows were interesting in this one. And so, for the month of June, I will return my attentions to the Essex. Appreciate any suggestions or observations on how to improve the lines on this lady.

May be a closer reflection of actual practice. The ends were the challenge - the mid-body was more or less a straight run. Take each strake as he has done and extend to fill the rest.

Good point, Denis. I will be thinning down and the bulwark posts (upper part of frames) and planking the inside of the bulwarks, so going with the false deck underlay might work. I'll need to do some checking on dimensions, though, as I may need to replace the planking strips that came with the kit if I use an underlay. Thanks for the idea!!!

Hello, Jason - thanks for stopping by! It is a very nice kit - definitely a kit for someone with more experience as there are no directions, just drawings on the plans sheets. need to be planning each step as i go. Still debating on the windows. My resident "starving artist" is contemplating the right color choices to try and paint them, may do one to see how it looks. I am starting to lean toward drill out the window panes and try some filler of some sort. Will keep you posted!

I think that Jay was getting at the difference between a new navy - no established bureaucracy - and a mature, entrenched administrative entity. The British admiralty had a couple of centuries of experience behind them - they had struggled through the process of building their own vessels, civilian approval of the ship form, then needing to contract with civilian yards to get vessels built at the rate needed due to the long period of naval conflict they had endured. While the original 6 frigates were being designed and then constructed, the US did not even have a separate Navy - it was under the War Department and the Secretary of War. It was not until 1798 that the Department of the Navy was established and Benjamin Stoddert became the first Secretary. The process of designing the frigates, including the Constitution, was tortuous. Henry Knox (Secretary of War) solicited opinions from several ship builders in the Philadelphia area (including Humphreys' partner, Wharton). Several other former ship captains and builders also contributed to the early debate. Knox selected Humphreys to design as much for his local presence and familiarity to the Secretary as anything else. The design of the frigates took some time, as there was no established system for naval construction, and much of the background is lost to history as it occurred via face to face meetings with Knox. What is known is that Humphreys was a mediocre draughtsman - hence the Secretary assigning Fox (capable, familiar with French and British designs and systems of shipbuilding) and Doughty (a talented draughtsman) to assist. There were philosophical disagreements on dimensions, form and so on that left a bad taste in both the Fox and Humphreys camps (see the 20th century debate in articles published c. 1916 and 1964). The frigates were, surprisingly, built. Each shipbuilder put his own interpretation into the build - even though they all had a copy of the plan and the moulds. Each builder was also strongly influenced by the assigned Naval Constructor (who would oversee the work of the contracted ship builder) and Naval Superintendent (who was intended to be the first Captain of his assigned frigate). There were also other alterations to the design between the first 44-gun frigates and the last one (for example, for the President, which had construction halted for a time, Humphreys requested changes to the height of the gun deck and the position of the main mast). The 4th 44-gun, Chesapeake, was significantly redesigned by Fox due to both his disagreement with Humphreys over the size and a lack of suitable timber. So - what we see is that, during this early formative stage for the US Navy, the lack of standardization and consistency of design resulted in 4 44-gun frigates that each was unique and different from the sister ships. Each also performed differently under sail as a result of not just the way they were constructed, but also the masting, which Secretary of War Pickering left to the discretion of the assigned Captain and Constructor. This after a rather lengthy debate between Humphreys and Truxton (in particular) over the size of the masts and spars. Truxton believed the plans by Humphreys were to lofty and oversized for the ships - and had decades of sailing experience to back up his system for masting of ships. The documentary record of much (though by no means all) of the above, including Truxton's treatise on masting &c., can be found on the Papers of the War Department website at http://wardepartmentpapers.org/ Attached, for your leisure reading, are (1) Truxton's publication on masting of frigates (2) Correspondence between Secretary of War Pickering and Naval constructors concerning Truxton's recommendations (3) transcription of (2) (4) Mast as you wish (Pickering) 1794 Masts Article_Truxtun.pdf 1795_NBB19_44 Gun Frigate spars_Truxton.pdf NBB19 Truxton Pickering.pdf Mast as you wish.pdf

Looks really good, Augie! Will you have moose antlers on the bulkhead in the main cabin???

Good job, Sjors. Which one gets a cannon pointing out of it?

One thing to keep in mind is that the AOTS book is about a British naval cutter from ~1777 while the US Alert was built about 1818. Not sure where They got 1805 for the kit.

Boy, was I wrong on my dates, at least according to the CRS: In 1968, Columbus Day was made a federal holiday. Several reasons were offered for creating Columbus Day at the federal level. Among the most prominent was that observance was already an established holiday in 45 states. By also commemorating Columbus’s voyage to the New World, Congress believed that the nation would be honoring the courage and determination which enabled generations of immigrants from many nations to find freedom and opportunity in America. Such a holiday would, according to a Senate report, also provide “an annual reaffirmation by the American people of their faith in the future, a declaration of willingness to face with confidence the imponderables of unknown tomorrows.” HOWEVER - the researcher at CRS may have gotten historical notes crossed, so to speak (it is rather uncommon to find a factual mistake of this sort in the reports they issue!). The citation provided for the 1968 (P.L. 90-363, 82 Stat. 250-251, June 28, 1968; 5 U.S.C. §6103) is actually the Monday Holiday Act of 1968, which moved observance for most Federal holidays to a Monday. The actual date it appears to have been a Federal Holiday was in the Act of April 30, 1934 (ch. 184, 48 stat. 657). In that act, the date was set as October 12th.

Nice job on the coppering, Sal. Looks really crisp!

Deck looks sharp, popeye! Send some of that nice weather this way, please?

Think I'll buy a ticket for this show as well!

t's tradition... but without the adult beverages and great food of St. Patrick's Day and Cinco de Mayo. You are obviously not of Italian heritage, Mark. In the old 'hood, there abundant adult beverages. Of course, the families all came over in the early 1900's. I will need to see if I can find it, but the Congressional Research Service recently released a brief report on Federal holidays that had some info on the history of Columbus Day. Became a Federal holiday in 1937. It would require an act of congress to un-holiday the day. I think the allure of Columbus is it reflects the spirit of exploration, where even a failed expedition results in something new. There are many tantalizing tidbits that may indicate an earlier visit to North America than 1492, but Columbus had an effective PR and marketing firm. As to not making it to the continent - he did not have a visa and Customs wouldn't let him land.... Blaming Columbus for the actions of his sponsoring government is like blaming the pilgrims for the Red Sox trading Babe Ruth.

No problem, Frank. Your 12 inches = 25 feet is also accurate.

The range from Russ sounds about right. The term "Cutter" has nothing to do with rig or form but rather function. It is a Revenue Cutter - a term still used today to describe the Coast Guard fleet.

I think either approach would make sense! They were both based on the 51 ton plans by Doughty. The following is extracted from US Coast Guard and Revenue Cutters, 1790-1935 by Donald L. Canney (1995). Note that he is the source for many of the older cutter records at the USCG History site, and is generally considered to be authoritative with thoroughly researched information. Both cutters were built by A. & N. Brown in New York. In terms of history, the Dallas served longer with numerous captures over the years (including at least 2 large slavers). The Surprise, however, lived a very short life. She was found to be too deep for service in Charleston, SC and was sent to Norfolk VA where she was sold in 1817.

As has been said already - nice job on them thar ports. While on the other side of the continent from Mark, getting a chilly rain all day here today as well, so much progress in the shipyard. Enjoy the summer weather tomorrow!

"tis indeed a challenge. There have been some discussions in the past which point out that the "perfect" alignment was likely less common than portrayed - it is a lot easier to paint them in a row than as they may have actually been on the ship. The Captain, Bosssun and sailing master would make adjustments to improve the trim, adjust the rake, or accommodate damage from storms, so the deadeyes would likely form a near- straight line as opposed to an actual straight line. I have seen some folks do an amazing job reeving the deadeyes off the hull - would need to do some real digging to show you the examples, but they are there. I guess one part of the equation is historical accuracy - for accurate termination of the lanyards, they are tucked through and around the shroud. If you can terminate the lanyard with, perhaps, a dollop of glue at the top of the deadeye, then you can install the shroud, get the right tension and the tie off the lanyard around the shroud.

Can be done, but the challenge is the shroud is where the lanyard gets tied. Getting the tension right by adjusting the shroud would be the big challenge, but not insurmountable.