Roger Pellett

First of all, my heartfelt thanks to all who have dropped by and left comments.  I find that your presence and well wishes are good motivators to moving forward on this craft.
 
November. 2024 update:
I did cobble together the various R/C components - sometimes with longish temporary lengths of wiring - to "dry run" the set-up.  It was a pleasant surprise to activate the transmitter, turn on the receiver, switch on the electronic speed control (hereinafter referred to as the ESC) and discover that the rudder worked and the prop spun in both directions.  However, as it turned out, (because of my poor soldering technique), the attached sound module did not make any noise. With the kind troubleshooting assistance of Nick Scalone at Harbor Models, the problems were discovered.  Once I corrected the bad connections, the engine "rumbled " to life, the horn worked and the bell rang! With that trial completed, it was time to go back to building up the model.
 
My focus was to first develop the joinery and furniture of the aft cabin area.  Like most stern areas, the hull curvature and converging structures of the aft portion of the hull required a bit of pattern making to make the most of the space prior to shaping wood.

 
Card material was cut to fit a time (or three) before the 1/16" th. 3-layer ply could be cut out.

The major furniture in the cabin is the bunk but this model's bunk required  a notch-out to accommodate the rudder servo.

Side panels for the joinery were laid out on fitted pieces of card.

Various blocks of basswood were carved or scooped out or assembled to represent the tub, WC and vanity and then temporarily slipped into place. A piece of no-longer-used yoga mat became a mattress. Mahogany drawer faces and cabinet doors were fashioned and glued in place. A lovely piece of walnut was made into the desk top.

 
The process continued pretty well according to the plan.
 

The cabin sole was planked with 1/16" WRC strips and varnished. The various components had their respective mahogany/walnut joinery varnished. Once the varnish was dry, those pieces to also be painted were masked off and sprayed.


All of the bits were then assembled in place to give you a look at the (nearly) finished appearance in the aft cabin.
 


I will next probably move on to the commencement of the main cabin and pilothouse in order to begin work above the level of the main deck.
 
So, until again,
 
Craig
 
 

The LCS, Landing Craft Support, hull is an adaption of Higgins prewar Eureka workboat and is virtually identical to Higgins first landing craft, the LCP(L).  The LCP(L) did not have a ramp.  Troops climbed out over the gunwale.
 
Roger

My favorite “Higgins Boat” is the LCP(L) and it’s sister the LCPR.  The Franklin D. Roosevelt Library has a set of Higgins Boat models and the LCP(L) makes a surprisingly attractive model.  The LCP(L) was Higgins’ original adaptation of his Louisiana Bayou  Eureka workboat into a landing craft.  These boats landed Marines at Guadalcanal and soldiers during the Torch landings.  The LCPR was a LCP(L) modified to add a narrow front ramp these were used by Navy UDT teams throughout WWII.  The LCVP utilized the LCP(L) after body hull lines but added a new fore end to provide a full width bow ramp.
 
An LCP(L) is on my ship modeling bucket list.  It would be a surprisingly difficult model as the scantlings are quite small.
 
There is a restored LST (LST 325 in Evansville, Indiana where many were built.  They have several LCVPs, all the later fiberglass construction.  They have a number of original LCVP drawings on their website.
 
Roger

Charles Robert’s book that Al posted above is great.  Also, there is a series of articles in several past issues of the Nautical Research Journal documenting the restoration of an LCVP.  These articles include original BuShips drawings used to restore the boat.  This includes a hull lines drawing.  The actual hull shape is more complex than it appears from most photos.  You can find ordering information for past articles by first using the Guild’s online index and then calling the Guild’s office.
 
Roger

British ship modeler Brian King has written a number of interesting books about building 1:100 & 1:200 Royal Navy steam warships.  One book focuses on what he calls Model Engineering, the topic at hand.  In typical model ship book fashion he includes chapters on useful hand and power tools.
 
He has a few short comments about a tool that he calls a ”Linisher.”  This is the same as the small bench mounted vertical belt sanders sold everywhere in the US.  These typically use a 1” (25mm) wide belt.  He claims that this is a metal working tool with no real woodworking applications.
 
I bought one of these many years ago at a hardware store that was closing.  Like Mr King I did not find it to be particularly useful until taking his advice I used it to grind a HSS lathe tool.  I personally found it to be much easier to use than a conventional bench grinder.  It produced a well shaped tool quickly.

In building these tools Preac would have used standard industrial bearings.  Pop out one of the bearings, take it to your nearest bearing distributor and I bet that they can match it.  Here in Minnesota we have branches of a company named Bearings, Inc but industrial supply houses like Grainger Supply also carry bearings.
 
Roger

Things have been moving ahead a little faster than I expected as most of the corrections on deck have now been made, so I've been able to concentrate more on the standing rigging.  I'm now back to the main mast and currently working on the royal rigging, so almost finished there. You can also see additional coils hanging over the side indicating that the lower halliard fittings are in and ready for the yards.
 
The fore spreaders are also now fitted. I always fit the spreaders after the rigging is done, as the very slightest alteration in angle of any of the upper backstays throws the spreader alignment off, so better to fit the spreader to the actual rigging than the other way around.
 
You will also see a clothes peg hanging on the main topmast stay near the deck. This is as a result of a self-inflicted disaster when I tried to trim a loose end down near the foremast base and slipped, slicing neatly through one leg of the stay! 🥵🥵🥵 I think it will be OK but will see tomorrow when I try to complete the repair.
 
John
 

I thought it was about time I updated my log for the 'Duchess'. Still working away on deck details and standing rigging. It seems to be taking an age to get anywhere with her, but there is a lot to do on  a model of a ship this big, plus I spend a lot of time talking to visitors (which is the whole point of the model being built in the museum galleries. Visitor interest has now reached the stage where one of the front desk staff came and asked me what my schedule is as visitors keep asking when the model will be worked on!
 
The photos below show some of the progress. The capping rail around the poop is now complete; I've replaced some of the gratings (which were wire mesh) with more appropriate looking ones; the donkey boiler house with feed tanks and supply pipes are now fitted and the foremast rigging has progressed to having the fore topmast rigging completed.
 
My plan is to continue rigging the foremast so that I can start experimenting with sail making - starting with the jibs, which should be a bit simpler than the square sails.
 
John
 

 

Dear Phil, this confirms others and my opinion, I guess. The look of the rivet heads in the exterior of the shell plating as you are describing was fairly standard and reflects very much the original appearance of riveted hulls dating even back to the mid of the 19th century. The exterior doublers above the waterline are typical for some warships of a certain period and can be easily reproduced in model scale, if wanted, but as you say, hands off of flush rivet heads.
I attach a close up photo (white) of the hull of the Danish yacht DANNEBROG, build in the 1930s and very nicely preserved to her original conditions. I don‘t believe such rivets would be visible in a scale of 1:48 or even smaller, but as mentioned before, very open to learn better.
(Note: As mentioned in my previous post, talking about standard exterior hull plating rivet heads only.)

And finally, the traditional photo with a match.  

Fifteen stars and fifteen stripes, looks right.

Old thread, but nice to see, since I specialize in designing and 3D printing (resin) of US Nukes. 
 
Attached are a couple of shots of my latest work for a museum project; (a Sturgeon-class boat as well): USS Parche as she appeared in the early 80's in 1/72 scale.
 
Since the latter version of the ship, (extensively modified again in the early 90's) has a 100' extension forward of the sail, I'll re-use the aft portion, (minus the DSRV Simulator atop the aft escape trunk) and re-model the forward half of the boat. 
 
After weathering the lower hull, the sail and DSRV sim will be bonded to the hull and made ready to be mounted on 90 keel blocks, bonded to a base painted to resemble a concrete drydock basin. 
 
I also included a render of the 3D model in the wild.
 
  

Greetings Fellow Modelers.  Thanks for the "thumbs up" and for stopping by.
 
 
 
Hey Keith - no I don't turn them on very often at all.  And actually, once I finish a model, I rarely even look it again except in passing.  The fun was in the building, and I don't need to see things I wish I'd done differently.  A few years ago, I started building small shadowbox scenes where lighting is important, and I've carried some of that over into fishing boats.  It's pretty quick and easy to do so - why not.  And I have noticed that casual model viewers seem to really get a kick out of it.
 
Whaleback -part 1
 
In the context of an Eastern-rig dragger, the whaleback is an elevated bow structure that provides a measure of protection for the crew when working the open deck in heavy weather.  The structure also adds storage space on the main deck for spare gear such as netting, chafing and roller gear, twine, cable, etc.  A whaleback was typically only built on larger draggers and sometimes mid-sized boats like the Pelican.  In the drawing below, the perimeter of the whaleback is high-lighted in blue. The aft wall sections (darker blue) are what I'll be modeling in this post along with the companionway doghouse outlined in green.
 

 

 
 
I began with the small walled in section that extends aft of the main storage space and butts up to the backside of the companionway doghouse.  There is no passage between these two structures.  Entry into this space is through the main storage area of the whaleback only.  It is a rather curious little space where the crew stored the deck chairs and chilled bottles of chardonnay – or not.  Joking aside, in subsequent years this spot held the fuel tank for the galley below, presumably kerosene.  I'm a bit surprised that this boat in the mid 1940s was still using coal for this purpose.
 
Anyway, I drew up the wall sections and glued pre-stained siding to the template and cut them free.
 
Like all things in boat model building, nothing is square, level or straight.  This structure leans toward the bow mirroring the sheer.
 

 

 
 
The main wall framing is drawn up with its lower edge conforming to the crown of the deck.  The top of the wall will be a landing spot for the roof and is more severely domed.
 

 
The wall is constructed and the previous assembly glued to it.
 

 
 
The partition needs planking.
 


 
 
And the walls need doors.  These doorways are short and potential head bangers, about 4’4” (132cm).
 

 

 
 
The doors (and everything else) were brush painted with Tamiya flat white acrylic with a touch of red and yellow to warm it just a bit.  The hinges came out of my junk box without packaging but are undoubtedly from Grandt Line.  They're painted with Testors “flat steel” enamel and rust colored pigment powder was daubed on while still wet.  The latch bracket is blackened .01” (.25mm) brass.
 

 

 
 
Painted and glued together.
 

 
 
Someone left the starboard door unlatched.
 

 
 
The companionway doghouse is drawn and assembled using up wood strip scraps.
 

 
 
The structure has two small portholes with 8” dia. openings made from slide fit brass tubing slices.
 

 
 
The outer tubing has a thicker sidewall and pretends to be a mounting flange.  The holes in the siding that accept the lights were drilled through first and expanded with a tapered file, then test fit.
 

 
 
The doorway threshold stands 12” (30.5cm) above deck to keep storm water from cascading down the companionway.  The structure has 12” wide vertical boards attached to the doorway corners at an angle of about 45 degrees.  Their purpose is unknown to me, but because it’s a two-piece center opening door, I suspect they act as stops and keep the hinges from being torn off in windy conditions.  Also, they are tapered at the bottom to reduce trip hazard.  Speaking of trip hazard, the wire rope cables leading to the forward gallows frames cross inches from these boards about ten inches above the deck (see drawing at top of post.)
 

 
 
The structure gets paint, the portholes are glued in, and a small piece of microscope cover slip glass is attached to the backside for glazing.  The glass is 0.13mm thick.  The brass portholes were only blackened long enough to take the shine off, and the outer ring was left a little proud to represent a surface mounted flange.
 

 
 
The door is constructed.  It is 26” (66cm) wide by 58” (147cm) tall.
 

 
 
Grab irons are made from .02” (.5mm) phosphor bronze wire treated with Jax Flemish Grey.  The pipe flange wall mounts are injection molded washer/nut sets from TichyTrain.  I filed most of the nut off and drilled them out.  Chrome enamel paint.
 

 
 
The chipped and missing paint on the siding is achieved by applying cellophane tape and then ripping it off like an old bandage.  I burnish the tape down with a fingernail in areas where I want more of the paint removed.  By staining all the wood prior to painting, this process reveals wood that looks aged. 
 

 
 
Soldered railings.  Again, phosphor bronze wire.  This stuff won’t sag as easily as brass will.
 

 

 

 
 
Placed on but not glued to the boat. 
 

 
 
After it is permanently attached, I’ll add base trim.
 

 
Next comes the roof (or would that be deck?) and a bunch of other stuff.
 
Thanks for looking.
 
Be safe and stay well.
 
Gary
 

MORTAR BARGE UPDATE (Bob Keeler)
 


   I redid the upper walls to more accurately reflect the scale seven-foot-tall scale (1/24). They 
are made from .040” plastic sheeting and are 1¼” tall (as opposed to a previous try, which was 
   1” high and found to be too short). The walls lean in at a ten-degree angle. The supports are 
   made of balsa “trailing-edge” planks, which are used in R/C airplane models, glued together. 
   Holes for doors and windows had to be recut to reflect placement on the 7’ scale. Doors and windows will be fashioned to scale. 
 

Interior of walls, floor supports and upper supports.

Interior view, with previously constructed (by Bill Kammermeyer) mortar, cannonballs, equipment/tools, and figures.
 
 

View through door
 

Another view through door
 
That's all for March/April of 2024. The next entry will be from July of 2024 and will look at further work on the Offier figures and pedestals for the gunboat. Coming soon!
 
Tim Jovick
   
 

Thank you to all for the comments and the likes.
 
 Made me laugh, Eric. 
 
 
 Lula's hull is planked.
 I've had a nice piece of 3mm plywood in my spares going on seven years. Being lazy I used it in lieu of making deck/guard beams, It all gets covered over so why not?
 
The transom could use a little more sanding. The hull planks are so smooth I don't know if they'll show when painted? 

 
 Creating the upward sweep was a bit challenging. I glued a two pieces of 0.10 on either side of the wheel opening, split the underside of the plywood forward of the 0.10 added pieces and clamped. The plywood opened but the top layer didn't break, a plan that actually worked first time.  Once fully clamped I dabbed CA into the split and when the CA dried the plywood was as strong as it was before being split. 

 
 
 
Lula's hull next to the pile driver for size comparison. 

 

 

 

 
 A little more fine tuning and I'll be ready to start planking the deck

 
 Thank you to everyone for following along.
 
   Keith
 

I've planned to make a model of the Lomellina for over 6 years now, since I found out about her. But she was discovered in (I think) 1979 and the excavation was done over the following decade.
 
Yes, there's just not enough of the ship left to know the bow shape - at the bow only the keel survives. So it has to be done by educated guesswork - extrapolated from what does survive. And extrapolation of this magnitude is risky - it's impossible to know for sure whether or not you've selected the correct curve. Though I don't have access to the contemporary text the author quotes, I have spent a lot of time looking at many many contemporary representations of carracks, and I believe I have a pretty good idea of what the bow shape should be. 
 
You make a good point regarding the guns and the wheels, but I believe Max Guérout is correct. Apart from anything else, why would they make wheels for field guns but leave them incomplete, without iron tyres? If they were needed in a hurry they would have had to wait till the tyres were made and fitted, which seems unlikely to me.
 
Regarding spaces for gunports, the bottom of the gunport that was discovered was level with the top of a stringer which they have marked as S1, and though the ship had come to rest at an angle of 45 degrees, with the mud above it preserving much of the starboard side, unfortunately there was not a lot surviving above S1. On examining the drawings I thought I'd found another gunport in the region of the master frame, as the frames and planking seemed to be cut off in a straight line there, which argued for an opening - though it was one frame (about 500mm) narrower than the gunport that was found. However, Max Guérout sent me a photo of the relevant part of the ship and unfortunately I had to come to the conclusion that I'd been wrong. And most of the rest of the surviving hull is preserved far enough above S1 that there seems to be hardly anywhere for any other gunports to be.
 
I believe the statement 'very well armed' has to be taken in context. Up till the very end of the 15th century, guns were light, as they had to be mounted on the gunwales. So at this time, a dozen guns would have made the ship 'very well armed'. Her predecessor (also called Lomellina) sank in 1503 and I'm of the opinion that the owners would have had a replacement built as soon as possible, so I should think she was probably built in 1503 or maybe 1504. And gunports were so new at this time that I'm quite prepared to believe that they were very wary of them, and that it's very likely that they only had one per side (as shown in the illustration above of the fleet outside Genoa) and that the other guns were located on the upper deck, pointing over the gunwales.
 
Which necessitated larger wheels to lift them high enough to do so. This seems to have been the case with the Mary Rose - each gun had its wheels individually tailored to raise the muzzle high enough for use. 
 
That information about the mast protruding from the water 2 canes is useful to me. The water is 18 metres deep, so the height of the masthead (assuming the mast remained complete) above the seabed there would be 21 metres. But she came to rest at 45 degrees, so we would have to multiply the mast height above the seabed by 1.414 (the tangent of 45 degrees) and then allow for the depth of the hull as well. Taking into account all the uncertainties built into this assumption, this might still give a fairly good estimate of the height of the mainmast. I've worked it out by proportion from contemporary pictures, and it will be interesting to see whether the two figures agree.
 
Thanks for the good wishes, and the offer of translation help. Interestingly, I recently joined a French conversation group here in Ballarat, and for the first time about a week ago I was able to read a full paper in the original French (with occasional journeys to Google Translate for words I didn't know). But if I find myself at a loss, I'll keep you in mind.
 
And now, enfin, I've started making sawdust. Here's the stempost (not recovered by the archaeologists), and the piece of wood from which the keel and stempost will be made.

As  all the segments of the keel except one were found  (and they know the length of the gap where that segment used to be), I think I will be making my keel out of four pieces copying the real ones. The sternpost wasn't found either, but they have a good idea of its size and angle.
 
Best wishes,
 
Steven  
 
 

Well, I'm very chuffed. In response to a request from me for a bit more information and a clear photo of an 'arquebus' (precursor of the musket) found on the Lomellina, Max Guérout sent me a thoroughly researched and incredibly comprehensive paper he'd written, covering not only the guns found on the wreck, but every type of gun in common use at the time, with photos, technical drawings, construction analyses, you name it.  108 pages long. But all in French. Fortunately, Google Translate has come a long way since I first started using it, and despite the occasional howler of a translation, that plus my own schoolboy french was very useful in getting the full sense of the paper. Wonderful.
 
One thing I found fascinating was the fact that as gunports had only just come into use -before this all guns were supported on the gunwales (which is why they have that name)  - they were so new that the problems hadn't yet been worked out (keeping water out was an issue, muzzles only barely stuck out past the front of the carriage - they were actually within the hull itself when the gun went off - so there was a considerable danger of fire, there were structural issues with putting holes in the side of the ship, as well as supporting the weight of ever bigger and heavier guns). So they weren't very trusting of this new development and initially ships were pierced with very few gunports - possibly only one or two per side, as in the pictures below, with other guns (even big ones) being still on the upper deck and fired over the gunwale.
   
     The French ship Loyse (Louise) - c. 1486-1508                               From the manuscript of Rochechouart c. 1502.
 
Among the finds on the Lomellina were a number of large wheels, much larger than those of the usual carriage found on shipboard guns of this time (though note the Mary Rose had them too) - about the size you'd expect for field guns. Except that some of these didn't have iron tyres, or even the rusted remnants of them (which are usually very obvious because they make a huge swollen mass). No good for wheels that had to stand up to travelling along the dreadful roads of the time (or, worse still, off-road). Which indicates they were intended to be used, not on land, but on board ship, as shown in the picture.
 
There's a good chance that despite a dozen gun barrels having been found in the wreck, the gunport and portlid found on the Lomellina were the only ones on that side of the ship, and the other guns were on the upper deck.
 
Loving this.
 
Steven  
 

Hi again to all - 
 
Thanks for the likes and interest.
 
My next segment was going to be the development of my scaled and measured working drawings.  For the illustrations I need to include the copyright materials, for which I have only partial permissions.  So instead, this will be part 3, a discussion of Egyptian construction methods, moved up to part 2.  The sequence numbers for the images are therefore out of order, but they are all from open source websites.
 
Before cutting wood, I wanted to look into historic Egyptian shipbuilding.  I made a commitment on this model to build it by relying on the original Egyptian techniques, at least as closely as possible for only one workman building a miniature.  So here is a quick dip into the original techniques might have been in use at the time that the Khufu ship was built. 
 
I was fortunate in this regard with information from a remarkably preserved tomb which has a series of wall carvings that show boats under construction.  In the cemetery at Saqqara is the tomb, or mastaba, of Ti (or Ty).  He was a long serving senior official and royal architect during the Fifth Dynasty, only 100 years or so after the Fourth Dynasty, the time of Pharaoh Khufu.  The tomb was discovered in the late 1800s by French archaeologist August Mariette and has some of the best bas-relief carvings of daily life from Egypt’s Old Kingdom.  In one of the outer chambers is a unique carved wall showing five boats under construction and two side panels with men working on planks for the boats. (Figure 21). 
 
It is a shame that I could not find a color image of the wall, just some smaller sections, since the carvings and even the polychrome pigments have survived for all this time. (Figure 22 – ti wall detail).  
 
Ti is known to have been in charge of the decoration of the tombs of several Pharaohs, so he must have had a long career where he was perfectly placed to assign the best craftsmen to work on his own tomb.  In this close-up you can see that even individual fingers were delicately carved.  You can certainly see what the workmen are doing and the strange tools that they are using.  (Figure 23 – using adzes)
 
Here are a selection of the actual tools.  At the top is a large axe, with two different saws below it, while at the bottom left are several small awls and chisels.  In the middle is a bent wood bow for a drill.  The largest tool, the one the workmen are using, is an adze, like a plane blade mounted on a bent handle. (Figure 24 – tools).
 
In Figure 23, above, three workmen are using adzes to trim wood and to smooth the outside planks of the hull, a technique called dubbing that is still used today.  The quality of the carving is so high that you can see the subtle differences in the shapes of the adze handles to do the two different tasks.  In the hieroglyphics there are representations of several tools.  Above the upper worker is a short handled axe, a hatchet.  To the right of the feather is an awl or chisel.  Maybe the rest of the symbols are talking about that tool, but I have no idea.
 
In the next scene a man is doing some sawing with a weighted stick and rope that is holding the kerf in the workpiece open (or closed, it is not clear).  Two others are sitting on an upended plank and chiseling mortices into its edge.  Above them seem to be carved images of the two types of saws and another chisel. (Figure 25).
 
In the third detail image the first man is, I believe, using a two-handed sledgehammer.  A similar type of hammer is still used to drive in fence posts.  The second man, who seems to be left-handed, is holding an awl or a marking tool, it is impossible to tell.  In the carvings the only thing that might be a tool is the twisted rope at the top left.  But what the paired faces of the monkey and Alfred E. Newman are supposed to be saying, I truly have no idea. (Figure 26).
 
What does all this mean for my project?  That the ancient Egyptians built their boats with the same techniques that we would use if all the electricity were turned off.  They were not stupid or unsophisticated, and didn’t need the help of aliens to build boats or pyramids.  I feel confident that my use of similar techniques, but with a few power tools, will not compromise the historic accuracy that I am working to achieve.
 
More soon when I can post drawings.
 
Be well
 
Dan

Some thoughts on the construction of the Khufu solar barge derived by building an accurate scale cross section model.
By Dan Pariser
 
   First, thanks to all who have followed me from my prior build log of the SS Mayaguez.  Thanks as well for all the likes and comments and suggestions that this community provided on that project.
   As will be seen, this project is based on information, plans and drawings which have much less precision and certainty than when I was building that modern steel-hulled ship.  I invite and request that all of the readers of this log give me their comments and suggestions to improve the model and keep me from going too far astray.
 
Part 1 - background and research
 
     Ancient civilizations have always fascinated me, especially Pharaonic Egypt, whose culture and religion were so focused on death and the afterlife.  Other early peoples were certainly focused on death, mostly the death of their enemies in war, but this one was all about their own deaths.  Strange.
   
     Somehow though, this philosophy led to some the greatest architectural, engineering and artistic works of the dawn of history.  This was true in shipbuilding as well.  Since the land is dominated by the long, straight river Nile, boats were incredibly important to move people and goods up and down its narrow fertile valley.  Boats of all types are depicted on the walls of tombs and were taken into the afterlife as models which would magically become real for the use of the deceased when the right spells and chants were said. 
 
   One of the oldest of these, and the best preserved, is the solar barge or funerary boat of the Pharaoh Khufu, also known as Cheops, the builder of the Great Pyramid at Giza.  (Figure 1) He wanted to take it with him into the afterlife, not as a model, but the actual boat.  To do this he had it fully built and then disassembled and buried in a sealed underground limestone crypt (Figure 2) next to his pyramid where it remained from about 2,560 BCE till being discovered in 1954, a span of over 4,500 years.  Yet because the seals had not been broken the wood was still in remarkably good condition. (Figure 3). 

   A team led by Egyptian archaeologist Dr. Hag Ahmed Youssef Moustafa spent 13 years putting back together its more than 2000 pieces.  The fully assembled boat was displayed in its own modern purpose built museum next to the Great Pyramid (Figure 4).  It has recently been moved to new quarters with better air conditioning in the Grand Egyptian Museum in Cairo.
 
   The saga of the discovery and reconstruction has been documented by American historic marine construction expert Paul Lipke (Lipke) based on over a hundred hours of translated interviews with Dr. Moustafa and hundreds of photographs and drawings of the boat and its parts made during the reconstruction. (The Royal Ship of Cheops, British Archaeological Reports, 1984).   His fascinating and comprehensive report is mandatory reading for anyone interested in this iconic craft.  He reproduces dozens of photographs of the reconstruction process and gives precise measurements for many of the boat’s details.  He also drew preliminary scale plans of the boat. (Figure 5).  
    Many additional photographs can be found in the book, “The Boat Beneath the Pyramid” by Nancy Jenkins, another must-read source, while other drawings and plans were developed by famed marine archeologist Bjorn Landstrom in “Ships of the Pharaohs”.  The final source that was central to this article is “The Construction of the Khufu I Vessel (c.2566 BC): a Re-Evaluation” by Samuel Mark (Mark) of Texas A&M University, published in the International Journal of Nautical Archaeology (2009).
 
     From Lipke’s initial plans and measurements various drawings have been created of the boat which give a better idea of its particulars. (Figure 6).  As you can see, the boat itself has a striking shape.  It is quite long at 43.6m (142 feet), but with a breadth of only 5.9m (19 feet) at its widest point.  Its shallow draft is only 1.78m (6 feet) from keel to sheer, with a freeboard from waterline to sheer of less than a meter.   The boat tapers symmetrically to points at both ends which curve up high above the waterline with carved ends that reflect the shape of papyrus reed boats from the dawn of Egyptian history.  On deck is a lightly built deckhouse which may have housed the Pharaoh’s coffin and a small open altar near the bow.
 
     Its construction is unusual to us as well.  Hull planks, 12cm (5 inch) thick, are fitted to their neighbors with mortice and tenon joints.  The planks are then laced to each other with ropes that snake through “V” shaped tunnels chiseled into the interior faces of the planks.  Rounded battens cover the plank seams and are held in place with the same lashings. (Figure 7).   Multiple beams span the hull from sheer to sheer, locked in place and strengthened by two notched side stringers above the beams and a central spine below.  The central spine is supported on short stanchions which rest on frames which spread the deck loads to the bottom planks.  These too are held in place with rope lashings. (Figure 8).   Taken together, the wooden pieces and lashings form a truss structure which would have been quite strong and rigid.
 
     However, these cross sectional and perspective drawings are somewhat simplified and stylized.  There are also two cross section models that I know of, but they are also similarly simplified, although the one built for Texas A&M University is quite accurate in its general configuration. (Figure 9).  This is perhaps because no one has been able to accurately measure and draw plans based on the actual ship.  Even the plans drawn by Lipke were derived from a 1:20 scale model built by Dr. Moustafa to aid his reconstruction work. 
 
    Compared to photographs of the boat’s interior, the profiles in the drawings and the model are too high and steep, the planks are too regular, the battens covering the plank seams are too narrow, rounded and straight, the lashings are too regular, and the tunnels that the lashings go through are not accurately represented. (Figure 10).  Because of this, certain conclusions about construction methods and sequences have been made which are, in my opinion, somewhat inaccurate.

     I decided to attempt the construction of a precise scale cross section of a specific location in the boat to see if I could replicate a workable method and sequence for how it might have been built.  I also resolved to build it as was done by the Egyptians, with mortice and tenon joints, rope lashings, and, most of all, no other fasteners or glue. To do this, instead of relying on the prior drawings I went back to the original boat. 
  
     Although I have no access to the boat itself, there are photographs of the exterior planking and interior structures which are reproduced in the several sources mentioned before, as well as on the internet.  I am also indebted to Mr. Lipke who kindly provided me with others from his personal collection.  Then there are the drawings created by Dr. Moustafa from the boat pieces, as reproduced by Lipke and Mark.  Though many are noted as not being to scale, they are the closest to accurate drawings as can be found.  Wherever there was a conflict between the photos and the drawings, I went with the photos.  Finally, there are drawings on contemporary tomb walls showing boats under construction, as well as academic studies of contemporary boats which also informed my investigation, and which will be referenced later.  These were used a supplements to the first two.
 
     From these I selected one photograph which contained many of the construction details that I wanted to recreate.  Here is that shot, an interior view of the hull taken during reconstruction. I call it my Primary Photograph. (Figure 11). Contrasted with the simplified drawings and models, it shows planks of various widths and shapes, lashing holes in irregular patterns, and flat battens which are pieced together from short sections with angled ends.  Note the large triangular batten piece to the left which must cover seams between several planks. 
   
   Based on the photo I decided to build out the model from the line of lacing in the foreground to just beyond the dark frame, which would then include the large square batten pieces tied with crossed ropes that are sitting just in front of the frame. This would give the model sufficient visual interest for the viewer yet still allow my close adherence to traditional building methods.  
 
     Next time, the development of the working drawings.
 
     Be well
 
     Dan
 
    

Andy, Rick, Phil.  Thank you all for continuing to follow my lamentable progress. I haven't had time to post much or to look at how everyone is getting on with their builds. I must try harder to catch up.
The culprit (photo below) breezed into the workshop about a month ago and drew the dolls house she wanted for Christmas. So the  boat was parked and the house build took over.

I am putting varnish on the hull between long periods of house construction.




Wire wool toned down the sheen after the first coat. I still have a few blemishes to fix.

On to the second coat.
I am keeping a log of the number of coats. I am aiming for one a day.
 

I haven't had time to read your last two posts yet, but just a quick comment on points 2 and 3 on building method:
 
Double-planking, I think, was invented by kit-manufacturers to deal with the fairing difficulty of too widely spaced bulkheads and to provide a good surface for glueing the 'good' planking. However, if the bulkheads are not faired properly, this will transpose into the whole hull and nothing is gained.
 
A better method, in my opinion, is to fill the spaces between the bulkheads with scrap wood. This wood should be a tad softer than the bulkheads, but certainly not harder. Cut the pieces to a rough shape, not too far off the final hull shape to reduce fairing work and glue them into place. The edges of the bulkheads need to blackened or blued with a marker-pen first. Once the glue has set, you fair down to the bulkheads until only a fine dark line remains visible.
 
This process result in a well-faired and sturdy backbone for the planking. If you made any mistakes in fairing they can easily filled up with filler or pieces of wood and sanded down to the correct shape.
 
A lot of people in Germany at least use this method and I have used it with bulkheads made from brass for an iron ship.
 
Later this afternoon I will have hopefully time to read throught he posts ...

After fiddling with it a bit, removing wood at some places and adding at others, the run of the sheer planks fairs nicely.
 

 
I have seen several otherwise nice models that had very noticeable  "warped" deck edges or bulwarks when viewed end on, and I really wanted to avoid that here. I think it is worth the extra effort.
 
Two down and fifty more to go!

I built this a few years back the chains have broken from moving and the sails and rigging I have in storage until I can finish the wall, I plan to place it on  

I think @JacquesCousteau framed very well our sentiments in that respect.
 
I have something like 45 years of scratch-building under my belt and a pretty well kitted out (mechanical) workshop, but I am slow builder. While I think a project, such as yours would be a great ambitions, considering that I spent already 18 years on a modest 1870s gun-boat and that I am approaching fast 70 years of age, I made a life-decision and that is to go for small ships that I can complete within a reasonable time-frame. I decided to put a lot of details in something smallish, rather than to build something big, where I would be confounded just by the number of repetitive details that I would have to make. OK, this is my personal philosophy as model builder.
 
Before tackling a project as you envisaged, it would be also good think about what kind of workshop space you have, what your workshop kit looks like and what investments may be needed to bring it up to a suitable level. The next tough question is also that of the skill and true patience level. Personally, I don't like the concept of 'beginner's'  models. That's something invented by the kit industry. I you are an accomplished artisan or have built other types of models from scratch, there is no reaons why you shouldn't tackle even an ambitious ship successfully. Of course, if you have to learn the necessary woodworking and metalworking skills first, the situation may be different. One can learn everything, provided one has the necessary patience. I personally think, that people do not fail because they have to left thumbs, but because they do not have the patience to use the rest of their hands.
 
I think you are trying to pack to many ambitions into one model. Yes, everyone of us wants to build the life-time model, but there may be so many practical problems that this easily can end up in a life-time frustration. Break down your ambition into several smaller ones. Build a smaller-scale model of one of those mid-19th century wooden anachronisms, build an individual gun station with all the details, even remotely controlled functions, etc. and you will have a reasonable chance to be proud of it ...
 

Very nice!  Deserves careful study in my favorite chair after dinner this evening.
 
Roger