Sizzolo

Coppering has started. White border is flexible tape to help me align the rows. Top row of brass is actually the waterline. Top edge will eventually be covered with a boxwood batton. RN rules of the day states the copper should be 16” above the waterline but according to the plans this could end up going over the wales - so I’m going up to the wales and stopping there. Next step is more complicated - the merging and patterns of the plating at bow and stern. Im quite happy with the nail pattern so far though. The plan seems to be working! (edit - upon further review I will likely align the plate pattern roughly with the planking rather than overcomplicate with gore-line alignments etc (likely a later period method). If working from waterline-down this makes sense for the period (1794). On consideration of the sources in my separate thread on this forum I think the protocols/methods advanced rapidly during this period so I’m selecting a method of layering most likely for 1794 - ie starting at waterline and generally aligning with the planking. For info, creating the nail pattern has gone through a few iterations so I’m sure if you follow my path you’ll figure out a preferred method, after (like me) wasting a few meters of copper tape and a few days. It’s part of the process!)

It’s extremely thin - like the foil you get around chocolate bars, probably thinner. I bought a few reels quite some time ago so don’t have the details handy. It’s quite delicate until it’s stuck down - then surprisingly robust. (forgot to mention, the pic of the one plate & nail pattern above is the copper still attached to its card backing).

I’ve finished the rig: quite happy with the results of each plate. All nail holes are in the right place and I can reproduce each plate quite quickly.

Great example of well-researched information supporting the logic behind the design of the resultant beautiful model.

I just tried a scale reproduction using a needle. Looks a bit like woodworm though. I like the ebony example.

Hi Allan - that reminded me of something I read earlier so I looked up the quote: Lavery's 'arming and fitting of English ships of war 1600-1815' p64 "The false keel.. was vulnerable to damage in any grounding...After 1780 it was to be filled with small nails, both copper and iron.. The main hull was protected between by copper between the main keel and the false keel, so that in a sense the latter could be sacrificed"

Absolutely fantastic - thank you Bob for the comprehensive study and the link. It really appears over the decades after the introduction of plates, the methods and patterns are quite variable. What you posted also helps me understand the YouTube clips which appear to suggest in places the USS constitution has both upper row over lower and vice versa. The other examples support the evolution of the methods over the years with those great pictures from wefalck. Putting all this together and the period of my build (1794) I think I'll go with the 'starting from the waterline' method, especially as Morgan's quote from Bugler's Victory book (that I can't afford) really supports this. Thanks everyone!

found the quote: "...in laying the strakes the work must run from the keel upwards and from the stern forwards. I am told, however, on very good authority, that while this general principle held good for merchant ships, it did not apply in the Navy. On naval ships the upper edge of a lower strake overlapped the lower edge of the strake above it" ... but Longridge doesn't say who the good authority was unfortunately...

The following appears to be recent new plates attached to Ol'Ironsides and it looks like they applied the plates from bottom to top, then applied the rows of nails along lower edge. It looks like they place a few rows, then the next row (bottom) would be slid under the one above before nailing. Looking at other videos of USS Constitution it may be the case the layers switch as some close ups hint lower over upper instead of upper over lower. The references above do seem quite firm though so, I'll do my usual and try to find the original admiralty order or shipyard doc in the references in the books mentioned. There's likely something somewhere!

All extremely helpful references - thank you so much. I'd hate to be half way through and find a very convincing reference which contradicts how I started! For DaveBaxt - I'm not sure if its a relatively recent development but a different approach is using copper 'plumbers tape' which is the method I'm following for this one. I've recreated the rivet pattern using my home made tool, and cutting the strip into pieces before applying. James H provided an absolutely stunning demonstration of this technique in his build of Chris Watton's HMS Indefatigable which you can see on page 12 of the build log: You'll also see the little tool I made to recreate the rivet pattern on page 13.

I’d suggest the opposite may be true. If exposed, the lower edge could be lifted upon contact. If the seam is on the upper edge it can’t be lifted through contact from below. Therefore, one should start from the top row and plate from top-down. I spotted a nice period painting that showed a ship being coppered and clearly shows the shipyard started from the waterline - I’ll have to dig it out. Also, I might need to make another visit to the UK national archives to get to the truth of the matter. Hopefully though someone will post a definitive reference that clarifies things for RN frigates of the period. Unfortunately Boudroit’s French ‘74 books don’t cover copper plating at all (not that I’ve found - pls correct if there is mention) which is a great shame. I’ve a feeling ‘authentic and accurate coppering’ for the scale model maker may be a relatively recent development in our art.

Can you supply your sources for this assessment?

On many models and YouTube clips I note the builder starts from the sternpost/keel and hence as the plates build up the upper rows overlap those below. However, I note that in the following sources, it appears the rows may have overlapped lower over upper, requiring the plating to start from the waterline: https://www.academia.edu/358814/The_Introduction_and_Use_of_Copper_Sheathing_A_History "..This system however only applied to British merchant vessels, the Royal Navy used a different method where the horizontal joints faced upwards." Lavery's Book 'Arming and fitting of English Ships of War' "On the first ships to be coppered, one sheet seems to have been placed directly above the corresponding one on the strake below; by 1779 this had been changed, and the strakes were staggered, as in brickwork" So, before I start placing thousands of plates on HMS Diana, is the general view that, it is accurate for a 1774 ship to be coppered, starting from the waterline, rather than the keel? I note on a few YouTube clips of the USS constitution (same year, different continent but likely similar/same tech) that this does indeed appear to be the case (lower over upper) but it's not easy to tell.

For reference, this is how I’ve approached the nailing pattern:

Larboard side second planking complete and moving on to copper. The nailing pattern was a lot more finickity than I thought it’d be. As the copper is on a roll it doesn’t like going flat through my home made machine and ends up losing its backing strip. Before you know it you just have a scrunched up ball of sticky copper laying in the corner. I think a 3d-printed jig would be the way to go, replicating the old style tape machines- spooling from one roll on to another. Anyway, as you can see, I started in the traditional way at the stern post with 4 rough test pieces (couldn’t resist!). However, I’ve seen a couple of sources state that the Royal Navy overlapped their plates, lower rows going over upper, instead of upper going over lower. This means one should start at the waterline stern, not the false keel/stern post. Has anyone else noticed this or seen other sources? Also I note the false keel was likely filled with closely massed iron nails instead of coppered. I’m still thinking of a way to model that.

Yup it's 1783 (ADM 106/2509) I'm assuming though that double banked means two sailors per row and not some kind of strange financial insurance in case it gets damaged (since this post I have learned ”double banked” means the sailor is using a long oar sweep and sits further away from the port/axel/pivot, not adjacent, thus generating more leverage. If boats are ‘Not’ double banked it means two sailors per bench with the sailors having less leverage at their port.).

Just a brief update today wrt the ships’ launch (armed). I went to the (uk) national archives today and found the original navy standing order for launches to be double banked (telling me I need to knock up a load more oars!). Not sure if I mentioned previously but I’m also going to replace the temporary masts and sail on the launch with silkspan, as per previous recommendation. I did purchase a small amount of 1940’s drafting cloth for a test but, I think that’s still out of scale for 1/64 (but may be good for 1/48 perhaps). It might be useful if I post an example of all three in a separate thread to help future planners.

All starboard planking between waterline and main wale now complete. Under the waterline I’ll be using walnut as it will all be covered with copper plates. The missing trenails above the waterline will be added when I make a new batch of nails (a v tedious process involving syringes and the pile drill). For the keen eyes - yes, a couple of minor nit picky errors on the stern plank arrangement. I hope to learn from this and not repeat in the next build! A lot of the fun of these builds is the craft learning and up-skilling over the years.

Yes I meant wiki commons but having a Quick Look there it doesn’t appear to contain a hi-res version of the outboard plan.

Hiya! Merry Christmas. Yes, according to the external planking plan (rare which is why I’m trying to follow it to some extent) the few rows under the four main wale rows replicate the lengths and patterns of the wales. It’s easy to see in the full size print I have in my wall but you can probably see it in the hi def version which is available on open source - or this low Rez pic from me. You’ll see in the pic a gap between the planking patterns - this is where the dimension shifts between upper and lower. The main wale is repeated but you can see the under-wake planks replicates the pattern.

Quick update to let you all know the build is still progressing! Unfortunately no pics yet as I want the next pics to be impressive! I’ve been planking under the wales to the waterline in boxwood and it’s looking much neater. I find once you get into your battle rhythm with a build things start getting good. I’ve increased the drill size for the trenails by one measure and there’s a good improvement in progress with no noticeable reduction of quality (I.e I’m not sitting there trying for 5min with every single trenail to squeeze an 0.6mm nail into a 0.65mm hole only to have it plink out of my tweezers across the room never to be seen again. It’s easier with an 0.7mm hole. Each plank has over 20 holes so you can imagine why progress is slow). It’s worth noting here - the HMS Diana models at the National Maritime museum, crafted at the time of the original ship likely for the first captain and admiralty… no bloody trenails. I was considering ripping out the upper wales that have the large visible nails but I think I’ll leave as-is. Port will be cleaner. I spent today cutting the planks for the counter out of ebony. They’re looking pretty good so far (they will likely fit). I cut them as pre-shaped pieces rather than risking bending them in two dimensions again (ebony fights this). I’m getting better at realising where things could mess up, slowing down and re-assessing my approach before cutting wood. Other noteworthy progress is that I’ve been studying both the captains log and the Boudriot 74 gun ship book 4 to get a better idea of what sails would be aloft. I need those sky sails up, and interestingly studdingsails could occasionally be set alternated, port on main mast, stbd on fore for example, not a symmetrical ‘all stunsls’ as one might imagine! Fore-topsl had its wind stolen too so that will be interesting to model! Also, don’t get me started on where the stay sail were set! I spent a good few hrs looking into that. Finally, I’ve decided it’s probably best to do all black hull planks on the upper in ebony too or it’ll look weird with altering textures and finishes. I’ll avoid this in the next model! (HMS Sophie). Plus - there won’t be any blue or red hull paint. I can’t find any evidence of it in 1806 but there’s plenty of pictorial evidence of black/white/yellow stripes. The overall objective of this piece is for the sails to draw the eye so the lack of colour shouldn’t matter. Hopefully the eye then closes in and notices the thousands of bloody trenails! I’m planning on gold leaf for the rear decoration though so that should look quite fancy.

Starboard wales now complete (no pic - the pic above gives enough of an idea). I think in future I'll use boxwood as it's much nicer to work with. Ebony is a real pain, not very forgiving and the glue stinks! Also, I'm going to end up with a difference of colour between the bulwarks and the wales but I can live with that. I'm not looking forward to having to do the whole thing again on Portside. It was worth the time though - I just would rather not have to spend weeks on them and break umpteen number of teeny drills. They're also not extremely secure with cyanoacrylate (CA) glue either so if the hull accidentally hits the floor when I'm working on some fiddly parts I'm expecting a few of them to fall off. Switching to boxwood will make me much happier! To add some variety to my workflow I think I'll finish the whole of the starboard lower hull planking, including the coppering (which I'm really looking forward to). At the end of that I might feel like doing ebony wales again on the port side!

“Admiral, there be wales here!” Lt Cdr ‘Scotty’ Scott, 1986

Thanks Allan. I did some research and knocked up a quick test using some tissue-like material I already had (could be silkspan or modelspan - no idea!). Seems to take shape quite well from the same mould. I’ll do a load more testing before committing one way or the other but I expect that will be next year sometime. I also bought the book - cheers! 1/64 marine now painted to help indicate the scale better of bits n pieces.