tkay11
-
Posts
1,821 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by tkay11
-
Thanks @JacquesCousteau, for the clarification. I had read your original post too quickly and thought you were referring to the Ancre translation! I had been so shocked by the translation you found that clearly I couldn't believe it. The English version provided by ANCRE reads as follows: "The rectilinear sternpost is fitted by a tenon into a mortice cut on the upper rear face of the keel, a small knee acting as the angular link between them." I have both French and English versions of the monograph and to my mind the English translation is fine. (The capitals for sternpost, by the way, are in the English version). I could never use an online translator for such technical work about boats of the age of sail. I agree they are next to useless other than in modern narrative passages where even there they just provide a guide to literal meaning. If you can't read the French it's definitely worth forking out for the ANCRE translation for the background history which I find most interesting, although as you're a craftsman you would easily get by just by using the lovely plan set. Sorry again for my confusion. Tony- 28 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- ancre
- Bateau de Lanveoc
- (and 2 more)
-
Could you let me know where in the book you found these sentences? I have not found them in mine. Nor could I find "Let's move on to the description of the hull of the boat with various drawings". The photo you show at the start of the book cover is the ANCRE French original. The cover of the book I have has the words: "A Lanvéoc Boat, Small boats of the 17th - 18th Centuries, Surviving from the Middle Ages" followed by the author's names. Thanks Tony
- 28 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- ancre
- Bateau de Lanveoc
- (and 2 more)
-
I'd agree with Phil. Do whatever you think best serves the ship you are building. Your logic is good. Have a good holiday! Tony
-
I am sure that the more knowledgeable in the forum will have lots to say about this, but I thought I'd throw in Boudriot's instructions for the shrouds on the Jacinthe schooner of 1825. It does seem to say that all the shrouds were served as far as the catharpins. The measurements are in mm for the scale of the model at 1:48. "After fitting the softwood bolsters to the trestletrees the shrouds are got overhead in the following order for the foremast. The first eye has two short legs forming the fore winding-tackle pendants . The second has two legs , and forms the aftermost shrouds to port and tarboard. The third forms the remaining two shroud on the port ide. and the fourth the last two to starboard. In the case of the mainmast the order is as follows: first pair, pendants of the main winding-tackles; second pair, starboard hroud ; third pair, shrouds on the port side. The Ø of the deadeye is 270 (10") , Ø of the laniards 22. Winding tackle: fall Ø22 , blocks (upper blocks treble, lower blocks* double) 217 long (8"). The eyes of the shrouds and tackle-pendants are served with spun-yarn down as far as the catharpins. Ratlings Ø 8." Tony
-
Very neat, George. I like the use of the laminated paper. Tony
-
I bought a refurbished Proxxon MF70 from Axminster at a great price and used it with aProxxon x-y table I had bought for a Proxxon MB140 drill stand. Although people have said that the mill is inefficient at drilling, I have found it so good at drilling that I now use it exclusively for drilling as well as milling. It is just a little slower, but that doesn't bother me. It is very accurate with the correct adjustments. My tungsten carbide drill bits have never broken with it when I use it as a drill. I had to adjust the MB140 to mill accurately with a finer height adjustment (see here on MSW) but could only use it as a mill with great care, which led me to the MF70. It's a great tool, much loved by European and other ship modellers with wonderful results. It is also much modded to include CNC, change of motor etc. I won't go that far as it is entirely satisfactory for my use. In fact I am such a poor modeller compared to the masters who use it that I will never use it to its full capabilities. I will never blame my tools for shoddy workmanship! It is certainly much less costly than the bigger mills and has lasted me several years so far. Anyway, everyone has their own requirements and I just thought to slip in my experience. Enjoy and master whatever your choice! Tony
- 53 replies
-
- 6
-
-
- Drill Press
- Milling
- (and 1 more)
-
Wonderful and beautiful. Lovely to see such beauty and craftmanship combined. Thanks Tony
-
This is a really nice technique, Wefalck. Could easily be applied to wooden bases, but I'm intrigued by the machining of the acrylic. Thanks very much. Tony
-
Very nice and neat, George. I love those Seahorse blocks, and have switched to using them. Excellent for 1:96. Tony
-
I remember the discussions about the windlass for the Sherbourne. In its case the drawings did show a windlass. But that of course was much earlier (1763) than yours. Tony
-
Looking forward to the illustrations and the rest of the guide. Great idea. Thanks Tony
-
Have you used <ancre.edition@gmail.com>? Tony
-
First timer introduction and needing some advice
tkay11 replied to Stuka's topic in New member Introductions
I alo thoroughly recommend the Sherbourne. There are several detailed builds on this forum, going back to 2012, some of which go into the modifications that might be made based on the original National Maritime Museum. It was my first model and one which, after a lot of interactions with other members of the forum (especially @Gregor and @Stockholm tar), I made a lot of alterations and ended up making many of the parts for myself. After that I quickly went to building directly from plans - something which opened up a whole new area of satisfaction. This forum is a wonderful place to provide help every step of the way, and a great many modelers of cutters with detailed advice. Cutters are a very good introduction to form, function and rigging. Just ask whenever you are stuck. Tony -
@GregorThanks, Gregor. Yes indeed, that whole experience was very pleasurable and productive. I often think back to it. So I really look forward to your new build log. I also look forward to your rigging plans for the Topaze whenever you get to it. There are some problems with the rigging diagrams in Boudriot's book on the Jacinthe, notably the rigging of the gaff throat and peak halyards, so it will be nice to see what you make of them. I have just started the rigging for my own Jacinthe and have been working out my own solutions using Marquardt's book on Rigs and Rigging. Tony
- 120 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- la jacinthe
- schooner
- (and 2 more)
-
Thanks, @Kevin. All I get from the link is: Was habe ich da im Februar nur geschrieben: Knie als Rohlinge ausgesägt... Immerhin, sie sind angepasst und eingesetzt: IMG_0545.jpeg - Bild entfernt (keine Rechte) IMG_0543.jpeg - Bild entfernt (keine Rechte) IMG_0542.jpeg - Bild entfernt (keine Rechte) Und noch etwas Abendstimmung: IMG_0547.jpeg - Bild entfernt (keine Rechte) Bis bald, LG Gregor It may be that I have to join the forum, or something other that blocks the images for me in the UK. Tony
- 120 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- la jacinthe
- schooner
- (and 2 more)
-
Sorry, @Gregor, but the images on the German site seem to be no longer available. Tony
- 120 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- la jacinthe
- schooner
- (and 2 more)
-
That’s really excellent, George. Thanks very much for the diligent and accurate work! Very helpful indeed. I’m just getting my head round stropping the 2mm (1.8mm) blocks; the grooves are a bit shallow to prevent slipping but they are correct and consistent in size, and as it is quite possible to strop them I prefer them to my own rather rough attempts. All the same I appreciate and agree with the comments about being thoughtful concerning what is pleasing for each modeller. I’m not a fanatic about accuracy in size, but having consistency is pleasing. Tony
-
That's very useful, George. Thanks. Could you provide the Seahorse 3mm block sizes? Tony
-
Just to give measurements of the 2mm blocks, as near as I can with these fiddly things: Height - 1.83mm Width - 1.4mm Thick - 0.8mm Sheave holes - 0.4mm Ø If I take block height as 12 x rope diameter, this would be suitable for 1.83/12 = 0.153mm Ø rope, which would be the equivalent of 15.3mm Ø rope when at a scale of 1:100. Similarly, a rope size of 0.4mm Ø would need a block 4.8mm high. It would be interesting to know if others agree with these calculations, and, if they have the measurements of other blocks from Seahorse, to know what those are. Cheers Tony
-
I've just received my order for 2mm blocks from Seahorse Poland. I have to agree with George and others that they are excellent. I am amazed at the detail at this small scale and I can't imagine that improving the detail with a new machine would be worth it. I just had to wait a bit for our slow customs in the UK. Tony
-
I'll second the request for cleats. I find making them at 4x1 mm much trickier than 2mm blocks. But I admit it could be my finishing skills! Tony
-
Can you provide a link for the Seahorse 3D printed blocks? I tried an online search but just came up with models of seahorses! Tony
-
Romme's 1813 dictionary says: "Plusieurs poulies tiennent leur nom des usages auxquels elles sont destinées. Ainsi , les poulies de retour, quarter block, sont celles qui ne servent qu'a changer la direction d'un cordage tendu; et celles de conduite sont seulement placées sur la direction pour la conserver sans l'altérer". Roughly translated this means "Many blocks take their name from their intended use. Thus, quarter blocks are those which only serve to change the direction of a taut rope; and conduction blocks are only placed to preserve the rope's direction without altering it". I think a double block is just that - a block with two sheaves side by side. As always, this is only my understanding, subject to correction or addition. Tony
-
@Pitan: The issue of the windlass and the ports was discussed a lot for earlier builds of the Chris' Caldercraft Sherbourne. The windlass, for example, is accurate in Chris Watton's new revised version, as per the plans from the NMM. For example, see @Gregor's and @Stockholm tar's builds for discussions of historical details and NMM plans, and the following: Although I have not seen Chris' new version, I am pretty sure he will have made the kit as accurate as possible, although there will always be questions about 'accuracy'. Tony
Our Emblem ®
