tkay11

Thanks, Kester. I'd noted that you'd said that before in your build log (I think), but I don't understand why the position of the topmast fore or aft would change its need for a backstay since it seems firmly embedded at the cross-tree and the top either way. This is simply my lack of understanding so it would be great if you could explain more. Sorry for the ignorance but I'll benefit from an understanding! Tony

Good to see another Sherbourne builder -- and in the UK too! I'm much looking forward to the rest of the build. You've made a good start with nice planking. I too made the mistake of leaving the stern on and scratching it -- as have a few others. It was only after reading some of the logs that I learned how to avoid the problem. Welcome to the Sherbourne MSW club! Tony

Thanks, Kester. Nice comments. I agree that the Sherbourne's mast is not incorrect. It's just that I think that even at that time there was a choice (as evidenced by the model). As I've explained in the recent update on my Sherbourne build, I've gone with the Petersson version where the topmast is fore because his rigging is easier for me to do (I think), as well as because I think it gives better positioning for the peak and throat halliards. However, because I have never sailed, and am unclear about the mechanics, I simply don't know the advantages and disadvantages of the different possible positions of the topmast. As to the braces running aft, I'll wait to hear the other comments as again I simply don't know the ins and outs! Tony

Matt, I'm a real novice and have never sailed, so I can't answer your questions. But I'm sure the more learned here will soon be chipping in! Tony

Thanks for the suggestion, Chuck. I've uploaded all the photos to the gallery of contemporary models as requested. When doing this, I didn't understand the box beside each photo which said 'Follow Image'. Could someone explain? Tony

The only ones that don't have obvious fids/holes for the fid are the Trial and the 12-gun cutter. However it looks as though they, like the class, are set up to have sliding bowsprits. I'd also noticed the loop on the stay and agree it might be something I do! Tony

MAIN MAST One of the tricky questions to answer was whether to place the top mast fore or aft of the main mast. The Alert AOTS book by Goodwin suggests placing it aft, as do the instructions and plans in the Sherbourne kit. Kester has followed this on his model and backed it during our discussion on whether or not to have topmast shrouds (http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/8622-topmast-shrouds-for-sherbourne/) where he said the following: “I am not certain that Sherbourne was actually rigged with topmast backstays, which is probably why they are not shown on the plans (and seemingly something they have got right!). “The cutter shown in Petersson's 'Fore and Aft Craft' is based on the model in the Science Museum (or was), which I believe dates from around 1785. Earlier cutters, which of course included the Sherbourne, don't seem have had them due to the positioning of the topgallant mast, abaft the lower mast head. This was thought sufficient support, and thus they were not necessary. “Goodwin mentions this in his AOTS book on the Alert and goes on to say that topmast backstays were introduced later (around the 1780's), when the topgallant mast began to be stepped on the fore side of the lower mast head. The length of the upper mast was also lengthened which made them even more necessary. Even then, however, they don't seem to have given much support from aft. In the book, there is a drawing of the Alert on page 104, which shows a ticked line indicating a breast backstay, ie. on each side of the topgallant mast, but he stresses this may or may not have been fitted.” Initially I was going to go for this placement as well, but following my visit to Chatham (http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/10370-18th-and-early-19th-century-cutter-models/) and seeing the 1763 cutter rigged with the topmast forward of the mast head, I decided to go with the rigging plan provided by Petersson. One of the things in the back of my mind was the placing of the throat and peak halliards, which are given extra height by being attached to the back of the mast head. Another thought was that as I am a complete novice I felt more comfortable going for the detailed rigging plan provided by Petersson. At least there’s some kind of logic there! So, after studying the dimensions of masts in Steel and Biddlecombe, I made some square pear stock and planed it with a David plane to an octagonal. I left the mast octagonal from the heel up until just below where the stool for the boom is placed. This also allowed for neat placing of the cleats that go around the base of the mast. I also left the mast octagonal at the hounds at the mast head. Otherwise, as with the bowsprit, I dimensioned the mast using the lathe and sanded it down. MAST HOOPS After fiddling around with offcuts from the planning I had done on the masts I gave up and instead cut a 0.3mm slice of pear which I then cut into 1.7mm widths, soaked in water and wrapped around a dowel of the right diameter. This was then wrapped in cling film for an hour or so, then I had mast hoop material ready for cutting and gluing: You can see the finished hoops in the picture that follows under the heading ‘Cleats’. BOOM STOOL The AOTS book on the Alert shows a stool for the boom at the base of the mast. These stools were also on the cutters I had seen at Chatham. I made one by using the mast diameter to draw circles of the correct diameter using TurboCAD. These circles were then halved and pasted onto pear strips. The following picture shows an early experiment. The final result is shown in the picture of the base of the mast in the following section on ‘Cleats’. CLEATS Instead of using the large cleats provided by the kit, I made them following Dan Vad’s method which you can see at http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/230-hms-vulture-by-dan-vadas-1776-148-scale-16-gun-swan-class-sloop-from-tffm-plans/?p=305401 This method is really elegant in that it ensures an even width and length for the cleats. The only problem was positioning them at equal heights around the base of the mast. I drilled holes through their centres and passed 0.4mm copper wire through them, which I then glued with epoxy into holes drilled in the mast as follows: After cutting off the ends of the wires and painting the lower mast, it looks as follows: Please note that the base of the mast is not yet finished, hence the sanding marks at its base. MAST HEAD [EDIT: As a matter of interest to those interested in forward planning, I discovered too late that it would have been very handy not to have fitted the top mast and the top cap before adding the shrouds. If I had not fitted the top mast and cap, it would have been much easier not only to tie the shrouds very easily, but also to fit the two sets of pendants (mast tackle and back stay) in the correct manner.] Although Petersson shows a sheave at the top of the mast head, I followed Goodwin in placing an eyebolt at the top which holds a block. This in turn links to the sheave at the bottom of the topmast for the toprope. Please note that I should have placed the sheave lower at the bottom of the topmast in order to give more room for the mast to be lifted under the block. Just to pre-empt those who demand I replace it, I am not going to do it on this model as I want to get on with the rest of it! A fid was placed in the heel of the topmast and another sheave drilled at its top for the topsail yard halliard. Eyebolts were placed at the back of the mast head for the topping lift and the throat and peak halliards. TOPMAST I made a top on the lathe and glued it to the topmast after drilling holes for the sheave for the pendant halliard. I then made a pair of thimbles for the topsail lifts in the same way as I made the thimbles for the bowlines at the bowsprit. Now to start the business of making the remaining masts and more rigging. Tony

BELAYING PINS AT BOW Following my visit to Chatham, which I described at http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/10370-18th-and-early-19th-century-cutter-models/ I decided to change the belaying pin rack at the bow. Gregor, Dirk, Kester and myself have had different approaches to this, but two of the models I saw had their racks positioned fore-aft beside the bowsprit and linking to the pawl post. I therefore decided that this was a really neat solution, dismantled the belaying racks I had made and replaced them as follows: You’ll see pictures of the contemporary models with this arrangement at the posting I have given above. Next up: the main mast Tony

BOWSPRIT Well, as I suggested in my last log entry, I remade the bowsprit in pear as I was so disappointed with my attempts at staining the dowels from the kit. What a lovely wood is pear! This time I decided I’d look at how masts and spars were made, so I bought the low cost paperback facsimile edition from the Cambridge University Press of the first three volumes of Steel’s Elements and Practice of Rigging, Seamanship and Naval Tactics which I have discussed in another post at: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/9675-difference-between-editions-of-david-steels-books-on-rigging-etc/?p=291358 Using the measurements given by Steel, as well as by Biddlecombe in his 1848 book on the Art of Rigging, I started with square stock (instead of using dowel), used the lathe to cut it to the correct dimensions and completed it by sanding. FINISHED WITH BEESWAX AND TURPENTINE I then used a furniture cream made from beeswax and turpentine to polish it and give it a lovely golden colour. BOWSPRIT HEEL SHEAVE Reading Steel and Biddlecombe led me to a number of questions, such as how to rig the sheave at the heel of the bowsprit, which was discussed at http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/9839-rigging-a-bowsprit-heel-rope-on-cutter-sherbourne-1763/?p=291354 I decided in the end just to make the sheave at the heel, and presume it would only be rigged when pulling out the bowsprit. CRANSE IRON I spent some time figuring out how to make the cranse iron at the tip of the bowsprit. Given the fact that I chose to have a bobstay, I had to make it with 4 hoops. You can see the discussion on bobstays at http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/8646-bobstay-for-bowsprit-on-sherbourne/?p=256873 Initially I thought I’d try to silver solder hoops on to the iron, which I would have made from some brass tubing. However, it was clear that this would be very difficult to do since the heat from the torch would melt solder in hoops already fitted. I therefore decided to go the simple route, mimic the iron with black cartridge paper, drill holes in the iron, and glue hoops made from brass rod into the holes. You can see the sequence in the following photos: JIB TRAVELLER Then came the jib traveller, which was easily made from a brass rod and copper wire, silver soldered together, blackened, painted and covered with matt varnish: SERVING MACHINE Time to provide the blocks, hooks and tackle for the bowsprit. I made my serving machine using some steel rod from an old inkjet printer, some wood I found as scrap and plastic gears which I had to buy. The alligator clips were modified by grinding the teeth down until they were parallel when opened, epoxying wooden blocks into them, and then surfacing the blocks with carborundum paper for grip. As you can see, I used plastic clamps to provide the tension on the thread. The serving machine was also adapted for stropping blocks, but since then I have been stropping blocks just using two alligator clips embedded in a block. All the same, here are the photos: THIMBLES These I decided to make by cutting off 0.8mm thicknesses of thin-walled 1mm brass tube using my modified Proxxon which allowed me to adjust the height in increments. To stop the thimbles flying off into the universe, I first wrapped the tube in sticky tape. You’ll get the idea from the photo: The next stage was to figure out how to wrap the rope round them together with the hook. This was really easy. All I had to do was to make the hook from copper wire, silver solder it whilst the thimble was in, then attach the rope and seize it. THIMBLES FOR TOPSAIL BOWLINES Initially I was puzzled about how to make the thimbles as shown by Petersson for the topsail bowlines, so I posted a question at http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/10181-how-to-make-circular-rope/?p=303151 The replies quickly pointed me to Jay Brent’s (modeller12) video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUrRb66VSSE which used the idea suggested by Bender at http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/1056-tying-blocks-to-yards-or-masts/?p=17489 I therefore used this method to make the thimbles as follows: MAKING THE BLOCKS You may have noted that I’ve already tried a few ways of making blocks. I don’t think I’ll ever get it right. Nevertheless, I thought I’d try something else, using the same basic method suggested by Frolich which I have mentioned before. I found that using a straightforward pin was a bit difficult as I had to file it down to the correct width. Imagine my happiness at finding that Swann Morton no. 11 scalpel blades were only 0.4mm thick! Since the smallest hole I’m going to make for my blocks is 0.4mm, that’s perfect! All I have to do is provide wood of the appropriate thicknesses for the single, double and triple blocks. I used the tables in zu Mondfeld’s book on Historic Ship Models to determine the size of the blocks by working up from the rope sizes suggested by Steel and Biddlecombe. The following pictures show how I assembled and used the blades that are to score the sides of the blocks: Note that I ground down the very tips of the blades to provide a stronger tip. BOWSPRIT CAP ASSEMBLY I built myself a new motorised vertical ropewalk along the same lines as the Prosak developed by Alexey Domanoff and by Antonyuk (http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/3593-hms-victory-cross-section-by-antony-scale-136/?p=133848), and put all these elements together. It was very satisfying: Next up: re-doing the belaying pins at the bow. Tony

Have a look at Dan Vad's blocks, Jack. He does these in the traditional way by hand after cutting lengths on a saw. Saw, scalpels, files, sanding. I am pretty determined to keep practising since it is clear some people can do it! Tony

Yes, indeed, Druxey. The feeling was mutual. I really admired their enthusiasm and knowledge, as well as their friendliness. Nick already sent me a reply correcting a previous version of my post about Smokey Joe. I had thought the museum named it, but he told me that it came to them with that name. Further, as they were accompanying me from the museum, they took me round their store to see some of the enormous contemporary models (not of cutters) that they have in storage and then led me to some models they thought highly of in the museum proper -- including two very fine ships made from bone. Tony

Jack, in addition to the dates provided for the models of the 1763 cutter, the 1777 Hawke and the 1790 Trial, the other two models are also said to be contemporary. The 12-gun cutter, as stated above, is thought to have been made as a model around 1820. Smokey Joe was thought to be around 1820 as well. Tony

Cutter; 12 Guns. Object ID SLR0704. The description provided on the NMM web site is: "Scale: probably 1:72. A contemporary (?) plank on frame full hull model of a 12-gun cutter. The fact that the hull is planked in carvel fashion, (edge to edge planking), and that a square topsail is rigged would suggest a date of about 1820. Also the decoration on the stern indicates the name ‘Pelican’ although a cutter of this name cannot be traced either as a man-of-war or a revenue cruiser". The interesting thing here (for me, at least!) is that again the belaying rack at the bow is running fore-aft by the bowsprit. Tony

Smokey Joe, Object ID SLR2631 The next one I saw is an unarmed cutter, probably acting as a pilot cutter. Its standard of construction is not as good as the others, but there are interesting details. Its name, Smokey Joe, is thought by the Museum to be fictitious, although very appropriate given the appearance of the model. Tony

Trial 1790, Object ID SLR0150Next was a model I had previously seen on display at the NMM in Greenwich. Its name probably refers to the fact that it had an experimental sliding keel. It is really beautifully constructed, but Nick said that it might have had some re-working at the museum. Its original caption at the NMM stated: The other photos really just show the beauty and detail of the construction Tony

Cutter Hawke 1777, NMM Object ID SLR0314 Next of the models I saw is the model referenced by Goodwin in the AOTS book on the cutter Alert. Unfortunately, when the model was taken out Dave Lindridge noticed that someone had damaged the topsail and had put it back in position totally out of place. This is something they will fix, but as the details are so interesting I am still posting the pics for those who have a particular interest in the Alert. As I mentioned previously, this was the only cutter with the topmast aft of the main mast. It is interesting that there are many details quite at variance with the Alert shown by Goodwin. See, for example, the shrouds. Tony

In order for me to understand better the rigging practices for cutters of the 18th Century, I wrote to the National Maritime Museum asking if I could see some of the cutter models they have in storage, now that they no longer have a model display at the Museum in Greenwich. Nick Ball, the Assistant Curator of Ship Models, wrote back very quickly saying that I would be welcome to visit and could see all of the models I had requested which are now stored at the Royal Historic Dockyard in Chatham -- except for one which was stored in another location less accessible to the occasional visitor. He, together with Dave Lindridge the Store Manager, gave me a very generous amount of time to look at and photograph the models that they had taken out for inspection – during which they provided a lively discussion about their jobs and the models they were showing. In fact Nick said he was pleased to show visitors the models because it gave him more of an opportunity to review models in their vast collection. I asked Nick about permission to post my pictures and he told me it was fine as long as I made it clear the pictures were from the NMM collection. He also asked to be provided to the links of the photos as he himself (as a trained naval archaeologist) was very keen on the details and would enjoy any discussion that ensued. I will post the photos of the individual models under different messages, this post deals only with the first of the models. I just need to add that I am enormously grateful to Nick and Dave for their patience and generosity with their time for this visit, which for me was invaluable. 1763 cutter NMM ID SLR0510 First off is their cutter referenced in the NMM as Object ID SLR0510. It is described there as “a full hull model of a cutter (circa 1763) Scale: 1:48. The vessel measures 53 feet on the main deck by 20 feet in the beam and is armed with twelve 3-pounders. The model was donated unfinished and was completed in the Museum in 1960”. For me there were four main points of interest, apart from the fact that it is dated the same year as my Sherbourne. The first is that the fore belaying pins are arranged fore-aft beside the bowsprit. Gregor, Dirk, Kester and I have been trying to figure out how the belaying pins would be set given that the kit of the Sherbourne provides no plans for such a belaying rack. Each of us have provided our own particular possibility – with Dirk going for an arrangement such as that on the AOTS book of the Alert, and Gregor going for a rack right on the stem. I had made a rack that was parallel to the windlass. However, now I have seen the arrangement on the NMM cutter SLR0510, and, as you will see, the 12-gun cutter I saw had the same arrangement, I have changed my own rack accordingly. The second is that the topmast is fore of the main mast. I had understood that earlier in the century the practice was to place the topmast aft of the main mast. In fact the cutter Hawke (which I also saw at Chatham and whose pictures follow in a subsequent post) was the only one of these models to place the topmast aft of the main mast. The third point of interest was the windlass. The original NMM plans for the Sherbourne showed this type of windlass, and Gregor has already made one in the same style, and I followed his example – rather than following the type of windlass provided for in the Sherbourne kit. The fourth point of interest is that, like the Trial that you'll see in a subsequent post, the lower hull is painted up to the wales, and not to a waterline. The following were the other pictures I took of the1763 cutter, all of which will have details which will be picked up by those more knowledgeable than I am! Tony

Thanks for letting me know about your experience of blackening, Clare. I had a chuckle of sympathy when you described how you began to feel more confident once you started up again. I have the same experience with each new step of the model. At first I believe I simply can't do it. Then I start thinking how I might do it. Then I experiment and find I can do an approximation of what I'm attempting. Then with a bit more practice I find it actually looks ok. Then I start worrying about the next step and start all over again! Tony

Perhaps of more general use would be a razor saw and mitre box set, of the type you can see at Cornwall Model Boats. I have never used one of the square cutters, so can't comment on how good they are. Maybe others will chip in. Tony

Nice idea, Wefalck. The prices for the cotton-covered wire are not bad either. Tony

There are quite a few modellers who have gone for a weathered look. You could search for 'weathering' in the forums. One I have been following recently is Riverboat's work on the Krick kit of the Alert. You can find it at http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/6400-alert-by-riverboat-krick-125th-scale/?p=186050. Most of the weathering is in the later pages. Railway modellers seem to be very big enthusiasts for weathering, and their supply shops are full of special paints and techniques to do that. Tony

Thanks, Lextin. That's very similar to Modeller12's and the one I'll use as it allows for snug fits as well. Tony

If you are thinking of getting into scratch building, you might want to look at building 'La Jacinthe', a French schooner of 1823. The monograph produced by Ancre is excellent, as are the plans and instructions that go with it. It is POB, but you can go as detailed as you like and several modellers have made it plank on frame. Because of the combination of instructions on building, list of the materials necessary and the excellence and details of the plans, it lends itself to a first time scratch builder. The author claims he gave the monograph to a 15 year old boy who was able to make it himself -- albeit with a little help from the author. The book is available in English as well as in French. If you speak French, there are also lots of builds that are beautiful on the French model ship fora. You can also see several stages of a POF build of La Jacinthe by Frolich in his book 'Art of Ship Modelling' which you can also find from Ancre books in France. You can see details of the monograph at http://ancre.fr/en/monographies-en/52-monographie-de-la-jacinthe-goelette-1823.html. There is also a very nice model of 'La Chaloupe Armee' which is very much simpler but has a very different method of construction, which you can also find through Ancre at http://ancre.fr/en/monographies-en/31-monographie-de-la-chaloupe-armee-en-guerre-1834.html. As these come from France, you have no import duties at all and all the references to lengths are in metric. An additional perk is that the Euro is extremely low against the pound, so these monographs and plans come in at a very reasonable price. I myself have bought the monograph and plans for 'Le Rochefort' -- which is a POF build. Otherwise, as has been said, there are plenty of lovely builds you can follow on this forum, including the cross section builds of Triton and Echo -- both of which are also great ways of learning about POF building. (Not that I know anything at all about building from plans or POF since I am only on my first model build). Tony

Nice points, Robin, and sorry if this is detracting from Chuck's log, but could someone let me know, or give an illustration of, how the mast would be placed when 'cockbiild'? This is purely my ignorance, so I apologise again. Tony

Thanks! I was just checking, Chuck, because I am slightly confused about when shrouds are served and when not in the building of the Sherbourne. Is it the case that the foremost shrouds are fully served whilst the others are only partly served? Or are they all fully served? And backstays? I agree about the 3D modelling being not only very interesting but helpful too. Tony