Baker

48 minutes ago, Tim Moore said:

Still have to fabricate something to stand off the exhaust so it doesn’t interfere with the kickstand; minor kit flaw or more likely I just screwed something up although I’ve been unable to fathom what. 

You didn't screwed something up.

I had the same problem in the 80's.

And good luck on the road to Victory 😉

Beautiful work 👍

7 hours ago, Snug Harbor Johnny said:

  I've shared you job of adding-to or subtracting-from bulkheads ...

 

Known problem. 
I've had that too on my Mary Rose. Call it the charm of scratch building. 

Nice work Simon.

Planking the bow.
Purely speculative. As mentioned earlier, the planking here is horizontal, on many carracks it is curved vertical, but at the time of the sinking of Mary Rose this seems to have become somewhat old-fashioned. most drawings then show horizontal planking.

First, a clean up on the inside

Then the bow is built up step by step.

The bow is planked. Not clearly visible in the photos, but there are still depths and heights in the shape here and there. But the planks are thick enough to sand away these imperfections.

And. Not happy with the errors on the right, but we don't see anything about this later. Needs further sanding (left)

With the cardboard fore castle. In this setup the height is already 1.5cm lower.

Next, sanding, applying treenails, etc. to be done.

Thanks for following

nice work on the ft 17
Indeed, a long time ago, Lego was stimulating to develop and build something yourself.
Nowadays you just have to follow the drawn instructions step by step.

boring for us older generation (my opinion😪)

9 hours ago, My Fathers Son said:

Frustratingly, she is not symmetrical,

Sounds familiar
I have experienced this too.
Drawing and building a model yourself is quite a challenge 👍

Saved by Kirill post 578, second time 😉 👍

Nice work Christian. 

Rigging the cannons is indeed al lot of work

was it worth the effort ? Always 😉

3 hours ago, Snug Harbor Johnny said:

  Popeye the Sailor has a build log for the Sergal Thermopylae, and contains a lot of info as far as he took the build on the hull work.  Other Sergal considerations are:

1.) the 1:124 scale is on the small size for a clipper - as are all the old 1:120 Scientific clipper kits.  I find the 1:100 restoration I'm on now to be hard enough.

 

2.)  The Sergal Thermie stern has a vertical end to it ... look at Thermopylae photos, and you'll see a nice angle in the stern.  This would not be too hard to alter at an early stage in planking.

 

3.)  Sergal uses obvious channel with oversize deadeyes. The original has the deadeyes mounted on the gunwale (perhaps wider than average to accommodate).  This change would also not be hard to make.

 

4.) Popeye uses an aftermarket  PE kit to enhance the build, and it may be hard to find this now.

 

  Still, with  a your exemplary skills the result will be fine.  The Mary Rose project is amazing, mate.

Thanks. 

1/124 is small indeed. And it will take a lot of extra work.
But I do believe that a beginner can make a nice model out of it.
ps
got mine for free so nothing to lose if it fails.

I have the thermopylae from sergal. tentatively scheduled to start building next winter.
Built "out of the box" it can produce quite a good model.

Disadvantage of the thermopylae:
almost no information available about it
There is no copper sheeting in the sergal box.

But new in the box it costs in belgium €95, which is quite a reasonable price for the kit

Great work.

I found this on the Dutch forum. 

https://www.modelbouwforum.nl/threads/bouwverslag-modelbouwkit-dwarsdoorsnede-van-een-17e-eeuwse-koopvaarder.286012/

https://www.modelbouwforum.nl/threads/nieuw-een-virtuele-rondleiding-op-een-17e-eeuws-nederlands-schip.276679/#post-4153895

And good luck 

Ordinary iron wire of 1mm. soldered with a regular soldering iron.

I think I have the Model Shipways Mayflower building instructions somewhere. This is very helpful for rigging.
If you want this you will have to wait a while, I am not at home right now

No problem. 

If this helps. My Bounty experiment. 

non-binding advice 😉

In my opinion the loop go's  around the bowsprit.

Normaly this is done with a chain. 

Otherwise, take a look at my Pelican build log.

in the first post you will find an index with links

peace 😉

This is a long term project.
Nothing thoughtless is done before moving on.
But every now and then you will see something like this 
Then there is removal and rebuilding😉

Sufficient archaeological remains of the main armament of the Mary Rose have been found.
All this has already been neatly researched and put on a drawing by the Mary Rose organisation.
The irregular placement of these cannons is simply because they were added later. Not in the best, most logical place, but simply where there was room and where the hull construction allowed it.
Most of these cannons have already been printed in 3D by a friendly Australian 
Since I will first continue building the outside of the hull, these cannons will only be placed in the year 2025 or later.
And iwill probably build the fore castle as one whole and then put it on the model.

But, when that will be. no idea for now.

So much better than mine. Built 40 years ago 

👍.

10 hours ago, tartane said:

 

If you study the excavated guns of the Mary Rose, it becomes clear that the heaviest guns had large dimensions. The heaviest guns were also front loaders and they were placed as low as possible in the ship. To operate such a cannon, a space of at least 80 cm was needed between the mouth of the barrel and the ship's hull. This space is needed to clean the barrel after a shot and to be able to put the bullet and powder in.  Then came the cannon itself, of which I don't know the exact length and then there had to be a space behind the cannon to give space to the hoists that had to hold the cannon while loading.

On the other side of the ship, exactly the same thing happened. So there had to be as few obstacles as possible in between. You can see on many warships that there were no cannons at the position of the masts.

On the MR, the spaces between the gunports are not evenly distributed. It is therefore very likely that the masts were located in the middle of the greatest distances between the gunports.

If you know the length of the guns, in this case the length of the barrel, you can calculate the minimum width of the ship. Warships had to be able to sail fast, so the width of the ship was kept as narrow as possible.

You might find this useful.

Constant

 

please
Don't start endless discussions like you do in other build logs.
thank you

Only the main mast