Baker

The rear castle.

Not much is left of the original. So from here on, most becomes guesswork. The frames of sections 6,8,10 and the stern are used as a basis

The first test isn't too bad.

The stern in the drawing has an unnatural bend (personal opinion). That's why I'm going to deviate a bit towards the outside.

The first 4 frames have been placed. They are still too high and probably too thick. But these 4 must be long and sturdy enough as a basis for the rest
The intention now is to first provide more frames on this side of the model.

Update,

BTR70  : only needs decals and final wheatering

Nona mortar carrier : almost ready for painting

BTR R3K  : chassis ready (after some struggles... )

As always ,

thanks for comments, likes and following

17 hours ago, Jaager said:

Some of them look like cartoons of what the actual vessels probably looked like -  I am thinking Baker's Mayflower as an example.   All are just a modern author's guess -

I never built a Mayflower....

 It is certainly not the perfect model, but if this is a cartoon, thanks

Some PDFs. (When I put them on my PC they were free downloads)

golden_hind plannen-volledig.pdf

2014Gresham.pdf

elizabethan-merchant-ships-and-shipbuilding.pdf

Furring in light of 16th century ship design_web.pdf

red bay 2.pdf

scheepsbouw 16e eeuw Engeland.pdf

7 hours ago, Giorgik63 said:

Thanks Baker. I looked at your post, but most of the links are no longer visible, including the plans http://www.john-tom.com/SailBoatPlans/GoldenHind/golden_hindSm.pdf.

maybe I downloaded this somewhere on the PC.
I'll take a look later

maybe my buildlog can help you

BTW. There no detailled plans for an English galleon.

Great work,  a very nice diorama. 

Dont now, but maybe this helps

Nice work. 

If I remember correctly, I also made this model a long time ago.

I was about 10 years old at the time, I will be 60 next month 😁

42 minutes ago, GrandpaPhil said:

this looks like an Elizabethan galleon now.

Indeed. 

Beautiful work.

23 minutes ago, challenger86 said:

Yes sir, I'm going of the kit's plans and their location. It is odd, as my NS Mercedes build, they're set back a bit and not on the stern post, etc... 

🙈🙉🙊  😉

Nice work on the Mercedes 

Great work. 

But the way you attach the anchors is quite unusual.
Normally these are attached to the channels of the fore mast.

Before.
This way you can do this easily and comfortably while sitting (And also much better for your back ...)

Amazing 

Home made saw?? 😉

14 hours ago, Roger Pellett said:

Wooden ships “work.”  As the ship travels through waves, the uneven buoyancy causes the hull to flex.  With conventionally framed construction the frames made no contribution to to the longitudinal strength of the hull.  In the Nineteenth Century the use of diagonal iron strapping was an attempt to add longitudinal strength to large hills but of course this was three hundred years or so prior to Mary Rose.

 

As ships aged these longitudinal bending stresses affected planking fasteners allowing individual planks to slide relative to each other, working the caulking loose.  The repair would have been to caulk the seam and to nail the batten atop.  This problem existed to some degree into modern times until advanced adhesives allowed monocoque construction of wooden hulls. 

 

Roger

Thanks Roger.

Indeed.

The Mary Rose builders (rebuilders) were also working on this problem

Thanks 

The BTR'S are better cast than Ace's older models.But still sometimes a mess and a puzzle to assemble ...

@Rock_From_Korea @Louie da fly @md1400cs @Roger Pellett

 Thanks for the nice comments.

Mary was indeed 30 years old and had had a major refit. Maybe the original version didn't need these battens