Srodbro

I saw your pics in the gallery this morning at breakfast and have spent today going through your entire log. Wish I’d have looked in sooner. Picked up several tips along the way. Thanks. So glad you spent the time to chronicle you journey. Great work. Thanks for sharing it.

Ah, yes. Felt. I had forgotten. I did so on a previous build and it worked well (even though the mounting screws caught some of the felt material and drove it into the hull .. this time I’ll cut out felt at the screws). Thank you.

Thank you.

Modelerbob: Thank you. Yes, exactly to my point : Considerable debate. Mtaylor: Pic below is how I secured my hull while working topside during an earlier stage of the build. At the expense of three or four small screw holes in the hull, I get almost absolutely secure support in a bench vice for all the work ahead. Might even be able to use the holes in a future display mount. I think the only major hull attachments will be the channels and chain plates, which can be reinforced with pins or small dowels driven deep through the bulwarks, and other attachments made the same way, driven into the solid hull under the planking (I have the luxury of not having to hit individual bulkheads; also, the space between the exterior bulwarks planking and the ceiling on my model is solid wood). Although I still intend to scrape away the finish and use adhesive, as well. lmagna: Fortunately, I don’t think I’ll need the bleach, now, but will keep the thought for future reference (I still have deck planking to consider).

Modelerbob: There is considerable debate about what Lawrence and Niagara may have looked like and materials of construction. In spring and summer of 1813, both Brits and Americans suffered severe shortages of men and materials on Lake Erie. Lawrence and Niagara were both constructed of green locally harvested timbers (unlike contemporaries like Constitution and her sisters, which could use materials like live oak from Georgia and Florida). Most materials were either stolen from the Brits, or laboriously hauled overland from Baltimore, and up to Erie, Pa via wagon and small streams. Both brigs were built mostly by house carpenters rather than shipwrights, and even they were directed to not do something unless essential ... they were only intended to engage in a single battle, and not have a long life. Walter Rybka in his book The Lake Erie Campaign of 1813, says: Due to the shortage of oakum, the below-waterline seams of the Niagara and Lawrence were partially caulked with sheet lead. So, I’m of the opinion that Lawrence looked nothing as “finished” as typically depicted in paintings or most models. Of course, that’s speculation, and I’m not making my model as “raw” as I think the may have been. Thanks for the comment.

Druxey and hornet: Some of my frustration stems from the fact that I did create a test panel. But, I can surmise several reasons the hull planking differed from the test planking: I can’t say for certain that the wood used on both was from the same board, although both were clear white pine; Altho I used the same proportions, the stain used on both was mixed at different times; Who knows if when wiping down with a cloth I used the same pressure? Finally, the test panel was small, about 2”x4”. Maybe there is a difference in the appearance of small vs large (think: that dinky paint chip against the final color of the living room). Thistle17: I am reluctant to use chemical on my planking, not knowing how they might affect the PVA below. But, I’ll reserve those steps if all else fails. I decided to take the advice of sanding down again. Concerned about how much wood I had left, I probed the planking with a pin and decided that in most places I had more than I thought. So, I brutally attacked with 60 grit sandpaper. Then I worked up with 100, 150, 350, and 600 grit paper and a rub with 0000 steel wool. Then I mixed my stain in a ratio of 4:2:1 ebony, walnut and gray, and applied. Used a dry brush to wipe off excess after drying for ten minutes. Except for a couple blotches near the keel, I got the color I want (put another way, the color I’m keeping). But this model has much more work to go, so, keeping chemical treatment and veneering in my pocket for now, I need to protect the surface against greasy fingerprints and rub off during the handling ahead. I won’t be using TruOil (that’s a lesson learned!). So ... the question now is: Shellac, satin polyurethane, or paste wax? Advice welcomed. Thanks.

I am modeling US Brig Lawrence essentially from scratch, based on the Model Shipways Niagara kit plans. It is a solid hull, with my first attempt at planking any hull. I am pleased with the way the planking turned out (pic below prior to sanding)... ...but am struggling with the finish. I wanted to achieve several things: I wanted to use pine for the planking since that’s what the original ship was planked with I wanted the planking detail to show thru (otherwise, why go to the trouble of planking ... just paint a solid hull) I wanted to somehow evoke the idea that Lawrence might not have been painted at all, since she was built in what was essentially a wilderness at the time. Maybe these goals are are mutually exclusive. At any rate, I’ve been attempting the finish, and through the process am now at a point that I’m not sure what to try next. After final sanding of the planking, I applied a mix of gray and black stain, and wiped it down. it wasn’t as dark as I wanted, so applied another coat of black stain. This time I waited longer before wiping it down. I was fairly satisfied with the color at this point. I had seen a post by a modeler from Germany in these forums (unfortunately, since removed) of a finish I liked that used a final coat of TruOil. On the exterior planking and the ceiling of my bulkheads I used Osage Orange and Redheart, finished with TruOil, and really liked the effect. So, after staining the hull planking, I applied TruOil. But, it was too dark and too much glare for the hull. I tried to dull it down by using steel wool, but it was still not right. Then I attacked it more aggressively with steel wool and sand paper, taking it down to almost nothing. This is where it stands at the moment. I like the detail that is visible in the planking ... ...but would still like the overall to be darker. But, I have concerns in taking the next step. First, I’ll bet there is still some TruOil lingering in places ... would stain or paint stick? Second, the stain can says do not thin, so I’d have to wipe on and off, which might take off some of what is already there, and be even more blotchy. Third, the spaces between planks are already filling, and if I use some finish that is not transparent, I think I’ll lose the detail. Last, there is a limit to how much I can sand it down ... 1/16” thick planks before they were initially planed and sanded, and sanded again. The second pic above was closest to where I wanted to be, if a bit darker. So, can this hull be saved?

I am wondering if there is any more definitive description of HMS Margaretta and Unity than in these paintings, which appear to be contradictory. The first doesn’t depict any square rigging on Margaretta.

Yes, I have. For deck planking. And I agree that the grain is very pronounced, but I disagree that you can have "scaled" wood grain. True to scale wood grain I don't think you can possibly discern. As far as appearance, it depends on what you fancy. Although, I admit I'd probably not use it again, once all the deck furniture and guns and rigging are added, it still provides some character and texture to the deck, which otherwise might be flat and dead looking. Not sure I'd plank a hull with it.

Just discovered your build log. Glad you're back at it. Looking forward to following. I think I recognize some of the water in the background of your pics!

Have enjoyed following your work, and looking forward to updates in the spring. Greatly appreciate your superb craftsmanship and techniques. Thank you.

There is a pic posted by AON in the Nautical General Discussion forum of a pinrail on the Niagara, copied below. Notice the black lines run down from the pinrails to the ceiling near the deck. Is this reinforcing for the pinrail? Given the huge forces imposed onto the pinrails by half a dozen lines from the running rigging, I am surprised that this isn't more common. I've never seen this depicted on models. Lacking these reinforcements, does anyone have detail of how the pinrails were joined to timberheads? Must have been one strong joint ... dovetailed with several pins?

I am fascinated by this ship. I find curious the position of the lowered mast, at its 2 degree skew, appearing to be paralleling the routing of the Reep from the bow to the capstan. Also, in the photo of the base of the mast, there are sheaves thru which I would bet the Reep is reeved. Judging from the drawings, these sheaves would be at about deck level when the mast is lowered. I wonder if, after passing thru these sheaves, the Reep ran up the mast, say to the location of the throats of the gaff, then paralleled the gaff down to the capstan. Doing so would direct a lot of the force from hauling the Reep to the base of the mast, and take some of it off the peak of the bow. The additional complexity of being able to lower the mast must be driven ( in my humble opinion) by some clear critical operating advantage beyond spilling a bit more wind, but I cannot think of what it might be. The skew to the bowsprit, and its apparent ability to be retracted, is also curious. Also, something protrudes from the mast above the five crewmen on deck ( unless, this a photo defect) which excites curiosity. Fascinating!

Allow me to demonstrate my ignorance with a question. In the fourth photo in the original post, the forward mast appears to be un-stepped, but the rigging of the forestay appears to allow for it. May I ask if this was done routinely, and if so, why?

Menard's specialty dimensioned lumber (plastic wrapped) goes under the name "Mastercraft". Not sure if that's their own brand, or if there is an independent company out there. They used to stock a variety of species, but now you have to special order walnut and cherry and mahogany. They seem to usually have poplar, hickory, maple and oak.

No worry: She lives in a glass case, so is protected from the admiral and grandchild. My only concern is how she'll age, if the sails will get brittle and crack on there own.

Hmmm....the gremlins are throwing in out of sequence pics again. To make up for that, here are a couple of the model as we go into mothballs. Thanks for all the comments along the way. Will be back to continue this project.

This black and white image of the hull from below the deck level looking aft highlights the relationship between the bulwarks and the waterway extension, and the hull. The portion of the bulwarks that extends outboard of the waterway extension will need to be removed, and the hull built outward. Here the grooves for the bow timberheads and knight heads have been begun. Next, the rough timberheads added, and a couple rows of wood strips added to build out the hull (to address BM#3--over-zealous hull shaping). Using the kit's laser cut rails, I laid out the lines on top of the forward timberheads and the bulwarks that would be used to shape them. Before continuing with shaping, the stern needed attention. Because the top of my solid hull is equal to the underside of the future deck, insets needed to be cut and chiseled out to set the stern stanchions flush with the hull. it didn't take long before these delicate pieces broke. If I ever do this again, I'll fabricate the stanchions of laminated styrene (seems like with all the builders who experience problems with these, kit manufacturers might consider furnishing these in Britannia metal). The port outer stanchions broke later. I repaired and reinforced the broken ones with slivers of brass, CA'd into place. After framing up the stern, the topmost element of the bulwarks, a continuous strip from bow to stern, was soaked, pinned and glued into place. the final bulwarks just forward of the stern were fabricated similar to the typical bulwarks subassemblies and glued into place. Then all the bulwarks were addressed with the Dremel tool. With filling and sanding, she was starting to look like a ship. Remember BM#1?(Big Mistake #1 -- not having a clear understanding of the stern). Well, that's coming home to roost, now. My guessing at the shape of thing aft of section "Q" required a lot of filling with wood and filler. The space between the sternpost and the archboard should get covered by about 5 or 6 planks. I only have room for about three. by the way, I haven't seen on any build log an "arch" in the archboard anywhere near that shown on the kit drawings. Mine certainly doesn't. I'll bet it has to do with the positioning of those darned stern stanchions. I may have to live with this stern inaccuracy. After another round of sanding everywhere, I turned to installation of the sheerplank. These laser cut kit pieces had cutouts for the bulkhead timberheads, which I don't have. So, I only used that portion of these parts that go into the gunports. And "Boo-Yah!!" I think I'm ready to start planking, now! No, just one more thing to do. Remember BM#2, where I glued up the hull lifts? The stern 1/3 of the upper four lifts were married to the forward 2/3 by a glued butt joint of end grain. So, I cut into my hull and added two butterfly splines across that joint. Now I can rest easy that it is less likely to fall apart until the deck planking can help marry these two sections. So, with BM#2 addressed, as well as BM#3, and BM#1 at a (maybe) acceptable state, this Niagara is going into mothballs for a few months. Next week starts late summer and fall fishing season, followed by hunting season, followed by the holidays. Many more activities for this old man to do while he can. But, I can't be in the boat all the time ,nor continually traipsing the wilderness for game, so maybe I'll get around to making the small boats in the kit, or cannons, or I may just lop off that stern, aft of section "Q". Or, who knows: I have all the kit hull components I need from the kit to build another hull, and demonstrate to myself that the solid hull experiment, vs. the plank on bulkhead, while interesting, was much more involved than I thought. I may wind up with Niagara AND Lawrence.

I've thought it would be neat to have a movie (or a book, even better) that began, oh, thirty years earlier and ended in "THE MUSIC-ROOM in the Governor’s House at Port Mahon".

I have made sails of tissue paper (the kind used in gift wrapping, not the stuff you wipe your nose with) attached to a bolt rope running the perimeter of the sail, made of fine (28ga) brass wire. The ends of the wire are doubled about a half inch and soldered together. On gaff-rigged fore-and-aft sales, and on square sails, I'll run another wire at one or two reef points, and on large square sails I might add bunt lines, all soldered together. Then I cut the sail paper material about 1/8th inch larger than this brass skeleton, saturate the sail at the brass wire with dilute white glue, and fold over. At the reef lines, I cut a separate strip of sail material and glue in a similar manner over the wire onto the sail. Then, lash to the yards, or attach to the stays, and complete the running rigging. The brass can be bent for the desired effect. Produces an effect that's acceptable to me. The construction is easily seen in the backlit pic below. Lit from another angle, it looks ok, too. I'll also use brass wire for the sheets of head sails to hold them out as if pushed by the wind.

I get some from Menards, as well. It is also known as tulip poplar. Woodcraft stores sometimes have it in a greater variety of sizes. The Woodcraft stuff is also drier, and frequently on sale. Beware: When you take the plastic wrap off the Menards stuff it can quickly warp or cup, depending on the ambient humidity. Id stay away from the Aspen. Much too soft, fuzzy ... I haven't found a good use for it (not even good kindling).

I've used poplar for one solid hull project and am currently using it for another. Similar source as yours. No problems. Don't know how it would work cut down for planking. I know it paints well, but not sure about staining -- it has a variety of strong grain colors.

Not sure how that last pic got out of sequence but it shows the eighteen typical bulwarks subassemblies ready for installation.

My excessive planing of the hull near the bow is my Big Mistake #3 (BM#3). But, as I know that I'll have further shaping issues ahead with the bulwarks, I'll postpone correcting this until then. On to the bulwarks. I first considered fabricating timberheads similar to the way the kit treats the stern stanchions. Then I considered cutting in vertical pieces along the hull, instead. This is similar to the way Pete Jacquith did his on Eagle. Taking this idea a bit further, I thought I could make repetitive subassemblies that would incorporate the framing for the gunports and sweep ports, maybe like the highlighted portion of the detail below. But it seemed that would require a complicated jig to get consistency. Then it dawned on me that all these approaches started with the assumption that I had to follow the spacing of the bulkheads, and that wasn't so. On this model, there is ceiling on the inboard side of the bulwarks and planking outboard. The timberheads aren't exposed anywhere. So I made a sketch of the side of the ship showing the gunports and sweep ports to find the simplest subassembly scheme. At the bottom of the chicken scratches are illustrated three gunports and two sweep ports. There are two continuous elements, the waterway at the bottom and the rail at the top. Between these, between each pair of gunports, I have four stacked elements, with the second from bottom as tall as the sweep port and divided in two by a gap the width of the sweep port. The top left sketch shows the final configuration of pieces, with two vertical elements, each forming one side of a gunport. The sketch at upper right shows that I would make the upper elements thicker, because each subassembly must accommodate both the flare of the bulwarks forward and the tumblehome aft. With the proper thickness, I could accommodate any location along the hull with a typical subassembly. i decided that forward of bulkhead section "C" the flare was too dramatic, and something else would have to be done there. So I constructed a simple jig to build the bulwarks subassemblies and put them together. To accommodate extremes of flare or tumblehome, I could install with the thicker top inward or outward and minor angular trimming of the waterway. Using a block spacer sized for the gunports, the typical bulwarks subassemblies are installed along the waterway. Also installed at this time is the temporary bowsprit. Treatment of the bow and stern bulwarks are atypical.

Very nice build. Really like the added details. Two years ago I returned to my Connie model that I'd shelved for nearly 50 years, and completed her. It was like getting back together with an old high school girlfriend. Whenever it is that you get back to your build you'll enjoy the reunion (although, she'll seem a bit different then from now). Hope it isn't too long from now. Just a suggestion: I found after time that some critical components don't hold a styrene cement bond thru the years. Maybe it was the fault of the modelmaker. I found that all my pinrails, fife rails and channels needed reinforcing when they became subjected to the rigors of the rigging process. Very frustrating to have half your lines attached to a rail that then breaks off. In all my builds since then. I bore fine holes and run a pair of metal pins thru the rail and into the hull and secure with CA.