bruce d

Sober?

Hello James, No comment on your main question, more experienced builders will I am sure give good advice: however, if you are in the UK, see ... ... for my version of the hunt for water-based polyurethane varnish. HTH Bruce

Oh dear. The railing for the steps is 180 degrees out: or perhaps it was an initiative test for the midshipmen?

They are building a house. What could go wrong? Joking aside, since the original post I have found this glue is used in some furniture restoration where they know there is a possibility the repair will be taken apart in the future.

Hello Keith, Maybe you already know the magical material: https://www.milliput.com/ My 'go-to' when I scratchbuilt figures and animals decades ago. (tip: buy direct from Milliput, that way it will be fresh) HTH Bruce

An organic glue. My bio-concious neighbours need to hear about this, I am sure they will use it. Thanks.

... plus also A1284A to D, some of these are 'English'; and all images in the A1205 series. I am convinced this archive has everything, the trick is finding it! I stumbled on these A12** images by accident. Bruce

Update: Water based polyurethane varnish is now officially endangered in the UK. Ronseal and, I believe two other big manufacturers, have dropped it from their range in the last year. A chat with someone in an independent shop confirmed my hunch that polyurethane just isn't a sexy branding choice. There are more and more acrylic and spirit branded varnishes on the shelves but it looks like 'poly' is out of vogue. Poor poly. It is still available in the UK from at least two sources and I have bought what I hope will be a lifetime supply. The products still available are: Sadolin Polyurethane Extra Durable Varnish (CAUTION: THERE IS ANOTHER PRODUCT IN THEIR RANGE WITH A SIMILAR NAME) Johnstone's Durable Quick Dry Polyurethane Varnish There are probably others but I could not find them. Bruce

I cannot say what they did in Portsmouth for Triton but in the Caribbean and American yards it was common to use mahogany for the false keel. For example, Bermuda had a wonderful supply of local cedar which was excellent for shipbuilding but they still imported African mahogany for the keel components and American woods for the deck planking. Nice start on Triton. Bruce

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48377930 Bruce

I have used all of them except CAD in preparing my Pickle. The most promising for a quick result must be photo editing provided the subject has the right proportions to start with. The most reliable must be 'Paper, pencil and ruler (with a little help from French curves) and an eraser.

Fantastic. Your build log of Cheerful is my benchmark. Bruce

I will tell you about my process before I offer advice: you may think I am bonkers. I am nearly finished drawing my plans. This will be my third version. As there were no drawings of the prototype, but her dimensions were known, I researched, compared other ships, studied scantlings, fretted over details and then, with relief, settled on La_Recouvrance as a starting point. She shared many features with my subject AND had been modeled AND was well documented. So I used her lines, distorted the image with PhotoShop to make her the correct beam, painstakingly traced each frame section to scale, drew a keel, blah blah blah... and then realised that La_Recouvrance just could not be stretched/tweaked to look like Pickle. A lot in common, yes, but what I wanted: no. Next, I tried manually adapting the drawings I had digitally produced to make her lines right. This required a total reboot and after some wasted time I accepted that I would be better off to start again from scratch. So I did. Now, the silver lining to this cloud is that my first two attempts taught me good lessons in both digital and traditional technique and, more importantly, over time I had refined my 'mind's eye' image of what Pickle should look like and what will and won't work in a scratchbuilt model. The drawings I am producing now are stripped right down to the basics of hull lines, deck levels, mast and gunport positions etc. So, Caleb, I hope this is useful to you. I have not found a magic wand or a button to push that will produce drawings on demand and I confess there may have been a touch of such silliness in my original decision to scratchbuild a subject that has no existing plans (I can almost hear myself saying 'How hard can it be?), But I am stubborn, or so I have been told. I know you asked about bulkheads but they are a component in the puzzle so forgive the ramble. If you can find a drawing of a ship with the same lines and sections, you should be able to trace them and make the adjustment for depth of planking. Otherwise, study the excellent articles in MSW and other online sources that show how to read drafts, buttock lines etc and plot your own. I know that sound oversimplified but it is what I had to do in the end. Other than roll up your sleeves and see what happens when you start, there is only one bit of practical, nuts-and-bolts advice I can pass on. If there is a set of drawings for the ship you are modeling, or one with the same proportions and general lines, great: get it in your head and ignore the differences. Then, find a set of plans for a model of a similar ship that you like. In this case it is not the ship you need to like, it is the PLANS FOR THE MODEL you must like. Use these plans as, shall we say, 'extensive reference' when breaking down the parts needed to make your model. See what the keel, deadwood, fashion pieces etc look like in the model plans, how the stern and stem are shaped, how the bulkheads join up with the centre piece, do they support the deck or is that a job for separate beams, and so on. Then you at least have a starting point for each of the same issues when you go back to the tasks needed to make that ship you have in your head. Sorry for the long answer, you have given me a soapbox to tell of the experience so far. I will start a build log when there is something to show for all this preparation. Hope this helps and doesn't scare you off, I have enjoyed it even if I do moan about the learning curve. Bruce

Have you seen this?

Back in post #2 I said 'It sounds like we are plotting similar projects.' Little did I know: mine is 'Pickle', which I am sure you know worked with Entreprenante at Trafalgar on rescue work. Can't help immediately with plans for either of your ships but I will keep my eyes open. Keep us informed. Regards, Bruce

Hello Caleb and welcome to MSW. It sounds like we are plotting similar projects. 'SPEEDY' 1828, available online, may be useful to you, also '10-gun Sloop MEDIATOR'. There are others, of course, and there may be some feature of the ship that leads you to one particular set of plans, but I will let the members with more experience speak on that point. Can you tell us the ship? In my case, I found that the plans I originally wanted to use as a starting point simply were no help because there is a difference between what makes a good laser-cut kit (ease of assembly, good solid joints between keel and bulkheads etc.) and what is best for a scratchbuilt model: also, after a couple of false starts, I realised that any existing plans for a model with different buttock lines would only be useful as inspiration and guidance because I still needed to draw my own bulkheads. This turned out to be more straightforward than I thought and the feeling of accomplishment once I had produced 'my plans' for 'my ship' was pretty good. You will get knowledgeable support here (I have) and I hope you start a build log. Regards, Bruce

Hello Phil, Very nice work. I discovered your build log when looking for accounts of deck planking and will be duplicating your experiments with different methods of caulking. I will be watching from now on. Bruce

... and I now realise they were both from the same proposal.

It looks like two different ships to me. The scond was a proposal for 'KING CARL' according to the description: here is the Google Translation... "Drawings by miniature painter Étienne Compardel after Jean Berain, probably 1694. In 1693 Jean Berain received an order from Tessin to make embellishments for a Swedish naval ship. The vessel would actually be called King Carl, but Berain wanted a ship name that was better suited for allegorical interpretations and the ship came therefore called the Victory. (However, some ship with this name was never launched). Berain delivered the 1694 drawings, which are now available at the War Archives. Compardel was then commissioned to perform detailed, beautifully colored drawings and the colors of blue and gold were adapted to the Swedish national coat of arms. On the stern, the Segergudinnan placed a four-span. (Source: The exhibition catalog of "The Sun and the North Strait" at Nationalmuseum) Provenance Collection: Lieutenant Malmborg Production 1694 (uncertain date)"

Gerhard, Wunderbar! Downloaded, many thanks. I have been looking for 'the rules' about the size and position of regal emblems/monograms on English cannons and all arrows point to Peterson. If it is in there I will post the results. I believe the files were originally hosted and available for downloading by a website promoting tourism and diving in Bermuda. I have contacted them and do not believe they plan to put them back online: they politely offered to sell me a hard copy (vol 1) from their tourist centre bookshop. Now to get comfortable and view a thousand pages … Regards, Bruce

Gerhard, may I also visit your dropbox? I have been looking for the Green Albums also. Regards, Bruce

Allan, what a great source! I found vol 1 in scribd but have not (yet) found the remaining pieces. It is a study of the work of one of the world's best authorities on identifying cannon found on the ocean floor and I am sure I will spend a lot of time studying the mass of information contained. So far it looks like it discusses the processes but not the rules but I will enjoy reading it in more detail. I will continue looking for the other pieces that complete the work. Many thanks.

Thanks, Wefalck. Yes, I found it in PDF quickly and it comes close but does not state the rules. What a great piece of reference material! I am glad to have this one. My observations tell me that the width of most regal monograms (if that is the correct name?) is roughly just less than half the diameter of the part of the barrel where it is cast: so if you looked down on it from above the emblem should appear to occupy nearly half of the section you are seeing. Not very exact but that is what I see. If there is a source of course I will be glad to chase it down. Best bet at the moment is 'Boxer, E.M. Treatise on Artillery' which is quoted greatly in the 'MCCONNELL (1988): British Smooth-Bore Artillery' from Wefalck. Regards, Bruce

Hello all, I hope someone can help. Were there rules dictating the size and placement of the regal monogram cast into English cannons/carronades? The George III era is of particular interest but now that the subject is raised I wonder if there is a standard reference source? Thanks, Bruce

Hello Jimmy and welcome to MSW. Bruce (south of you)