Kishmul

Some details of the metalwork from the Model Dockyard plans. The lathe will start turning in April when sawdust will also be created. A build log will follow.

Before CAD, when I was a pen and paper draughtsman, proportional dividers were an essential bit of kit and I own an expensive pair.
They are little used these days, but I would not be without them.
One word of caution when using them for planking (as has been mentioned above). When measuring from the frames or bulkheads, you are measuring the chord- a straight line between two points on the circumference of a circle or arc- not the length of the arc itself= the width of the plank. In most ship model situations the error will be so small as to be irrelevant, but it is there.

Some details of the metalwork from the Model Dockyard plans. The lathe will start turning in April when sawdust will also be created. A build log will follow.

Got another few hours in. Images as requested.

Got another few hours in. Images as requested.

I  agree on the 0 errors point. It must also be said that Boudroit's volumes on the 74 gun ship were never intended to be a practicum for model makers. That said, they are an essential reference for anyone who intends to make such a model.
I own the English translations of Boudroit's  masterwork and some of the errors may derive from that, whilst all the drawings are scaled, that the dimensions vary from French "pieds" to metres requires concentration.
As an example, the width of the keel varies along the length, in several drawings this is not shown, the width being the same as at midship.
No, I have not built a 74, perhaps I never will, but I have begun to tackle the project in 3D CAD.
No, I do not think that I cannot build a 74 because of the errors, I simply have to surmount them. I have my (many) doubts about my wood working ability but fewer about a 3D CAD "build" -errors are easier to spot and correct in the virtual environment.
My point remains the same, Boudroit's books and Lemineur's plans offer, probably, the most comprehensive resource to the building of a 74. Though not without inevitable errors, their value remains. That these publications are all you need for perfection is misrepresenting the truth, there is still a lot of drafting work to be done. And skill. Time will tell as to how well I will do, probably not at all well, but the journey will be interesting, as will discussions along the road.
 
Ken

Usually the next one, but for a serious answer, Caldercraft's Imara has plenty of scope for detailing and some whizz-bang RC features.

Before CAD, when I was a pen and paper draughtsman, proportional dividers were an essential bit of kit and I own an expensive pair.
They are little used these days, but I would not be without them.
One word of caution when using them for planking (as has been mentioned above). When measuring from the frames or bulkheads, you are measuring the chord- a straight line between two points on the circumference of a circle or arc- not the length of the arc itself= the width of the plank. In most ship model situations the error will be so small as to be irrelevant, but it is there.

Nope, not possible with the weight and trucks (wheels) do not swivel.
The recoil forced the cannon far enough inboard, restrained by the ropes, to clean and reload.

I  agree on the 0 errors point. It must also be said that Boudroit's volumes on the 74 gun ship were never intended to be a practicum for model makers. That said, they are an essential reference for anyone who intends to make such a model.
I own the English translations of Boudroit's  masterwork and some of the errors may derive from that, whilst all the drawings are scaled, that the dimensions vary from French "pieds" to metres requires concentration.
As an example, the width of the keel varies along the length, in several drawings this is not shown, the width being the same as at midship.
No, I have not built a 74, perhaps I never will, but I have begun to tackle the project in 3D CAD.
No, I do not think that I cannot build a 74 because of the errors, I simply have to surmount them. I have my (many) doubts about my wood working ability but fewer about a 3D CAD "build" -errors are easier to spot and correct in the virtual environment.
My point remains the same, Boudroit's books and Lemineur's plans offer, probably, the most comprehensive resource to the building of a 74. Though not without inevitable errors, their value remains. That these publications are all you need for perfection is misrepresenting the truth, there is still a lot of drafting work to be done. And skill. Time will tell as to how well I will do, probably not at all well, but the journey will be interesting, as will discussions along the road.
 
Ken

Lovely work, I'll watch this with interest.
What software is being used for the figurehead?
Thanks
 
Ken

Thank you, I'll take a look at that!
 
Ken

Lovely work, I'll watch this with interest.
What software is being used for the figurehead?
Thanks
 
Ken

My introduction to wooden model ships came out of the blue when the Admiral bought me AL's "Scottish Maid" as a Christmas present.
What a mess I made of it!
Thirty years later I have learned much, but have much more to learn.
Watching the posts here - those looking for help- reminds me of my early struggles.
Planking and rigging problems appear regularly from the novice or first-timer and still trouble experienced builders.
So, is there a place for and introductory series of kits?
The first would concentrate on planking- a half-hull model, POB, mounted on a stout board (MDF) with some nice, complicated lines.
Such a kit could concentrate on the planking alone and offer detailed instructions and decent wood at not too great a cost.
The end result to be hung on the wall as your first step into the art.
For an introduction to rigging, a section of deck around a mainmast. An MDF block extending to the width of the deck, fore and aft to encompass the required standing and running rigging, and depth to include the attachment of the chain plates, veneer planking. Full-height mast and, again, the novice learns a lot and ends up with a displayable object.
With such skills acquired relatively cheaply, our newcomer can approach a complete, POB, vessel with much more confidence than many of us have on our third or fourth build.
Or, is the desire to start with a full-on, 1:96, HMS Victory, too hard to resist? Even when (as has been suggested elsewhere) the majority languish uncompleted. 
Just an idle thought-what do you think?
 
Ken

Thank you, I'll take a look at that!
 
Ken

Lovely work, I'll watch this with interest.
What software is being used for the figurehead?
Thanks
 
Ken

zbrush - Digital engraving software

Casting the net further around the world, check out www.pandaw.com for some contemporary rivercraft (built as recently as 2013) based on sternwheeler designs from the 1880's.
This is where I am headed for this year's project.
 
Ken
 

Casting the net further around the world, check out www.pandaw.com for some contemporary rivercraft (built as recently as 2013) based on sternwheeler designs from the 1880's.
This is where I am headed for this year's project.
 
Ken
 

Try taking a look at the suppliers of accessories (in 1:48 scale) for the plastic military modelling diorama scene.
A quick look brings up oil barrels and much else, some nice clutter to enhance your model.
(No cotton bales that I have found yet!)
 
Ken

I don't know, but as ratlines are the means of getting aloft and the crew need to get aloft I'd say yes.

I don't know, but as ratlines are the means of getting aloft and the crew need to get aloft I'd say yes.

The grain will also depend on how the planks or billets were sawn from the original log.
In English this is known as "conversion" and there are four principal methods.- through and through, flat (or plain) and quartersawing (modern or traditional). Each method has both strengths and weaknesses and the conversion method is chosen to suit the intended purpose.
Terry Porter's book "Wood Identification and Use"  is a fine resource and will introduce readers to a vast range of woods to consider for use.
 
Ken

Here, in the UK, the cheapest (inevitably) come from China, but the quality is acceptable if you are prepared to wait a month or so for delivery.
Many are labelled "PCB Mills" (Printed circuit board) for the electronics market and can be found on Amazon with standard 3.2mm shanks and a mill size down to 0.25mm.
The price can be worryingly cheap - around a tenth of that of UK suppliers- but, with care, they work well.
Below 1mm dia I have only used them as drills, above 1mm they perform well as mills.
 
Ken

Here, in the UK, the cheapest (inevitably) come from China, but the quality is acceptable if you are prepared to wait a month or so for delivery.
Many are labelled "PCB Mills" (Printed circuit board) for the electronics market and can be found on Amazon with standard 3.2mm shanks and a mill size down to 0.25mm.
The price can be worryingly cheap - around a tenth of that of UK suppliers- but, with care, they work well.
Below 1mm dia I have only used them as drills, above 1mm they perform well as mills.
 
Ken