-Dallen

Its really  a VERY simple answer.  Dont Use the Ancre plans at all. Dont use the Ancre drawings at all .  You can learn a great deal from those books as a reference and source of inspiration but rather than replicate them and adding more to them....simply pick a 74 gun ship other than those from a plan by La Charpente....get the original drafts of a similar 74 and draft your model plans from them, using the knowledge you have gleaned from the Ancre books and other sources while avoiding any copying/duplication at all.  Thus you will have created an original Kishmul set of plans that are entirely your own.
 
Otherwise you would be really walking a thin line ....If you have the knowledge and skill to fill in the blanks that are missing from someone elses efforts....then certainly you would also have the chops to not use someone elses efforts as a starting point, and instead...simply flush out a whole new project from A thru Z ......rather than take A thru M from someone else and then supplement with your own N thru Z.    
 
Chuck

ofencer -
 
We have established a policy acceptable here - please don't muddy the waters with what is done elsewhere.  Please read the policy and posts that were linked in my earlier post.
Kurt
 

Based on US Law
Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States CodeIn short.... If it aint yours it's copyrighted and you must obtain permission or release to publish, amend or offer for profit.

Based on US Law
Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States CodeIn short.... If it aint yours it's copyrighted and you must obtain permission or release to publish, amend or offer for profit.

if u just draw cad on  your pc never mind;
but if u send or sell them the copyright must be.

Yes i agree instructions are of up most important for beginners / Rigging complicated models, i am quite lucky as my father was a boat builder for around 10 years building million dollar launches and yachts. he taught me how to interpret real plans, from the kits i have looked at even beginner models give the impression that you have many years woodworking experience and tend to skip important steps.
 
Ps never go billing boats the instructions are terrible 

I agree that instructions are important.  My current build didn't really offer a lot, 3 pages of written instructions and a few pictures.  This forum has helped me a lot.
 
 
For my next build I chose the Bluenose because I've heard that Model Shipways has very good instructions.  I've received the boat and sure enough, there is a 32 (or so) page manual plus 6 full size drawings.
 
But just to make sure I have all the information available I purchased a practicum from Bob Hunt at Lauck Street Shipyards.  He offers quite detailed build instructions including a disc with a few hundred reference photos.
 
I also purchased one of the books that Model Shipways used as reference when making their Bluenose plans.
 
I'm thinking I should be loaded now for reference material.

I built Constructo's Enterprise, and the instructions left lots to be desired, but I think they've updated the kit since then.I swear by Frank Mastini's "Ship Modeling Simplified," While not specific to one kit, it is a step-by-step guide that, with a good set of plans, can get you going on any beginner or internediate model. I gave the book and MS Bluenose to my father in law and he built a very nice ship, so that might be a kit to consider.

I just bought the HM Bomb Vessel Granado 1:64 by Victory and the Lady's Cutter. I'll let you know what I think when they get here.
 
I didn't know you could check model shipways plans first. I see them under documentation now. Thanks!

Plus he has a practicum also doesn't he?
 
Another recommendation would be Victory Models' Lady Nelson cutter. Only one mast's worth of rigging to deal with, but it's a mast with full shrouds and square yards and a gaff boom so it's representative of all the other masts you'll run into, excepting the not complicated differences between that and one with all square sails. That's about as easy as it gets, and in doing it you can understand all the ropes and standing rigging for that one mast in isolation. Then you can move to two masts and then three, now that you can see them as consisting of two or three units of that mast you now understand.
 
Also buy Rigging Period Ship Models and Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War 1625 - 1860, both of which come with lots and lots of clear diagrams and drawings and explanations of what everything does and why.

It's not a stupid question, just one without a clear answer because there are so many variables.
 
Model Expo's instructions seem to vary in quality depending on how old the kit is; the good news is that all of their kits' instructions are posted on their website, so you can review the entire process before diving in. It's a very helpful way to judge if a kit (and its instructions) are suitable. For example, Sultana has a regular set of instructions and then a long, detailed practicum (I haven't built this kit, but I've consulted its practicum before for some good drawings of certain concepts that apply to other situations).
 
Personally, if something like Niagara is overwhelming you, maybe look for a simpler kit? A nice sloop with one mast where you can learn the basics of rigging and then apply them to a more complex situation? I've heard very good things about BlueJacket, though I haven't built one of their kits yet.

Chuck Passaro's Syren (Model Shipways kit) has great plans and detailed instructions. Check out some of the builds here. Chuck is also a PM away for questions.
 
Russ

Keep in mind that the wale(s) were structural members, not decoration or "fenders".  In part, they acted like barrel hoops, tying the frames together and also as a strong point for deck clamps, knees, etc.
 
    In the 1600s, and prior (not sure of the dates) each frame futtock was secured to a wale rather than it's neighboring futtock.  That is why the earlier vessels have so many wales.

Hi Erik;
 
Herring above is essentially correct,  but strictly speaking double wales were made obsolete by the 1719 establishment,  which says of wales:
 
'Wales: and the Stuff between them to be of an Equal Thickness: To be worked withe Hook and Butt'
 
It then lists the various widths and thicknesses of wales for the different rates.  For example,  60 gun ship 3'10" wide x 7" thick.
 
However,  some vessels continued to be built with double wales,  primarily first rates,  I think (I stand to be corrected on this point)
 
The Royal Yacht 'Royal Caroline' launched in 1749 had double wales also;  possibly because her predecessor had them,  and the new yacht was pretty much a copy as far as hull design was concerned. 
 
The model shown above is not firmly identified,  but features in Brian Lavery's book 'The ship of the line: a history in ship models',  where he describes several of the model's features as being rather old-fashioned,  including the double wales,  full-length lateen yard,  and location of the channels.  The model is believed to be the 'Yarmouth' built to the 1741 establishment. 
 
The 'dockyard' style of open hull framing was also going out of fashion around this time,  being replaced by the 'Georgian',  which features solid,  normally planked,  hulls.
 
It is therefore just possible that the model does not represent the vessel as actually built,  but as a traditionally-minded model builder wanted her to appear.
 
All the best,
 
Mark P

It partly depends on what your sails are made out of. Some people stretch the sails over a curved frame and fix them with a spray. Others run fine wire inside the seams and let the wire hold the shape. For my longboat build, I made the sails from paper, which held a curve without any extra work.

What a great idea.
I use a strip of rigid clear plastic as a spacer and guide.
But that does not stop what you call the hourglass effect which is always a problem.
The twin strips and sandpaper will sort that out a treat.
So I will be stealing this if you don't mind.
Nice one!!!

Good idea for a simple tool to make a difficult task easier !  But the title of the post is misleading or even wrong: ratlines don't actually need to be 'tensioned', in reality they are slightly sagging due to their own weight. This uniform sagging is rather difficult to reproduce, as the catena-shape changes as you proceed upward.
 
I would modify the tool a bit and drill two holes in the ends for a couple of machine screws with wing-nuts. But take caution not to squeeze the shrouds flat ...

fmartins
 
The wales always seem to be thicker than the rest of the planking. They are named in relationship to their location. as such, channel wales are where the channel fastenings are. The planks below this are the main wales. The plank below the main wales are referred to as Diminishing planks or strakes and the thickness reduces to the dimensions of the lower planking. This is pretty basic and I’m no means an authority.

Amazing project for first build. Scale and presentation are fabulous. This scale would be much to intricate for my eyesight, but a joy to follow.

fmartins
 
The wales always seem to be thicker than the rest of the planking. They are named in relationship to their location. as such, channel wales are where the channel fastenings are. The planks below this are the main wales. The plank below the main wales are referred to as Diminishing planks or strakes and the thickness reduces to the dimensions of the lower planking. This is pretty basic and I’m no means an authority.

fmartins
 
The wales always seem to be thicker than the rest of the planking. They are named in relationship to their location. as such, channel wales are where the channel fastenings are. The planks below this are the main wales. The plank below the main wales are referred to as Diminishing planks or strakes and the thickness reduces to the dimensions of the lower planking. This is pretty basic and I’m no means an authority.

Amazing project for first build. Scale and presentation are fabulous. This scale would be much to intricate for my eyesight, but a joy to follow.

Amazing project for first build. Scale and presentation are fabulous. This scale would be much to intricate for my eyesight, but a joy to follow.

More balsa and a few strips of scrap wood to make the arcade stuff (don't know the name     )...
 


 
The balsa pieces also help to form the gunports.
 
I totally forgot to take pictures, but I glued the gun carriages in to the their positions in the gunports (two of them may be seen from outside - more pics later...) under this second deck (      stupid me!).
 
This is was a prototype for the gun carriages (the cannons themselves were not included as I thought I would break them easily - they'll be glued in the final stages of the model - if it survives...)
 
First try - thick card. Not good.
 

 
Second attempt - wood veneer (no idea what wood this is... I just bought a pile of scraps...     )
 

 
Toothpick for the cannon...
 

 
A second set...
 

 
Both together...
 

 
Ruler for size... (out of scale but still cool!)
 

 
And my thumb for reference too...
 

 
It'd be much easier to turn the cannons if I had a lathe or a rotary tool (I'll try to purchase one, 'cause doing all these by hand will be too time consuming and time is one of my restrictions lately).
 
 
 
 
 
 

After a few attempts, I think that the deck planking was not so horrible...
 


 
The hole you guys see in the middle section was the fruit of my illusion to add some real miniature grating      ... All the gunports were also painted red. Due to the small size, I think I'll have to use CA glue to secure the bow planks in place, so instead of wood, I carved/sanded a plastic piece (to make it easier, I think...).
 
The same was done with the other decks...
 

 
With a bit of improvised weathering (yeah everything's improvised!!!      )