garyshipwright

Hi Danial. Just to let you know good sir I have a very high respect for your skill and a out standing build that show's a very very high skill of work and understanding of your build. If i was a judge in a show of model's, I would give you the gold, silver and bronze medal's. You would deserve every one of them. Please keep up the outstanding build. Gary

Thanks druxey, more to come.

Hello every one. Here is a small update on my build showing the stages that making a cast knee goes through to become a cast knee for my build. Also a few photos showing the fore mast partner on the upper gun deck beams.The photo also show's the bolts being installed and is made up of 10 piece's of wood. Hope you enjoy the photo's

Mark I have to agree with druxey on the exhaust of the stove and on the sheaves and or standards I do believe you would be ok if you added them or didn't. I have gone through my plans and some show the breast work knees and some that don't. The same thing with models some have them others do not. I think that from a different point of view having those knees would help those items to resist the stress of the rigging and being pulled loose from the deck itself. I also found three model's in the gallery that show them having those knees, the Ajax 1767, Hercule/Thunder 1760 and the Egmont 1768, along with the framed Bellona, so I do believe you are in good company. The number of sheaves in them, still looking for a answer on that one.

Hi Stuglo. You are doing a really great job but I would leave a little meat on the parts for finishing. Cutting to the line and leaving your self nothing to finish fairing the cant frames will give you a real head ack which I had to get the misses to buy me a couple of bottles of aspirin that helped when I was building Montague frames. You probably already know this but I like to sneak up on the line which help me, and to this day still sneak up on the line. Keeps me out of trouble. Seems I had to redo my cant's two or three times before I was happy with them and each time i got closer to what I was trying for. Here is a photo or two of the cant frames on my Montague. Keep up the good work and will be watching your build. Hope this is of some help to you. Gary

Mark I have a couple of question if you don't mind. From looking at the deck plan it looks like you have two large carlings underneith the stove. Is there a reason why it is showing two? After looking at the sheer plan, it shows that the pillars are on the side of that carling I mention above and shouldn't they be underneith that carling to support it? Some thing else I noticed Mark is I don't believe that they would have installed a pillar under the cat beam because of the collar beam set up. Here's a photo of my beak head and bellona that you shared that shows the heavy type of stantions that was used to hold the bow sprit in place along with supporting the cat beam. Gary

Thanks Alan.

Alan those are nice and you may of been asked this before, are they hand made or CNC. Either way they are good looking. If CNC what machine are you using, Still have it in the back of my mind about getting one. Thanks. Gary

Hi Marsalv. You are really doing a outstanding job and enjoying your build. Thank you for sharing. Gary

Hi Levmiller. Have you thought about hard Maple. It's a good looking wood and built Richard's frames from it. Its also good for full size furniture like a hobby desk and woodworkers bench. I prefere a light creamy type of wood such as para marfin and castillo box wood and use woods like pear for accent's. The model am building today have para marfin for the frames and really like the color of the wood. Came out like a honey looking color. Gary

Hi Siggi. I saw that sir but it seems to only talk about that part of the deck behind the step it self. Behind the step on the upper deck was the fore mast partner which was the heavy type and at the gun deck you had the standard from the bit pins and in front of the step the standard from the stem to help strength the front of it on the forward side. Thing is it doesn't say any thing about in front of the step at the upper deck. I do think that those carlings that I have installed on Montague may of been supported by the messenger roller's. Goodwin shows them on page 178 and gives a time line of 1790 which is 10 years after Montagea, so could she have had them in her time, and am leaning to the side of she did. Hoping some one will set me straight on this one. I did find some thing on a Victory plan in Arthur Bugler book vol 2, which is the plans that show some thing around the bowsprit but at the moment unsure of what that could be. Another one is what the Victory was post of looked like when she was built, One item to noticed is that the plan, I believe I got from the danish museum, doesn't show her as having the small beakhead platform but just the upper deck planking going from the inside to the out side., and that one is for another day. Thank you Siggi and others for their in put and would of been a lot less fun with out those inputs.

Thank Alan and Mark. Alan I did the same I had some pictures of the walk through and as you say they are awol. Maybe some one some were has a set of those area's. Mark those delicate little diagonal pieces may have been installed to help support the heavy partner planking. My reason is that the hole in this was cut in a circle and you problem had the end of some of the planks sitting on those pieces. At the moment Mark am looking for answer's to you question but its a little on the slow side. Has far as the forward part of this opening I have to agree with Siggi and the most forward part of the hole is underneath the collar beam and my earlier build shows what and how this may of looked under the collar beam that I showed in a early photo. Plans show that beam, but not the stanchions. Mark you show pillars underneath the forecastle beams is there a plan that shows this? So far I have not found any thing that says there was but will look at a couple of items that may agree with that. Mark I looked at a couple of contract's that talk about pillars underneath the quarter deck and forecastle but as far as the forecastle it only mention iron ones around the stove. Gary

Hi Alan and Mark. fore give me guys am still trying to come up with answer for your post but in the mean time does any one have any photos showing the space under neith and on top of the upper deck of the Victory were the bowsprit comes through the deck and also were it come out of the small deck of the beakhead deck? Am trying to figure out how the space around and below was filled in. I know that it is a different time for how Victory is done today but it may help give me clues as to how just maybe it was done then. Thank you and will be back to answer on the upper post. Gary

Thank you druxey. Hi Alan and your very welcome, and I would have to say yes to the question.

Alan here is a couple of photo's of the partner on the gun deck for the main mast showing it's construction. Hope you enjoy the photo's. Also i don't think the lighter partners could be moved and once installed could not be adjusted,like the heavy partner's. Gary

Hi Alan. Your right sir all decks had partners but there is a difference in those partners. If you look in vol 1 of the Swan, pg 259, 264 and 265 you will see the partners of the lower deck's. If you go to vol 2, page 60, 61,62,63,64, and page 65 you will see that those partners are of a heavy type and not all decks had this type. The mizen mast partners on the upper deck was just a heavy type of of planking rabbet together to make up the mast partner. Your right and all deck's had partners but there is a difference in what type was used on what deck. I have some photo's of alfred deck plan and you will see the difference of the heavy type of mast partner and the type that was just a heavier type of planking. I agree also that the rake was set depending on what the Captain wanted and how he wanted her to sail. If you look at vol 1 page 199, 200 and 201 , on page 199, you can see that the step could be moved forward or backward depending on what the Captain wanted. On page 200 he does say that in larger ships the foremast was moveable and when you look up the French 74 you will be able to see how this was done. On a 74 English the step was installed most of the time between two breast hooks and by moving wedges on either side could be moved forward or backwards to the whim of the Captain. The mizzen on larger ships such as 74, the mizzen mast step could have been on the orlop deck the, keel and the only way to know was to research those items. Was it adjustable on that I don't believe it was but have been wrong before. Forgive me for not being more precise on the difference of the two type's of partners, and the heavy type is the one I was talking about. Here are some Photos of Alfred's gun deck and upper deck and quarter deck and forcastle. deck. You will noticed that on Alfred gun deck at the main mast you will see the heavy type but when you go up to the upper deck you will see a lighter partner. Same thing at the fore mast accept this time the heavy type is on the upper deck and a lighter one is on the gun deck. Some times the one on the gun deck looks like a heavy one but contracts don't say this. If it looked like the upper deck main mast then to me it would have been a lighter one. Maybe it had a lot more pressure then what the other mast had. You will also noticed that the mizzen mast partner is just a hole in the deck. Was the mast wedge at each deck am sure they were, but am not sure if they installed the rain coat on each deck or just the one's open to the weather. Alan i laid out the photo's so they would I hope make sense. The first of three are of alfreds upper gun deck going from the stern to the bow. The next set is the gun deck going from the bow to the stern. The next set is the Hector upper deck going from the stern to the bow and finally the last three is of the fore castle, quarter deck main mast and finally the quarter deck. The should show you the difference on Alfred's heavy partner and light partner. I don't have Victory deck lay out so am not sure how they was laid out but being she was a first rate she probably had two per mast but that is just a guess. My apology for making it confusing. If you want some of other deck,s from other ships I will be more then happy to upload them here for you. It was the misses fault alan, she made me take her to the store and didn't have time to properly answer your question and thats my story and am sticking to it.😁

The short answer Alan is no. The main mast partner is on the gun deck and the foremast is on the upper deck. the mizzen mast doesn't really have a partner like the other two, more of just a heavy set of planks around it. I have seen plans were there was some times two or they was installed on another deck, but most of the time the norm was just one each. On the two forward mast they were able to shifted the tilt of the mast forward or back ward due to the way the step was set up. I don't believe that the mizzen mast was set up the same way. Alan the misses wants me to take her to the store so when I get back I give you some more detail on them. As far as the bowsprit it seems she had a step then a collar beam/stations plus was clamped between the knight heads, along with binging heavly tied in place, plus some more rigging, so with all that I don't think it was going any place.Some times looking and researching is a pain in the butt. Gary

Siggi your english is good sir and understand every word you spoke. Shoot I can barely speak english much less another language. For some reason I think the green item might be a cover like a scuttle hole and the square behind it as the foot of the Fore topsail sheet bitts. If you look at the green item it shows dash lines on the sides that maybe saying it is a cover of some sort with the aft and forward piece being small ledges to help support it. Looking at the large carling I think they ran all the way over to the side of what am thinking is a cover and that the blue items are battens that run on top of the main carling. It shows them running all the way back to the front of the fore mast partner and up under neither the collums of the bulk head. Maybe battens that would level with the green hatch and a place for the planking to butt up against the side of it all being level with the planking it self. A scuttle here would keep people from falling down the rabbet hole. And one would then not be to worried about the planking part. The forward side of the hole would be filled with the bowsprit so don't think planking would be necessary and if nothing else a large cover that would be rabbit in to the carlings to cover the gap. . Just my thoughts folks and you input please. Alan i have to agree with you about the item in David's book but am thinking this would come in to play more around the bowsprit has it comes through the small beak head deck, to make the hole water tight. Thank you. Gary

Thanks druxey, Hubac's, Alan, Mark and Siggi. Every bit help guys. druxey I took a look at Longridge plate and your probably right there may of been some type of landing and will just have to work through it. Mark the framing of the beakhead that is in the photo's was version 1 of the frame work, which is gone and looks like the one with the stump bowsprit at the moment. Siggi thats a good one sir and it looks as if its a as built plan with the parts and pieces not all being symmetric. When looking forward at the middle of the beam arms you see the carling but unsure of how wide those carling's really are. Also any ideal of what the square's in the middle are? You can see were the ledges are installed on the outside of the middle carling but then what looks like another skinny carling is sitting on top of the bottom one. The smaller ledges sitting on top of the lower carling looks like what I have on Montuga. The bottom carling if I may call it that really looks very wide don't you think. I don't see the step for the bowsprit but that may just be the way am looking at it. Do you know what the two squares are that is sitting between the carlings. Best guess maybe. Thanks Siggi, do you have a sheer plan of this same place to look at. Was wondering if you can see how the side of the step for the bowsprit looked. Interesting plan Siggi and again thank you. it seems my knowledge is showing or maybe my lack of. Thanks again every one.

Alan here's a old one showing the crew goofing off. Gary

Hi Alan. I do think that they had what I think was at least a box like bracing around the vertical mast and called it a collar beams. , to have a collar beam afore at the heights of the ports, 11 inches square, kneed at each end with on substantial iron knee, bolted with six saucer headed bolts of 1 inch diameter, or have two stantions run down to a cant on the upper deck and half beams with a rabbitt for the plank of the beakhead, as shall be directed. Mark has a photo of the Bellona beak head that show those two stantions . do believe that had a hard time getting a collar beam and settled on the Stanction's. This is a earlier photo before I started the deck over and tore all of this out. Thanks Alan but I believe you are experienced modeller and thanks for all the help you do give me.

Hello every one. Need some thought's on this and maybe a little input. The carlings that was installed on the sides of the bow sprit on the upper deck, I believe to keep it locked in place from shifting side ways, maybe or just to support the ledges on the outside. Most plans don't t show nothing like ledges between them to support the planking. Come to think of it most plans don't show ledges at all, at least not any that I have looked at. Any ideal's? I drew up what I thought may of been there to support the deck planks around the bow sprint, but can not find any info on what was there. Am sure they filled in between with ledges, but just want some thought's on it. I looked in the swan books and a few more but unsure. Thanks in advance. Don't be to hard on my drawing and who knows maybe in my next life time I come back as Michelangelo😁

This is outstanding Alan and as druxey said look forward to seeing you getting back to working on her.

Hi Giampiero Your stove looks outstanding and the metal work to. Nice job sir. Gary

Ok thanks, O by the way you parked it behind my car in the drive way. Thanks. Gar