As TERRIBLE is a quite far way project please do not be too disappointed if some progress is far away. The first thing I have to do is to lay my hand on good enlargable copys of the three relevant van de Velde drawings. After this I buy a

small clear glas table to copy the lines by illuminating the plan and transparent paper from below. So this is step A. Afterwards the drawings have to be turned into proper technical drawings of a 2D kind... 

So this will consume some time.

Thanks a lot, Claude! What I think is that any minute you invest into researchs adds a week if detail or rebuild work on the workbranch into your model... 

...and often months of stand still at the shipyard due to redesigning everything again.

Hello guys!

I went back here to work on

my stand to let him* look like wood.

There is a really long, stony hard road to transform plastic into wood... these guy how transformed water into wine must have had a similar job (but I get close to him... Yeeees, I do! Behold this! My wine of yesterday tasted like vinegar tonight  ) - but he was a carpenter, wasn't he?

There are some last glossy spots I have to deal with a pice of  60grain sandpaper to get rid of them.

But for God's sake it started to look like orange-tree-wood.

Not everything looks as perfect as I wish to have it or looks like I deamed it would come out - but I got closer to a solution I can say to:

"Okay Heller - kit you are half a century old, I have done my part of the job - now it is time for you and some colour to found a joint-venture and the colour has to show that it can do its job, too!"

_______

*as all ships are a "SHE" someMAN has to lift her over the treshold... I am against gendering ships to a neutral - there is one German ship that is not a femal and was declared male - the biggest German passenger ship of the world

S/S IMPERATOR of the H.A.P.A.G. in 1913 - a ship we could say: "She was the largest craft afloat and the greatest of the works of man." Moran Robertson first line in his novelle Futility (in what he describel the lost of TITANIC 14 years before it does happen in reality - no great literature, but a prophetical thing to read for those that are interested in naval history it was obvious that a this accident will happen and the companys looked no gazed on the stakeholder's values all over the world - world turned since than but didn't change a bit!)**

___________

**This was a typical HdS topicdisgressionation.

Thanks Sir for this intersting article series about H.M.S.TERROR and your build. I was watching the movie and read some books and articles online but could not reach the point to buy this kit. As you show how she is to build I am interested and think it might be an astonisching present for my wife who starts her own modelship career these days with wounderful precice output. As we both have seen the movieseries she will be interested to build and bash this kit. So I will follow you further steps and have a look onto your solutions on this build*. .

So I am highly interested in your further progresses with this kit and seaching for a yellow bathtube's duck. Thanks for sharing your first steps into this wounderful hobby and welcome back again ;).

*She told me she would change the gratings as she remembers that there were no isolation cloth unter the grating in the movie and recognized that the thinner planks were adjusted into grooves in thicker bars as a crossover unit. By watching several building reports on YT she got a good knowledge and became very critical on this kit gratings - and today she figured out if it is a kit or a scracht build with an eye on this particular feature. Here one way to build those more close to the original prototype - from somewhere here on this side by paragraf.

Hoping to give some helping hand to you. Please do not try to tear the gratings out if the are glued in, the trail to remove them may ruin the hole deck. The holes in the gratings have to be in that kind that a shoe's heel isn't stuck in there. (What makes it obviously why Ahab hadn't had a conical whalebone's end as his foots small surfaced substitution.)

Hope this helpes.

And I made her device/motto on the miszzen mast's plate to the sentence in my signature:

Hello again - as my job is it to look in to people minds (not brains! I'm not a serial killer or neurosurgeon) I looked into my own and figured out something interestin. Perchance you are interested into this thoughts, too?  There is an evel trap in our mind I figured out... we would like to see something matching to our own anticipations and so our brain "changes" reality and by this it trickily makes thinks fitting to thoughts. 

Our eyes say:"These two pictures do fit together - that is easily to see!" because we estimate if the front is high the back has also to be like this - a high front and a high end do correspondent to our wishes.

But when we take the other comparing drawing we say: "Hmmm... this two drawings from the front can never show to me the identical ship - that is impossible!"

 Our brain tells us:

"If the red drawing matches to the backside of the other drawing the sepia one can never fit - it is some big frigat or some unimportand little Dutch 50-gun ship!"

But then I compared the both sepia drawings directly - and as I am some grumpy old rivet counter I counted the gun barrels and alternativly the lids, too, we figure out that there are a plenty of similarities in number of guns and lids.

Due to the perspective the tree headlamps in the front view merge into a cluster - they are not nicely seperated that looks strange to our eyes. The angele of view changes in the acters perspective from a low one (in a boat?) to a high one looking directly into the 24 pounders muzzle by this the frontview looks smaller.  This perspective lets the hull appear a plenty much taller in the transom view. 

That was the story behinde it - and the reason why I countet the barrels. There is one new question reaching the surface of my mind:

are their stairways on both sides of the hull when the French Navy adopted woodel stairs instead of simple rope ladders?

6 hours ago, Heinrich der Seefahrer said:

As often some decoration was recycled at the rebuild I imagine the 1670 TERRIBLE wasn't so devastated that some of her woodwork to sculptures was rescued and reused... So my drawn invest into the 2nd TERRIBLE wasn't wasted work and time. 

Okay let us have some closer look onto the 1st TERRIBLE of 1670's data and we do start with the numbers we do get at https://threedecks.org :

Quote

 

Le Terrible			13488
Nominal Guns	70	NNF-1661
Nationality	Royaume de France
Operator	Marine Royale
Keel Laid Down	10.1669	NNF-1661
Launched	19.9.1670	NNF-1661
First Commissioned	1671
How acquired	Purpose built	NNF-1661
Shipyard	Brest - Brittany	NNF-1661
Constructor	Laurent Hubac	NNF-1661
Category	Second Rate	NNF-1661
National Rate	Deuxième Rang
Ship Type	Ship of the Line
Sailing Rig	Ship Rigged
Wrecked	11.5.1678	NNF-1661

 

Dimensions

DimensionMeasurementTypeMetric EquivalentNNF-1661
Length of Gundeck140' 0"French Feet (Pied du Roi)45.472 (149′ 2″ Imperial)
Length of Keel125' 0"French Feet (Pied du Roi)40.6 (133′ 2″ Imperial)
Breadth37' 6"French Feet (Pied du Roi)12.0408 (39′ 6″ Imperial)
Depth in Hold17' 0"French Feet (Pied du Roi)5.5216 (18′ 1″ Imperial)
Burthen1,300Ton 

Armament

1671Broadside Weight = 524 French Livre (565.5008 lbs 256.498 kg)NNF-1661
Lower Gun Deck26 French 24-Pounder
Upper Gun Deck26 French 12-Pounder
Quarterdeck/Forecastle16 French 6-Pounder
Quarterdeck/Forecastle4 French 4-Pounder
 

Crew Complement

Date# of MenNotesSource
1671409 NNF-1661

3 Commanding Officers

DatesRankNameSource
1672Lieutenant-Général des armées navalesAbraham II Duquesne (1610-1688)ref:6871673Chef d'escadreHector des Ardens (1620-1675)FWIKI3.10.1677 - 11.5.1678Capitaine de VaisseauNicholas Lefèvre de MéricourtEWIKI

1 Flag Officer

DatesRankNameSource
3.10.1677 - 11.5.1678Vice-AmiralJean d'Estrées (Comte d'Estrées) (1624-1707)EWIKI

1 Crewman

DatesRatingNameSource
1672Volontaire de la MarineSimon de Pas (Chevalier de Feuquières) (1655-1692)ref:687

Service History

DateEventSource
28.5.1672Battle of Solebay
28.5.1673First Battle of Schooneveld
4.6.1673Second Battle of Schooneveld
11.8.1673Battle of Texel
11.12.16772nd Battle of Tobago
11.5.1678 Wrecked in central America

 

 

I.

And with thhis very last lin emy hope of the usual reuse of the decorational scuptures are fading away! 

 

 

II.

Lest testify out faith in Marc! He figured out that thje Drawing is a drawing of Terrible - one ogf the first 72-gun-ships of the French Navy!

So we ask Sesamstreet's Count...

 

Lower Gun Deck: 26 French 24-Pounder ( starboard side 13 gun ports in light blue)
Upper Gun Deck: 26 French 12-Pounder (starboard side 13 gun ports in orangebrown)
Quarterdeck/Forecastle: 16 French 6-Pounder (starboard side 8 gun ports in royal blue)
Quarterdeck/Forecastle: 4 French 4-Pounder (starboard side 2 gun ports in green)

__________________________________________________

Total of bronze guns of all calibre:  72 barrels 

One next fearture of identification is the stairway on the shipsboardsside.

the stairway is here  between gunport 7 and 8( counted from stem).

 

Our only problem is appearing in ther lower transom. There are two surplus guns - as we know these ere very often longbarreled guns of the side batteryswifted to attack through the aft gunports.

So van der Velde imagined these two barrels not to let these ports empty or the lids closed?

 

Okay lets repeat this on the port front view of TERRIBLE (1670) to look if we are still om track with this drawing to our faith into Marcs magic abilities.

 

 

Lower Gun Deck: 26 French 24-Pounder ( starboard side 13 gun ports in light blue) but we have got 16 - the ver stemside my have been disappeared due to the perspective before

Upper Gun Deck: 26 French 12-Pounder (starboard side 13 gun ports in orangebrown) - the 13 guns are as we thought they will be.

Quarterdeck/Forecastle: 16 French 6-Pounder (starboard side 8 gun ports in royal blue) instead of 8 we got 13 gunports. 

Quarterdeck/Forecastle: 4 French 4-Pounder (starboard side 2 gun ports in green) on the backdeck we have got 2 guns fore shore a third may be there or some ornamental or catheads part - but there are 5 further gunports on the poopdeck.

 

Let's count together:

16 

14

13

02

05

___

50

So we have got to thake is as double so there she is a 90 - 100 gun ship here and not a 72 barreler. 😲

 

 

 

 So if we look at the numbers for RTh at www.threedecker.org we do get the following information:

Quote

 

Armament

1670Broadside Weight = 710 French Livre (766.232 lbs 347.545 kg)W033
Lower Gun Deck: 10 French 36-Pounder
Lower Gun Deck: 16 French 24-Pounder
Middle Gun Deck: 26 French 18-Pounder
Upper Gun Deck: 24 French 8-Pounder
Quarterdeck: 4 French 4-Pounder

1671Broadside Weight = 608 French Livre (656.1536 lbs 297.616 kg)NNF-1661
Lower Gun Deck: 24 French 24-Pounder
Middle Gun Deck: 24 French 18-Pounder
Upper Gun Deck: 24 French 8-Pounder
Quarterdeck/Forecastle: 4 French 4-Pounder

 

That corresponds quite better to the stemshowing portside view and the factum that we do see three tiers of guns or arrels shadows. So the assingnement to ROYAL THÉRÉSE looks quite logical and so we do lose one source!

 

Further evidence is given by the

much longer stairway showing clearly this ship is a threedecker ! Also the stairway started between LD gunport 8 and 9 - typical design feature?

 

 

And there is a second drawing from the very same piont of view painted:

The stairs are also here starting at the CWL betwen gunport 7 and 8 - clearly showin this is a doubledecker not a three'er!

 

And now to the at least blurriest vdV-drawing:

 

 

 

Where the cacao dot or blood stain is more visiable as the lines... so a good part of my counting is guessiung for the 6pdr and 4 pdr in particular but for the 24 pdr and 12 pdr it is obvies that the number is right but here the stairway is one gunport toward the stem. It is positonated  between gunort N°. 8  and 7 - If the hile number is not to be shiftef to the stem as the encloses empty gunport N°1 is closes and due to this not to be seen. So the answer of the wrong and wrigth decission for the placment of the staiirway is not at it's very end.

 

So we can see the half of the pictures given to us as TERRIBLE 1670 by Marc is proven as rigth by counting the tiers and guns. One is defently not TERRIBLE 1670 - it may be a drawing of ROYAL THÉRÉSE or some other three decker. Thje fourth drawing is the most specteular one as it may have the most evidence but we are unable to see it. 

 

So what we do need some better reproduction - and I got the information from the Albertina in Vienna that a repicturion of the ROYAL LOUIS will cost about €80,- (by today: US$ 89,03/AUS$ 190,9/CAN$ 117,8) without p&p. 

 

So my question to Marc is if he knows where these two of three (the best bow/portside vies is at the NMM) drawings of interest are stored recently.

 

 

Thanks for your intrest and enjoy your rest of the weekend!

 

 

 

 

 

 

At first I will do some political statement:

Hello friends of the sunbathed baroque shipbuilding!

Okay I have clearly overestimated my abilities to reconstruck a complete transom artistically from scatch in a believable baroque manner. So I now have to turn the boat towards some realistic goal. At TERRIBLE this can only be the First Navy's version. 

Contributed to Marc's knowledge* we do have got FOUR contemporary drawings:

Van der Velde

vdV believable TERRIBLE official named ROYAL THÉRÈSE.

The bow portside view of RTh - so we got a second view on TERRIBLE as we trust in Marc. 

If we do so than this is also a vdV contemporary drawing and ink of the first TERRIBLE so this comes closer to faith in Marc than he ever believed to become a theological figure... (duck&cover).

(...pic will follow haven'tgit the book at hand...)

N°5 is the Pierre Puget drawing of the luxuriant transom with figures and one obelisc - as we see on the upper drawings this concept wasn't realized (I think due to the ROYAL LOUIS list problems by the heavy figuration of transom and balconies). But I think the exentric artist will habe saved some of his ideas into the built version. Due to this three as built drawings and the artconcept we have some as good database as with ROYAL LOUIS 1667.

With my oldschool method of transparent paper and pen I hope the catch as much detail out of the vdV-pictures az possible

There is really trouble in front of my to identify  what is the real figure 

behind some flourish curlicule. VdV were both masters in the light imitations ofof details.

But we have some very clear parts we can copy and place! 

As often some decoration was recycled at the rebuild I imagine the 1670 TERRIBLE wasn't so devastated that some of her woodwork to sculptures was rescued and reused... So my drawn invest into the 2nd TERRIBLE wasn't wasted work and time. 

If we compare the Heller hull to the VdV drawing we can lean back and smile. The interisting features are the combat cloth hiding material covering the men and blocking enemy's line of sight. Battleships allways collect the most modern inventions and the shipbuilders did pick out the redest cherries they could get.

...and the artillery is all bronze cast so no mixture lower decorated iron and sophisticated sculptured bronze ordonance is to be done. (Also the panier is right for me: I also do not retreat even outnumbered {one man and four hulls}

...and b.t.w. my coffeypot says "Daily Dose" not the whiskey bottle[she must be empty fore some future ship in the bottle project for Christmas.)

Thanks for your interest, patiente, engagement and kind reaction.

Yours Christian Heinrich

P.S.:

If we turn the picture just a little bit everything comes back to order...

_______

*Do your colleagues at work not believe what your hobby is or have you got a modelship in your bureau?

9 hours ago, Hubac's Historian said:

(...)

 

 

 

 

I’m confused as to what your approach will be, here, Chris.  Are you going to plank over the cardboard patterns with styrene strip, or are you going to cut new decks from styrene sheet and plank over those?

 

(...)

My English is too bad you see, Marc, I want to test fit the cardboard decks - then cutting them to fit into the hull. And when they do fit I will reshape the kits plastic deck to fit into the hull - then the plastic deck from the Heller kit will be plankedandgettingsome waterway.

Hy Marc,

so your tip is to retry the REYNE as she is closest to the SR... hmmmm. Good suggestion - I will think about it. They both being close relatives is not some adrgument it is a very strong argument to vote for REYNE. 

On the other hand PARIS has had a lot of

elaborated craved wales - on the vdV drawing of ROYAL THÉRÈSE nothing is left - the gun barrels shadows are absolutely straight and were not staired as we would have anticipated them. The both side gallerys have the very same angel - both following the run of the wales? So the wales were left away due to the optical effect in the drawing?

For PARIS we can see the galleries do fit - for RTh we have good arguments that only transom, side galery and perchance the figurehead were changed but not the hole wales and the planking. Or does there have been any experimenting in the 1670th to built ships without wales?

But for taking REYNE are more good arguments - the one you have given, Marc, and the better situation of sources: the number of  drawings of REYNE is twice as large as of RTh...

and both come from the same hand van der Velde.

We have some drawing of the recycled decoration. 

And some

good detail of the side figure and sidegalery

and transom.

Also the very precice work of Cederic who figured out some very little differences between

SOLEYL ROYAL (blue) and REYNE (red) - the Puget drawing of PARIS gives some very nice detailing of the recycling of the wing figures.

Hello my friends,

as I am afraid of my lost of motiric abilities and selfconfidence by this stroke in June I am testing it on a whaleboat - now back with fresh enthusiasm to the main project and

I managed to cut out the decks pattern to try and dryfit them into the hull next week.  This cutying was less stressfull than I anticipated it to be.

The two halfs sould fit beside the midboard into the hull the complete deck will be nerded for some other projects bashing the Heller hull...*

My main question is how to get a curved end to the decks so it does fit to the transoms inside. So it might be a smart idea to get by building the tole transom first the fitting of the aft ends of all the decks. So there will be no gap between transoms bend inside and the decks convex  plankings end.

As you see also in here Finnegan is always right!

At the moment I deal with the idea of glueing the decks drawing onto the cardboard and dryfit this into the hull so I can use this result as a pattern toof plank the cut to shape Heller drecks by 0,5mm polysterol stripes. 

Hannial Lecter would have casted my problem in one very simple question:

First the transom than the deck or first deck than tansom?

What is your best practice proofed in the hard reality of modelshipbuilding?

_________

*I am still thinking about what to do with this fourth Hellerhull I could get from the internet a further French ship project of the 1st Navy:

ROYAL THÉRÈSE 1669 (ex PARIS)

But the  gundecks and wales look very straight flat and there is no front view**. And I know now I am not allowed to overuse structure for building the hull by changing too much, as it seems mamatoy to have happend to our Beglian colleague with the beautyfull RHEYNE - a project still standing still and the last pictures looked as he tryed to replace the wales by cutting them out. 

** very often one picture is shown as a second

bowside view of ROYAL THÉRÈSE  ut as the NMM writes*** it is not shure. I am still counting the guns and am not able to connecte both views together into a single side that looks in some kind believable.

*** ROYAL THÉRÈSE online article

Or building the hull into some model of

SAINT PHILIPPE of 1663... I'll have to figure out some better picture to decide if this may be some more helpful source than the vdV ink drawing.

...as you can see there are hunderts if rraps to build something wrong. The "Santa Maria" in the Deutsches Technikmuseum has one door that cannot be opened completly as it smashes into the mast in front the bulkhead before it is opened to its half! So even highly payed professional modelship builders do wrong. So you will find minimum one fault in every modelship - is not you have not recognized it till now. So you are inngoid company - we all do wrongs in our models - sometimes because we follow a mistake or irregularity in the plan, we do reconstruct wrongly or we misunderstood a text passage, misdated a stecial feature (s.th. like putting a winch on the deck that has been invented after the ship sunk - so there is no modernisation as an excuse ).

No I don't find some troubles - less circumstances will be in your build if you copy the decks part drawing (simply on transperent paper) and work on the brench with this - seperated from the kit. So you can cut the planks to length and shape - after this you than add it onto the plywood. 

Please remember to lay. some soft cloth between ships hull and stand. This due to the pressure of adding the decks planking that may harm the wounderfull coppering.

The waterway can be simply build by some 1/4 circle of wood bent to the decks outline shape by hot water steam - please remember to add the scubbers by drilling through the hullside and paint it with some plumbum like metal grey. Succubers are one of the very often neglected little details that are able to push your build in the first class row.

If you have a look into Mondfeld Historical Modelshipbuildung there are several examples of scubbers to find - most important is to add one pair (port and starboard!). Placed in the line of the pumps and on tne deepest point of the deck (rectangular to the ships central line) they will be located right.

2 hours ago, mugje said:

I wiped the copper plates clean with a mixture of vinegar and salt. Is isopropanol then still needed? And what do you mean with a clear layer of color? 

To varnish the copper plates?

 

And yes, in the manual they put the deck first on the ship and then planking it. Would it be better not to? (with the next ship :D)

Af far as the fingerprints do disappear there is no problem.

The planking of the deck will get a bit more complicated as the single planks can not be easily pressed onto the plywood. The easier way next time will be to plant the deck, drill the mast and gratingpositions from the downside and after this turn the deck around. By the manuals way to build you have problems to fix the waterway and you can not lay the planks and cut the overlength down to the plywooddeck. So you have got less place to handle anything an the plywood due to the bulkwalks and you have to plan the planking very precisely - perhaps by using some cardboard pattern to cut the planks on and than transfer them onto the plywood deck? 

Hello Peter,nice work you do! Ease remember to clean the copper by using isopropanol before giving it a clear layer of colour - due to varnish any fingerprints that will appear in some years on the copper. 

And shouldn't the deck been planked before installing it due to lighter planking or are the manuals' advises like this?

The breakfastdaylightpictures (yes in German we can make such long words at Scrabble) show the biggest malus and bonus of this kit:

The formers were swung aft  due to the mispositionation of the gypsum mould on the predrilled plywood!

But what works is my wood craft artwork, yesternight I was in doubt - but it does it

I have to admit

...I could not stop to build this night...

...only five plankes are placed till noon...

...and the plankes were side by side when I placed them. But by the soldering irons heat they shrink so canyons not gaps appear  - some more than frustrating thing! These "gaps" are as big as a plank is thick!

I am told in the instructions  to paint thehole planked hull with wood glue, wipe it off the planks - sand them and the saw dust would fill the gaps and magically the do disappear...  

But due to the size of the gaps I cannot belief in the successfull use of this simple technique. And I do think of the inlaying of squaresized stripes of the planks to fill the gaps before the wood-glue-& sanding trick.

What do you think about this? Can anybody who planked a boat in 1/48 tell to me what to do?

Hello,

as I told you I'll do some small short turn projects in between. Here is N°1.

Todays noon I did start a whale boat by GK-Modellbau/Kirchlengern (Germany) in some strange vaneer based PoF style.

Mondfeld critics this buildingtype very hard in his new Encyclopedia of Modelbuildung (3.1/3.2 the Hull part I. & II.) Here my shipcat on the vaneer, gypsum mould kit - and the quite nice stand within.

It is a coaster boat of the XVII.century hunting the whale in a small villages whalemen group. So there is no need for a big whaling ship to be built, too. 

The formers lay quite well on the gypsum moulds surface - wetted with water and pressed on by a soldering iron.

The holes for the formers are not aline with the grooves in the keel - so the formers are diagonal... 

Hope you like todays progress and the scratching freestyle on the fore and aft lockers topsides. 

Here the sideview of todays progress; that ruler shows how small the hole kit is at the very end.

Wishing you a good night.

Jo, you do gerat progress! 'thanksMany 'thanks, Madam, for sharing with your shipmates and the grumpy old rest

I am learning a lot from your build and am going to ask some questions later, as I have glued at home's chair by reading your thread and am in a hurry now to come to work in time! 

Dear SP-Clubers! 

Still inhappy with the bowend of the deck let us focus on something else.

The surface of the cardboard was hardly enough for the deck. It is realy a large pice of space.

Tonight the Lower Deck is in the focus.

By scaling downto 1/92 the planks breadth is 3mm and smaller the

mainplanks come up to 4mm. The hole decks looks quite nice and as very few light will come down into to LD the detailing graduality does not need to be too important.

For your information the big space the cardboard pattern does need - I circled around the original Heller part with some biro so 1/2mm will be processing encore. As my old master at thevfoundery told us:

"You can rasp something off but never on the workpice again!"

Next step: fitting in of the pattern into the hull.

In this forum you'll find some helping hands...

On 7/12/2019 at 2:17 PM, Kevin said:

Does anyone else do anything like this? Lol the wife has said i can have it, but only  if i can scccesfully build the cutty sark in 1/48

My wife* told me this isn't women's logic thinking! So look what a beauty she is:

These are thr two models at Rochefort

- buy the book

- copy the plans to scale

-  tell her you are building the CUTTY SARK

- and by a plenty of enormous errors and titanian bad luck you got out with the SAINT PHILIPPE

- there was nothing you could do about the MSW-forum misleaded you.

I think the SP is such a big project that we all together will support you in the very first phase of the start - so we all in here are to blame by your wife for being

grumpyest and stubbornnessial old men. And I am shure we will hold out to  be blamed to behave in our natural way! What du you think?

__________________________

*We (Me, Myself, I & my wife)  in here also discussed the problem of enough space for the "a sunkings' foot is an inch"* scale - and after she realised the momentum of the hull this dwindled the SP down to a 1/92 version **  or she would use the 1/12 hull as a bed 4,28m long... And with 204,8 g wight of the boardside Berlins well-fortified bed!   

 ** .. as she is used to metric I tryed to keep thinks paedagogicly simple

*** Parturiunt montes, nascetur ridiculus mus.

Today I was waiting for 2.5hours and found so some time to doodle arround...  so here my statical profile of a cut through the transom with a first idea of yhe placing of the balkonies and adding of some rods to fix the figures to the ships structure. As I know the sculpturist he would have built 3/4relief figure of the king and 1/2 of the two arabs sitting bondaged to his sides.

The English description is

"Isopropyl Alcohol 99.99% ACS Reagent - 1 Gallon *"

Have fun with your kit!

P.S.: Best wishes from the USCG-Band: https://archive.org/details/YellowRoseOfTexas

* https://www.amazon.com/Isopropyl-Alcohol-99-99-ACS-Reagent/dp/B00DUGMVC6/ref=sr_1_9?__mk_de_DE=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&crid=6HHRO02DZPVQ&keywords=isopropanol+alcohol+99%&qid=1563899173&s=gateway&sprefix=Isopropanol+%2Caps%2C567&sr=8-9

2 hours ago, sjanicki said:

Made some more progress this evening on some small details.  

 

The first detail was sanding the cradle a but a bit so the keel would fit in again. The keel is now a little bit thicker because of the copper plates. 

 

 (...)

 

 

You may dinstiguish the singular planks from.each other by taking a pruch and paint with a veeeery light yellow-brown ("sepia" from Citardel or a ligther one?) ink. So you interrupt the monstructure of the grain an bit and the deck doesn't look like a lasered vaneer plywood. Try out on a rest pice first to apply one layer on the next plank a double and next 1/2 a layer (by adding water).

You are on a very good track with your kit!