Dowmer

BE,

I'm glad to see you spent so much time on the fastidious chainplates.  You got the look just right, and it really enhances the “look” of the ship.  So many people make this an after thought as they want to get busy with other parts of the build, but it’s so noticeable that it deserves the time and patience you showed it.  Well done 👍 

Why use the Caldercraft PE hooks?  Why not make them out of wire like Chuck did?  I think they look far superior.

BE, do the channels rest on top of the planking or do they go directly onto the frames.  I’ve never known quite how it was done?

nice job with the scuppers.  A real pain to get the right look.

Rob, were the fore and main stays on the GR hemp or steel cable at this time?

BE, are the hatch comings sitting on the deck planks or on the deck beams and carlings. That could explain the extra edge.  The hatch should be sitting on the deck beams. 

B.E.

I have a question that has been nagging at me.  In one of your previous pictures of your hatch coamings it shows the edge square with the top rounded off.

I always thought the edges were rounded down to the deck to prevent nasty ankle injuries etc.  Here’s a picture of what I mean.

Are there other ways to model them?  

I’m certainly no expert, and I don’t mean to be critical, but I’m always looking for accurate or contemporary ways of construction.

Thanks

1 hour ago, wefalck said:

Well, I would go for the left version, with the lanyard a tad darker.

I agree 👍, but it looks very nice Johann. Great work. 

14 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

I beefed up the bulls-eye iron strop/hook.  Just to let all my concerned citizen MSW folks rest comfortably. 





Ahh yes, much better muttered the OCD crowd 🤪😎

Ya know.  Your work needs more 👍 👍 👍

I guess we are an OCD bunch 😁 

Looks really good Rob.

Question, is the metal hook attaching the forestay to the eye bolt on the focsl’ scale size?  It appears a little small or wimpy for such a large stay.  

Nice run down Ed.  Thanks for the update post.  Perfect with the morning coffee.

On your bowline sag with humidity, this might be heresy but I like the catenary sag.  It looks more realistic than everything music string tight. 

10 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

Good catch.....I intentionally placed the channel deadeyes upside down to facilitate the means by which I attached the deadeyes to the channels.

 

In my case the modification nearly goes unnoticed....unless close-up pics are provided to give away the modification.

 

I've been found out.

😀  No worries Rob, I’m not really that anal.  It’s just one of the things I look for since so many people get the orientation wrong (unknowingly).  I understand, sometimes it is just practical at the scale you work.  We all make sacrifices. 

The ratlin’s look very uniform and tidy BTW.  Nice job.  👍

Rob,

I noticed the orientation of the bottom deadeyes on the channel.  Is that correct?

Siggi,

I agree, no shortcut and these ships were built to very exacting standards, albeit with certain artistic interpretations such as the admiralty framing which isn’t full size practice.

It seems that this discussion keeps stating that gunport practice was only one way.  In fact, gunport practice I believe was multiple different ways....or at least two or three.  

The framed Bellona pictures above clearly show no port lid rabbet, but a rabbet created by the ship’s plank sides, creating a groove for the port.  It also shows that the lid total port lid thickness is the thickness of the ships side planking which includes the lining.  So port planking and lining = ship side thickness in this particular case.  It is also very clear there is no rabbet “cut” into the frames as you suggested earlier.

A bit of a different era (1797). But here is a picture of Constitution during her 1875 refit with the outer planking removed to show the frames.  The forward gun ports can be seen, and no rabbet cut into the ship frames can be seen.  So in this case, the rabbet was created by the ships plank like the Bellona picture above.  

Also, the port gun lids in photo below show that the lining was full size.  Gun port Plank and lining = thickness of ship plank.  No cut rabbet into the frames.  Granted, the port lids were two two piece which was a later era.  It’s also possible that the gun port had an extra sill lining to create the port stop like Druxey mentioned before but it isn’t clear in the picture.  The point is that the port lid has no rabbet except where the two halves meet.

Siggi,

I find this a very interesting discussion.  I think Mark P and Druxey have some very fine points.  One point I would like to add reference your picture below. I do not think they rabbeted into the ship frame.  

If you are not going to show a port lid with a rabbet then the lining and port lid plank together “equal” the thickness of the surrounding ships side plank.  Goodwin shows this in the notes as Y in the drawing you posted earlier in pic below.

 It can also be seen in the photos of the contemporary models posted earlier and the HMS Victory you showed earlier as well.  See pic below.  None that I can find, show the lid rabbet “let into the ship frame” to make up for the thickness of the lining.

I think you can also have a port lid with the outer lid planks the same as the thickness of the ships side planks.  But when you add the inner lining, then you will need to have a rabbet on the port lid underside created by the lining “short of the stops” created, so that when the lining is added it will clear the frames.  This you can see in contemporary models.

I will be interested to see where Mark P’s and Druxey’s discussion resolves since they are much more informed than me. 

Happy Holidays

It depends on the direction of the wind.  Yes, they were a general utility boat ferrying supplies, equipment and people back and forth.  They were also used for exploring shallow waters and depth soundings.

so the answer which I’m sure you will love is......”It depends”  on the winds, current etc.

19 minutes ago, mtaylor said:

I think the kit people got builders hocked on "black" as it's the color of tar.  Road tar that is.   Personally, I'd drop the black.

Ditto, I’d drop the black too. No real reason to keep it IMHO.

BE, beautiful work and a Merry Christmas from the other side of the pond. 

Personal preference, I like the natural wood handles on the Elm Tree Pumps.  It makes them stand out a little instead of the detail being lost if it was all black.  The discharge could be red however.  I figure it would need some preservation.

cheers

Chuck,

How do you know if the block stopping was served or not?  I always get confused on this. 

Looks great by the way. 

Alan,

One of the suggestions earlier which may resolve the insignia issue, was to print the insignia flat, but thicker than required and sand it down to the desired thickness after you glue it on.

Ed,

Great descriptions of the process.

Question, (I apologize if you mentioned this earlier but with the large thread it would be impossible to find it)

For you soldering work of the copper or brass, what flux and solder do you use?  I’m assuming you don’t use “Staybrite” solder.  Is it some kind of paste so you can control the quantity and location with small parts?  Soldering iron or mini torch?  A bit of a tutorial would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Looks nice Rob. I like the catenary sag of the clew lines on the fore main. 👍

Alan, I think hexnut was saying to print the emblem separately, sand it down to thickness required and apply to the barrel later after it’s cleaned up. 

On 12/5/2018 at 10:57 AM, rwiederrich said:

but even less known is that sails can be directed in any fashion during the evolution of a tack but are rarely depicted in a model

Rob,

Just a thought but you might be able to achieve that billowed jib look hanging away from the stay using wire instead of rope for the sheet.  So it could hold the sail out so to speak rather than in real life it would hold it down. 

50 minutes ago, druxey said:

I think that the printer used has too coarse a resolution for what you need, Alan.

Alan,

I agree with Druxey.  The resolution is too coarse.  Also, with the taper of the barrel you will get those steps in the barrel if you print it lengthwise. You might consider printing it in sections vertically.  It will come out better and you can glue the sections together with a dowel down the center of the barrel to hold everything straight. Then smooth the roughness with acetone and sand. 

You dont need to get the barrel perfectly smooth. Remember, these cannon were crudely cast and their finish was a bit rough on the outside.