Jump to content

Ab Hoving

Member
  • Posts

    377
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

3,990 profile views
  1. Fantastic project. Well done!
  2. Hi Kevin, I really don't know anything about any model from the Science Museum. Sorry. Ab
  3. One solid advice: Buy Seamanship in the Age of Sail by John Harland. Everything you wanted to (and should) know about sailing period ships.
  4. I know Waldemar, I too think it's an iconic model and I would not dare to deny anyone's right to duplicate it. I simply wanted to point out that if you want to draw conclusions or solve mysterious issues coming with it, it might be a better idea to work from a model with more authentic dimensions. No more. I recognize the joy of creating a model with an obvious character, keeping in mind the limits of its technical value. I wish you a lot of joy building. No better way to spend your available hours (and more).
  5. Nobody said that the model should be excluded Waldemar. Only its dimensions, which are apparently the product of someone’s fantasy. 🙂
  6. Not that I want to discourage any of you, in your queeste for the truth, but seeing the Mataro model again I could not help remembering the study that was done in 2004 by the late professor Gerritsma, a famous shipbuilding scolar I had the honor to know. HIs aim was (amongst other purposes) to see how the Mataro model must have sailed and his conclusion was, that it could not sail at all. If the model had been a true depiction of a ship of its days this must have been the difference between it and the nearest possible shape that could sail: I don't say this because I want to look like someone who thinks he knows things better than others, but the calculations of the professor seemed sound to me and once again I was confronted with the way we should look at ship models, especially old ones. The Mataro model seems to be a charicature of ships of the period. Having said that, you can ask yourself: if the real ships was as deformed as it is in the model, what truth can there be in its details? How can we try to give belaying points and deck furniture a place in the ship if all its dimensions are deformed. That is the only answer I can give to all the questions Waldemar asked. The age of the Mataro model is one big question mark to me. It took me half a life-time to understand a slice of 17th century Dutch shipbuilding and still I think I only scratched the surface. A real good project would be to build the Mataro ship with the dimensions professor Gerritsma suggested and have a new look at all the items that are so hard to locate in a replica of the deformed model. But who am I?
  7. As to the discussion about knightheads on post #19: Instead of a knighthead for the main yard, it seems to me that on the picture of the Mataro model there is a heavy block attached to a deck beam in the middle of the quarter deck, which could have served as a knighthead. As to the discussion about the capstan: there are several examples of small capstans of which the foot rests in a clamp underneath the deckbeams, which leaves enough space for a tiller to pass. But maybe I am intervering into a discussion I do not completely understand?
  8. A breathtaking model, a joy to watch. Is there anything you cannot do?
  9. Willem van de Velde (father) was born in 1611 and died in 1693. The son was born in 1633 and died in 1707. Peter van de Velde was born in Flanders and lived from 1634 till 1723/4.
  10. I like this thread very much. Only just discovered it. I especially like the way you do your research. In my opinion it does not pay off often to try to build a model of a specific ship, even more so if the data are unsure and controverse. Much better to depict a type, even if you put a name on it later. You found a nice way in between by connecting with archaeological finds and manuscripts. So much better than simply using a plan made by someone who did not know what is right or not either. My compliments Sir. Ab
  11. This is a wonderful tutorial David. Almost a pity that I don’t work in wood any more. 🙂 Ab
  12. The answer is simple. Petr. They are two different plans. The one (on top) was done by Cor Emke with AutoCad, the other one from the book (which is the second one you show here) is hand-drawn by myself. There are some differences, but nothing dramatic. Once you are on your way you will encounter some minor aspects that should be changed anyway. Call it 'developing understanding' over a period of 30 years. If you carefully study the 3D images of the 'witsenscheepsbouw' program, you will see what I mean.
×
×
  • Create New...