tmj

You might be able to use a jewelers saw to cut out the windows. Drill a hole in each windowpane to feed the saw blade through, then cut out each separate pane of glass. That's the only way I can think of to get square corners. If the metal is too thick, and breaks your sawblades, use a Dremel and grind away at the back of the part until the metal is thin enough to easily cut.

No, there are actually 4 steps, which is still a really tall step (around 20" between steps). That's what comes with the kit. I suppose that sailors had longer legs back then than they do today! 😗 There are a 'lot' of problems with this model. When I bought this, I had no real direction. I just wanted to build a ship model that looked good. Historical accuracy was not a part of the plan. That changed and I now have something that will 'never' be correct. I'm now using it as a training aid to hone some skills for my next project. My next project 'WILL' have a more proper, historically accurate direction to follow. My current plan with this kit bash is to simply do the best I can do, with what I have to work with. I want the model to look nice when all is said and done, but I don't want to put too much effort into making corrections. I just want to get 'er done and move on to something with a more promising future. Everyone has to start somewhere. This is my start...

Here's the 'flip' side. Ladders/stairs are not glued. They're just sitting loose in place, just like the stanchions. Please forgive me for anything that doesn't look square and plumb. Everything will be situated properly before I add any glue.

Winston, from Model Ship Builder finally got back to me. Stated that his computer had to go to the shop for a repair. All is good now! Plans will be on the way shortly...

Lower gun deck stanchions complete and dry fitted in place. I like it. A bit of cleanup with a file and some sandpaper and they will be ready to permanently install.

Does anyone here have these plans and willing to sell them? If so, I'm interested!

Gary, Is there any chance that maybe a 'hybrid' system could have been employed? A limber system using short lengths of rope as the main component, with a link of heavier chain tied in the middle, for extra weight, to deal with the more 'stubborn' sediments and blockages? I'm reaching, I know, albeit. I can actually see a rope simply gliding over a lot of heavy sediment with little effect, just as Bob explained. I can 'also' see a knotted rope doing almost the exact same thing unless the knots were tied large enough to occupy most of the internal space within the limber channel. Maybe a rope with a heavier chain link tied into it could have been employed for dislodging any clogs? Sailors can be rather resourceful when it comes to making dirty jobs a bit easier. This subject is really going to bug me!

Hmm, back to those limber chains, again. "I remember that discussion!" It was mentioned that chain was prohibitively expensive back then, therefor knotted rope was most likely used, so I switched from chain to the rope idea. Now, rope is a bad idea and something like copper chains were likely used! I'm glad that I haven't added any limber 'things' yet! 😁

This is 'very' appropriate, and yes. I have limber ropes on my list of needful things to display on my sectional build. I'm going to have short, about 1cm to 1.5cm lengths of knotted ropes hanging out of the limber channels on both ends of my model. Greetings and thank you for chiming in!

Still thinking forward and scratching my head. These are the barrels that will eventually be going into the hold, etc. Not knowing how many I will truly need for this build, I purchased fifty. They are of a proper scale size for 'large' wooden barrels in Victory 1:98 scale. I'd like to find smaller barrels too, but so far this is the smallest that I've been able to find. I might have to turn smaller barrels myself, should I really want smaller barrels scattered around the ship. I'll have to think about that...

One thing that I have never seen depicted, in sectional models, are the general 'every day' items used to keep the ship's decks clean, etc. There's no such thing as a ship without proper 'janitorial' tools! Other than brooms, mops and buckets... what other janitorial 'devices' would have been found on the decks of HMS Victory in 1805? Also, weren't certain 'stones' used to occasionally 'grind' the surface of the decks to a smooth, splinter free surface? Where would this kind of gear/equipment typically be stowed upon the different decks of a ship like this?

I've decided to support the lower gun deck with this stanchion design. I doubt that it is period correct, but it should be close to what would have been used in 1805. One down, five more to go!

This is the stanchion design that I settled on for supporting the lower gun deck. I'm rather sure that it isn't historically accurate, but it's probably as descent an attempt as any.

Pump housing for the Orlop deck is now complete, save a bit of touchup and finish work. The housing is glued to the bottom of the lower gun deck. I needed to anchor the pump housing to the bottom of that gun deck in order to provide a fixed point of reference, for obtaining measurements, that would result in the completed pump house fitting tightly atop the Orlop deck once the gun deck was slid into place. Another reason for gluing the pump house to the gun deck is because I also need to be able to remove the gun deck, and the pump housing to give me free, open access to the Orlop deck for the addition of Orlop deck furnishings. I'd much rather be able to locate/set furnishings via looking straight down on them. Much easier to do it that way than to try and sneak things in later, with tweezers, between two decks offering very little space to work within... as well as depth perception issues that would surely affect easy and proper alignment/location of the furnishings. Here is the lower gun deck and the pump housing slid into place. The second story of my pump housing looks a bit off of center in this photo, but it's not. Just a bad camera angle making it look off. I need to learn to pay attention to such details while taking pictures.

I've been experimenting with my 'Pigs of Iron' ballast effect. My first attempt in creating these things was a successful 'failure'! I say 'successful' because my failure, in the method I used, taught me just how it must be done. I'll get it right next time. In the meantime, I'm dry fitting false stanchions and ladders atop my Orlop deck, as visual aids, to help me plan ahead. The curvature of my deck is now proper, due to the false stanchions, and I can now finish planking and trimming out my well housing seeing as how I now know exactly where the bottom of the pump well housing will be. After completing the well house, I need to figure out just how I intend to furnish the Orlop deck, build the furniture, then fabricate the 'actual' support stanchions prior to making everything permanent. It's a slow go, but it's 'going'!

Thanks again, Gary!

I'm dry fitting parts atop my HMS Victory Orlop deck so I can start staring at things, scratching my head, and thinking forward as to where I want to go via this phase of the model. When I look at these ladders, or stairs, I can't help but to wonder if any kind of a 'handrail' system was ever incorporated on such 'Ships of the Line' in 1805? Perhaps, HMS Victory was a heavy, sluggish ship that didn't roll too much, somewhat like a modern day 'Aircraft Carrier.' Maybe handrails were unnecessary, then again. Maybe handrails were used, just not shown in most drawings? I don't have a clue. Back in the day, my squadron was attached to the USS Coral Sea. She didn't roll much, except when hard turns were being made to the starboard, due to the old wooden 'angle-deck' being replaced with heavier steel to accommodate jets. It was a weight/balance thing. Anyway, we had handrails aboard that carrier, but didn't really need them most of the time. Did Victory have rope, or wooden handrails on ladders such as this?

Hmm, one more question. "How were those stanchions/pillars, etc. actually 'anchored' in place?" Would it have been via tongue & groove, or what? This obviously has no value in the building of a small model. It would just be nice to know...

I think my mind is made up. I'm going to use square stanchions in the hold and also between the Orlop and lower gun deck. All other pillars/stanchions/whatever's that will be supporting the upper level gun decks will be squared on the ends and turned in the middle, just like post #6 depicts. Bear in mind... post #6 is nothing but a concept of how I intend to fabricate those stanchions. It is 'NOT' anywhere close to the exact geometry that I will truly be using! I truly appreciate everyone who has chimed in on this subject. Many thanks! Tom...

We also cannot assume that it wasn't! I totally agree with you as per the shading! All in all, This goes back to #1) on my list of curious things to consider!

I'm still struggling with the true 'geometry' of these posts/pillars/stanchions... whatever the true nomenclature actually is. My issues are based upon structural integrity, cost effectiveness, and time constraints. Without getting into details and diving down a lot of deep 'rabbit-holes'... I'm beginning to wonder if 'anyone' will ever know the truth! #1)... I understand that way back when, folks took a lot more pride in their work and skills than folks seem to do today. They had very crude tools, very strong backs and finely honed skills worth being proud of! #2)... Materials, labor and time. Ornate posts/pillars/stanchions would produce excess amounts of waste requiring a great deal of time/labor/money in creating all of that unusable waste for the sake of aesthetics! #3)... Engineering. There would be no advantage in having the ends of these posts/pillars/stanchions larger than the mid-sections of the so-called posts/pillars/stanchions except to provide better 'footing' upon the surfaces upon which those posts/pillars/stanchions would be mounted, for 'whatever' reason. Those large square ends would serve no other purpose. If the posts/pillars/stanchions ever failed, they would fail within the smaller profile of their mid sections. I can also see the 'thicker' tops and bottoms cracking, due to fatigue from the ship pitching, rolling and twisting as ships must be able to do. Those enlarged, square tops and bottoms actually create certain shear points that would eventually crack and fail. No real structural integrity. Pure aesthetics and footing. All that being said... were ornately carved posts truly used back in those days, or were such artistic designs simply the initial products presented by desiring architects, who's ornate ideas were eventually turned down, for many reasons, and replaced with things more practical with the original drawings still remaining simply out of flare and pride from the designer? Maybe creative licensing by authors wanting to make their works more appealing to potential buyers has had an influence on the material we now examine? Let's not forget museums... unless you think that I'd be historically accurate in building HMS Victory, as per the current vessel, as she sits in Portsmouth's Historic Dockyard. This sort of research into factual historic details is becoming very curious, as well as confusing! There's obviously a bit of "Tongue & Cheek" going on with the content of this post. I hope that this post does not open up a huge can of worms. That is not my intent. I'm just beginning to scratch my head and wonder if the truth is really out there at all! Halloween is approaching. Maybe someone knows of a spiritual medium who can channel the spirit of a sailor who was onboard Victory during Trafalgar? Some of that 'automatic writing' might give us all some good drawings of period correct posts/pillars/stanchions, etc.!🫠 In case anyone missed it. This post is about posts/pillars and stanchions! 🙃

Making them round, or somewhat pyramid shaped, as the description reads, would 'BOTH' require a lot of unnecessary work! I'm thinking that the description is a bit loose in language, for the time period, and also leaving a lot of room for modern day interpretation.

Hello Grandpa! I have that book, and it is a very 'fine' book, however. Its data, as accurate as it is, is also based upon cumulative refits, reworks, modifications, etc. that have taken place over a very long period of time. The ship that McKay based his data upon is not the same ship as it truly was back in 1805. His book is based upon the latest version(s) of that ship, after re-fits, during our more modern times. 'McKay'... I really like that name... only not so much 'John' McKay as that of 'Donald' McKay! Every time I think of Donald McKay, I start having visions of a 'Flying Cloud'! 🙂

Allan, I now have a link to David Steel's 1805 Elements and Practice of Naval Architecture. Could you please tell me what page number you found this data on? Thanks, Tom...

Thanks Allan! I was about to make another major, historical error via the geometry of the Orlop and gun deck(s) pillars/stanchions. If I am understanding the content of your post correctly, I will 'NOT' need a lathe for 'any' of my stanchions and or pillars if I am to pursue an 1805, Trafalgar configuration! If that is correct, that's also 'great', however. I'm not out of the woods yet! I now need to know just where those pillars/stanchions were actually placed, athwartships, with the keel being used as a centerline reference point. I do not trust any of my reference material for the 1805 era. You wouldn't happen to have 'that' data too, would you? Regards, Tom...