NAZGÛL
-
Posts
1,365 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Reputation Activity
-
NAZGÛL reacted to Cristiano in Ships of the late 16th century?
Hello Nazgul,
you are lucky, since I sold the plans some years ago, but I still have some shot used for the ebay auction.
in the photo can be seen the part of the plans related to the stern.
There are no surprises, since more or less all the galleons of this period were similar.
-
NAZGÛL reacted to jbshan in Ships of the late 16th century?
I've been doing some more looking. You probably have guns in the small range of size. Ports get smaller with smaller guns, but there is a limit. Your ports probably want to be in the range of 71 to 76 cm on each side, or 2ft. 3 inches to 2 ft. 6 inches square. This is from Susan Constant, Brian Lavery, from the AOS series by Conway. This ship dates from 1603-05 and the book is a reconstruction based on best evidence to assist the Jamestown VA folks to replace their replica ship.
-
NAZGÛL reacted to Cristiano in Ships of the late 16th century?
below there are the informations about the size of the Venetian ship that I show previously.
Are French written, but can be understood, I think.
Well, is nearly 30 metres of lenght.
-
NAZGÛL reacted to jbshan in Ships of the late 16th century?
32 meters is what Matti mentioned. I applied that dimension to about the perpendiculars (rabbet of the gundeck) just to get a rough approximation. Putting the men in now gives a sense perhaps if it is too long or not.
-
NAZGÛL reacted to amateur in Ships of the late 16th century?
But 32 meters is too large.
One of the ships markus showed is a pinace of 159something, and that is 85 foot over the sterns. I don't know the size of duyfken, but that is more what a small ship looked like. Duyfken was 25 last, and had an estimated lenght of about 20 meters. What was the size of Gripen?
Two or three wales. There are no fixed rules for that. Quite a lot of pics however showing both, even for relatively small ships.
Jan
-
NAZGÛL reacted to jbshan in Ships of the late 16th century?
What I'm thinking of as scale to determine heights of deck etc. would be merely a human figure you could put in different positions to compare to your design. I find it a very useful tool.
You note Cathead's photo from NC has only one wale. Most we have been looking at have two rails in the lower wale. I read, about two days apart, that 'no English ship at this time (happened to be 1650) had more than two rails in the lower rails, and a sketch from the time that had three. It seems that things aren't actually carved in stone, that there are always exceptions to any rule.
Just to show what I mean by scale, I took your latest drawing and added some figures. If it is 32 meters between my two red uprights, then the men are about 2 meters tall.
-
NAZGÛL reacted to jbshan in Ships of the late 16th century?
Matti.
Think about making the spacing between the two lower wales wider. That will let you raise your ports a little.
I like the new look.
-
NAZGÛL reacted to amateur in Ships of the late 16th century?
No this distance is about right: between the wales is about 1-2 times the width of the wale. Your current drawing looks about right to me. (but I'm not an expert ....)
It would be worth asking for the scale, and the dimensions of the ship: that would make it easier tot determinie wehther or not the gunports are close to the water or not.
Jan
-
NAZGÛL reacted to Cristiano in Ships of the late 16th century?
Hello Nazgul!
interesting your research!
maybe can be of help the following image:
represent the side view of a Venetian Galleon of mid XVI century.
As you can see, it matches a lot your Gripen.
this ship was a contemporary ex-voto model, which was studied and drawn by the Admiral Paris in 1884.
the drawings made by Paris were used by Corel for making its own "Galeone Veneto" kit.
I bought in the past the Paris drawings from the Venice Naval Museum, but now are available in many online shops, and are very complete (from my point of view).
-
NAZGÛL reacted to Cathead in Ships of the late 16th century?
I recently returned from a trip to the US East Coast, which included a visit to the Elizabeth II, a working replica ship of the late 16th century, of the kind that would have carried the failed Roanoke colonists from England. Here she is, from the official site:
There are many photos available online if you search the name, and if you are at all capable of visiting, it is a fantastic experience. They have trained re-enactors on board who compromise the actual sailing crew when they take her out of port, and I had a delightful time poking around every nook and cranny of the ship. Also took a number of photos myself, which could be shared if you're looking for a specific detail (and I got it in the camera). She is berthed in Manteo, NC.
-
NAZGÛL got a reaction from flying_dutchman2 in Ships of the late 16th century?
Thanks for the comments! jbshan, I'd prefer to get a look that feels right then think out the decks from that result. I plan to have the weatherdeck in different heigths, the middle part lower. Here is a crude line up, nothing detailed or final.
Nigel and Jan, I also heard that the ships decks would follow the wales curvature at this time, like Vasa has. Stronger hull, but horrible for the boatsmen handling havy cannons... Glad for your tips though!
Cheers Zeh, I'll check that out!
Here is my try to combine the gunports from A to the proportions of B. Aren't the gunports rather close to the water?
/Matti
-
NAZGÛL reacted to rybakov in Ships of the late 16th century?
A bit more to the South but this site of Texas A&M University might be worth a look.
They have a good section on naval archeology.
http://nautarch.tamu.edu/shiplab/01George/Fernandez.htm
All the best
Zeh
-
NAZGÛL reacted to amateur in Ships of the late 16th century?
The scientists contradict that: only after 1650 the wales were cut through.
In Dutch shipbuilding, the wales were an important part of the structure: the part of the frames were not connected to each other, it was the wales (and some thickstuff in the hull) was holding the whole structure together. It took dutch shipwrights some time before they dared to cut through the wales.
It is assumed that in the late 1500 the decks did follow the wales for most of the ships lenght.
Jan
-
NAZGÛL reacted to NMBROOK in Ships of the late 16th century?
This is interesting stuff mate.Whilst my area of knowledge is a little later and mainly confined to English ships,there are some almost general rules to follow for the 16/17th century.The lower main wale will almost certainly dip into the water as you have it.The biggest difference is that the ports will not follow the curvature of the wales.Alot of period artwork exaggerates the sheer of the vessel and quite often the ports follow this.This is purely artistic license and would not follow reality.Whilst the decks will have some sheer,it would not be anywhere close to that of the wales.Some part of the wales,whether it be the mainwale,in part,or the chainwale would be cut into by the ports.
One other consideration is that there are no guarantees there would be a clear deck run fore and aft.It was quite common in this period to have a stepped deck,rather than a single one that ran the full length.This 'step' would more often than not be in the aft/stern area.
Kind Regards
Nigel
-
NAZGÛL reacted to jbshan in Ships of the late 16th century?
Jan wrote:
"Mind, the pics of Dutchships shown are all from the post-Wasa period.
It's not at allo clear whehter or not they provide you with info on how a pre-1600 ship would have looked like."
I've been looking around and I think Jan is getting close.
I'm still going for option 'A', but I like the stern gallery as in 'B'.
Earlier, and you're going for more than 50 years before the van de Velds, and in smaller vessels, I'm seeing gun ports higher up, into the 2nd or chain wale. This puts the guns, because of the size of the ship, onto the weather deck.
Do please work out where your decks/platforms will be located because deciding the combination of deck and port location will probably help work out the rest. I don't think only one deck exposed to the weather is correct. Everything has to go down a hatch anyway, and it wouldn't hurt if the cargo had someplace besides on top of the ballast to sit. I think there would be a platform or two at least.
-
NAZGÛL reacted to jbshan in Ships of the late 16th century?
Even the pinnace, Matti, as, if you look particularly at the van de Veld sketch in tallship's posting, the water comes quite farther up than the line or division drawn on the pinnace. The water comes about to the lower rail of the lower wale on all the other pictures. If the deck is also about there, the guns work out about right with regard to headroom and clearance for the barrels of the guns. Except for Kalmar Nyckel, for which I do not know the sources they used. Perhaps smaller or earlier ships were set up differently.
Have you looked at pictures of the Spanish Armada and the English 'race-built' galleons? These English ships I think might be the forerunners of the type of vessel you're looking for, similar in look to the votive model somebody put up earlier.
-
NAZGÛL reacted to trippwj in Ships of the late 16th century?
Matti -
Have you looked at 17th Century Dutch Merchant Ships: Text, Photos and Plans for the Ship Modeler by Ab Hoving (2014). SeaWatch Books, Florence, OR, 152 pp. http://www.seawatchbooks.com/114003?
It is reviewed here (with pictures): http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/8853-17th-century-dutch-merchant-ships/?p=262024
It is a wonderful reference, primarily 17th century, but may provide you with some backwards looking ideas. The plans include the following:
Seagoing Vessels:
Pinas Witsen – scale 1-96 – 4 sheets of plans.
Fluit “Langewijk” – scale 1-96 – 3 sheets of plans.
Fluit “Zeehaen” (Able Tasman) – scale 1-96 – 3 sheets of plans.
Fluit “Roode Leeuw” – scale 1-96 – 2 sheets of plans.
Cat “Peacock” – scale 1-96 – 1 sheet of plans.
Coastal Trade:
Boyer 86ft – scale 1-48 – 3 sheets of plans.
Galliot – scale 1-48 – 2 sheets of plans.
Inshore:
The Narrow- & Wide-ship – scale 1-48 – 2 sheets of plans.
Kaag – scale- 1-48 – 1 sheet of plans.
Fishermen as Traders:
Buss 1598 – scale 1-96 – 1 sheets of plans.
Hooker – scale 1-96 – 1 sheets of plans.
Pink – scale 1-48 – 1 sheet of plans.
-
NAZGÛL got a reaction from mtaylor in Old ships transporting horses and wagons???
Thanks for the info all! Man, I've been riding horses alot earlier and also transporting them in trailers. I can only imagine the troubles the men and animals had during these travels. Lovely model Chuck!
/Matti
-
NAZGÛL reacted to amateur in Ships of the late 16th century?
Mind, the pics of Dutchships shown are all from the post-Wasa period.
It's not at allo clear whehter or not they provide you with info on how a pre-1600 ship would have looked like.
Jan
-
NAZGÛL reacted to AntonyUK in Old ships transporting horses and wagons???
Hi.
I have read a article that discribed the loading and unloading of horses.
The horses were lead out to the ships by small rowing boats ( The horse was swimming)
A sling/ harness was passed around the horse and it was halled aboard as the photos that Chuck posted.
Unloading was the reverse.
I guess that cargo ships would have been used to this purpose as there hatches were much larger.
And they would have used a hoisting beam for this task.
Regards Antony.
-
NAZGÛL reacted to druxey in Old ships transporting horses and wagons???
The famous naval architect, F.H. Chapman, designed two sizes of horse transport with special loading ramps and doors in the bows specifically for this purpose.
-
-
NAZGÛL reacted to realworkingsailor in Old ships transporting horses and wagons???
Have a look here, for a start: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphibious_warfare
Andy
-
NAZGÛL reacted to Tallshiptragic in Ships of the late 16th century?
How about, the 'B' lines with the ports as 'A'
-
NAZGÛL reacted to jbshan in Ships of the late 16th century?
I think picture 'A' is probably more likely. Check out port locations on Mayflower II. The guns are not on the open weather deck.
The decks would probably not be continuous at this time. There might well be a step down aft, especially into any cabin area, and there might be a leveling off aft on a gun-bearing deck so any guns could be more easily moved into aft ports.
Our Emblem ®
