AnobiumPunctatum

Hi Giampieroricci,

I've take the time to look through your complete build log. It's a real interesting log and a nice representation of the "French shool of shipmodelling".

I'll follow your log next year with great interest

Really nice progress

Really nice drafting skills. I like to see more of your drawings.

Seventy degrees Fahrenheit. I don't knowhow much this in °C is, but I think it's very hot.

In Germany we have around 0°C. Best weather for working on my model drawings.

Have you thought of using different colord timbers for framing and planking the model? Or do you like to paint your model later?

Aldo,

it's good to hear from you. I am happy that you are doing better and find time to continue your log.

Mery Christmas, Jürgen.

Your Triton looks really good

Wow, really wonderful small Modell. It's unbelievable that's build of wood.

Wow, that's a really beautyful planking. Do you like to copper her?

Back to the framing dimensions.

I got the values of the SR, but there are mostly the same as in Steel. But both dimensions are for a 273 tons, 16 gun cutter which is much bigger than Alert.

I also got the values for Weazle, a 201 tons brigantine, which is nearly the same size as Alert and has the same room and space. (Thanks very much for the help) Unfortunately the framing dimensions do not really fit with the proportions of SR and Steel.

So I decided to go with two different options:

1. On the basis of Steel I calculated the relationship between 2'2'' and 2'0'' room and space and make my frames 92.3% of the dimensions of Steel.

2. I use the given distance between the station lines for frame 0 (8'') and calculate all other timbers in relationship to Steel.

The first design I will do with option 2 and the frame layout of Cheerful and Racer. These drawings are around 30 years younger but the oldest which I found with framing information.

If the design don't work, I will give the first option a try with real double frames.

What do you think, could both options a possible solution for the framing of the small vessel? Which option would you prefer?

Thank you for the "likes" and comments even when I've done a bone-headed stunt like that.  It keeps me honest and on my toes.

 

 

Christian,

The modified fence idea came from Grant and Danny and fences are just a bit of creative usage.   So.. no... I stole all the ideas.

No problem, I think I will make another ripp-off

Very interesting solution for keeping your fingers away from the blade.

Did you made this by yoursel?

Yesterday I experimented a little bit with 3D views of my line drawings. The result is not a real 3D model but very helpful for checking the reconstruction. The two pictures are only an impression, because on the PC I can rotate the model and have a closer look to the details.

Ben, Allans book is on my wishlist for Christmas.

The framinglooks really well aligned. Superb work, Ben

My stylised frame design is nearly finshed.

As written in JK Lees build log I will now try to design a possible framing for this cutter.

All cutter drawings which I know show only double frames.

The drawing of Cheerful 1806 and Racer 1809 show double frames with a spacing on both sides.

The drawing of Speedy 1818 shows normal double frames.

So I think that also the two cutters of the Rattlesnake class will also have only double frames.

First source for the dimensions of the frame timbers is Steel "The Elements and Practice of Naval Architecture, 1805":

(Thanks Druxey for the values)

Steel gives a Room and Space of 2ft 2in. The original drawing of Alert only show a Room and Space of 2ft 0in. My first try with this dimensions show that the spacing between the double frames is very small (3.75in).

Goodwin gives in his book "The construction and fitting of Sailing Man of War" a factor to calculate the sided dimensions of the frames. If I calculate the sided values with the keel width of 13in, which Steel gives in his book, I get the values of the above table.

The original drawing shows only a designed keel width of 10in. So I calculated the sided dimensions of the framing again.

With these values I get a spacing of 8,42in, which is perhaps a little much.

edit: I got the infos I searched. Thanks very much.

Lee,

as I've written earlier I think that the frames design in the AotS is wrong. The shifted top timbers are only a fix for this design. Also the positions of the gun ports don't match the position of the original drawing.

I could only find double frames for cutters. If I read Allans comment he confirmed what I think.

There exist no contemporary drawing of the framing design for the Rattlesnake class. I've drawn a simplified framing but will now try to make a new reconstruction of the framing to check if my ideas are possible.

Wonderful. That looks really perfect.

Tony,

there is not really a problem. I buy my timber at a supplier in Germany, who  cuts it to every size with a precision of 1/10mm. I think that this is precise enough for a scratch build model. http://www.modellbau-holzleisten.de/

Thanks for posting the pictures. That helps me a lot.

 

And one last image of the contemporary planking expansion detail.   It shows the square tuck pretty well.  For those that might have one on there model although its unlikely.  I have never seen a kit that shows one.

I don't think so. I found hints on it at my Alert drawing, on the drawing of Racer 1808 and on the Speedy drawing of 1818.

If a kit does not show this detail it's not a reason that it was not there.

Nice fix, Jürgen

Chuck,

yes that's exactly what I am missing. This part makes me in the moment some problems during the reconstruction of the Alert.

Do you have some otehr pictures of this cutter model which you can share?

Chuck,

I've a question to your planking. If I look at the planking sheme of your cutter, I found a vertical triangle under the counter. As far as I understand will the planks end before that. You've also drawn this but you did not use this in the praxis. Is there a special reason or is it a simplification?

Your planking looks really brilliant.

Jürgen,

what kind of timber do you use for the planking? The contrast to the darker swiss pear looks really great

Lee,

last year as I started with the project, I had the same idea. But I had problems to match the dimensions he has given in the first part of the book with the drawings. At this point I started to use a simplified frame model. Then I started my build but was not happy.

His line drawing differs from the original drawing which you can find on the NMM Homepage. And I couldn't find the reasons.

In September I bought the original drawing and started again ... the rest of the story you know. Meanwhile it makes a lot of fun to search and compare the different original drawings. I think I will do the same steps on the next models I like to build also.

There is also nothing wrong with your approach. I will follow your log with great interest.

I am sure, that the frame desing of Goodwin is not the original design.

Most of the original cutter drawings only Show double Frames. Cheerful instead shows only single frames.

That is one reason why I like to build my model with a stylized frame design