AnobiumPunctatum

I had been a little intimidated by the cannons, I was unsure if I would be able to produce two similar cannons (still a newbie with the lathe).  I turned them on my Sherline lathe out of brass and I'm pretty happy with how they came out.  I also used the lathe to turn the Carriage Wheels with the grain running along the length of the wheel.  The wheels took a couple of tries, I broke a few.  Still need to blacken the cannon and add a few more parts to the carriage.
 
Tony

Completed the Gun Deck Planking today. I also built and added in the stairs.
 
Thanks for all the likes,
Tony

Thanks for the comment Bob, means a lot coming from a talented builder like yourself.
 
I have fitted and glued all the major deck components and dry fitted it into the hull. This deck is coming along much nicer than the lower deck. I am more happy with my joint work this time around.
 
I was wondering if anyone could tell me what would be on the lower deck in this section of the ship, cable tier? Any info would be appreciated.
 
Thanks,
Tony

Thanks Dupree for your words. Thanks for likes too.I am now working on the "second floor" or gun deck and then I will add some photos again.

Beak painted ....
 
All bulkheads fitted to the former with careful measurements taken to insure precise spacing at the outer edges and top surface alignment from bow to stern.
Next task of fairing the edges and creating bow and stern filler blocks.
Also, I finished the starboard side carvings and painted the whole beak flat black.  Then used a straight razor blade to scrape the top surface of the carvings clean, leaving the black background.
Then added the delicate double trim rails above and below the carvings and painted them flat black.
After three coats of acrylic white, mostly applied with a tooth pic, completed the beak by painting out the red/white/blue shield....again, acrylic paint applied with very sharp tooth pic. 
 

Wow, your blocks are looking amazing

Last part of the small details - euphroes, parrel ribbs, cleats, rack blockas, cathead blocks.

1/12 for a Swan Class Sloop would be a dream. 1/32 is the biggest scale which is possible for me. Fully rigged the model would be 5 feet long and around 3 feet height.
I own Alexanders drawings for HMS Anson and think if it is possible to build a hull model with all frames in 1/32. But this is a project if I am retired because a lot of time and much more experience than I have is necessary.

1/12 for a Swan Class Sloop would be a dream. 1/32 is the biggest scale which is possible for me. Fully rigged the model would be 5 feet long and around 3 feet height.
I own Alexanders drawings for HMS Anson and think if it is possible to build a hull model with all frames in 1/32. But this is a project if I am retired because a lot of time and much more experience than I have is necessary.

Continuation
 
.
 

 
 
The beginning of the relation is available at this address:
 
http://5500.forumact...ndre-1-24#66516
 
Regards, Pawel

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 196 – A Touch of Rework
 
This post was intended to be about topmast deadeyes and connection of those deadeyes to their futtock shrouds below the foretop.  However, some interesting discoveries caused some rework that has interfered with this – and other work that was proceeding.  Fixing mistakes is not all that interesting but in this case I learned some things that may be of interest and I'm not sure the term "mistake" applies.  In any case the rework is relatively minor, and the final model will certainly benefit – though the change may be fairly obscure and unnoticed.
 
The first picture shows the two forward futtock shrouds installed under the fore top.
 

 
The shrouds in the picture have eyes with thimbles at each end, hooks to the deadeye straps, lashings to the mast eyes, and are served all over.  After completing this work, I felt, perhaps intuitively, that the rope looked a bit heavy.  I keep thinking of the lacy rigging in the photos.
 
The specified size of the topmast shrouds on large merchant and Naval ships, and therefore the futtock shroud size, is 6 ½", a size that goes back in time at least to Steel, and probably earlier.  It is repeated in other early sources, probably copying Steel.  It is also listed in Underhill's work on clipper ship rigging that I have used for some line sizing.  Crothers rigging drawings follow suit.  Considering the slight exaggeration in diameter that serving at this scale causes, the final futtocks shown above measure about to the spec.
 
In pursuing this further, I learned that American underwriters, at least, had some different ideas about standing rigging sizes.  While they duplicate Steel for the most part, they part company in the way topmasts are supported.  It appears to me that they wanted stronger topmast backstays and were less concerned about the size and structural importance of the topmast shrouds.  Both the New York Marine Register of 1857 and the American Lloyds Register of 1867 required 10 1/2" backstays on the fore and main topmasts on ships of this class, against the 7" size found in Steel – and other derivative listings.  This is equal to the lower shroud and stay sizes – the largest lines in the ship.  Topmast shrouds and futtocks on the large masts go from 6 ½" down to 5 ¼".
 
The next picture shows a smaller, 5 ¼" replacement futtock on the left with the original 6 ½" on the right.  There is quite a difference, of course.
 

 
If this were the only fix needed, it would hardly bear mentioning, but the backstays are another matter. Upsizing these means changing out a dozen channel deadeyes and chains.  The fore and main deadeyes go from 13" to 16" and the mizzen from 9" to 13".  No fun for Ed.
 
The last check before deciding to proceed with these changes was to examine the photographs of the ship.  While they reveal little on the futtock sizes, they clearly show topmast backstays and deadeyes comparable in size to the lower shrouds as anticipated from the underwriters' specs.  Wow!
 
This would have been easy to miss and I am delighted to have discovered it at this stage.  The difference will certainly be noticeable on the model.  Other American clipper modelers take note.
 
So, I will probably spend a week on the channel deadeyes and backstays – on the model, on the drawings, on the rigging list, and on the channel deadeye chapter in Volume II.
 
Please do not comment on my sanity.
 
Ed

The limit is probably the width of the printer.
There is also another limit, the size of the door. A 74 guns pass through the door but if we add masting, height become s a problem. The only way to overcome this problem being to have removable masts
Does distortion for model-making purposes may become a factor in extremely large sizes. I faced that problem with my last build. Framing could have been a bit bigger, plus adding with other considerations such as humidity, the size of the ship move. In this way, I could not fit all the parts made exactly as ''plans'' are drawn, often parts must be adjusted. In this instance the construction of the model are the real lengths even if the guide are the plans. The bigger the scale the bigger the a compensation must be applied the length. The easiest to observe is the width which at 1/24 can easily change from 1/2 inch.
In fact I guess that it is possible to plot drawings more precise than the real thing in wood.
Metal would not be better, the length of a  wire cable  transporting electricity has a sag variation of many feet on a long distance
PRECISION is important for many assembly, by example if  we drill a hole smaller than the bar, problems will follow.
In wood assembly,  greater tolerances are acceptable.
Different scales, different uses, different tolerances.
 
I  had the plan of HMS pegasus enlarged at 1/12 but the difference of the width of the frames was not that big.
Frame size Pegasus 1/12 approximately the same size as a 74 guns at 1/24.  Like this

Mark,
 
is ist right, that on French ships thy don't use the 3 But Shift or 4 But Shift System for the planking sheme?
If they use it, you have to change the ends of the planks in your last picture.

It took a longer time to finish the construction of the deadwood.





 

It took a longer time to finish the construction of the deadwood.





 

Hello,
 
In French construction in the eighteenth century, the fitting of orderly end of plank was not practiced. And for two reasons: - it would be wasteful to cut a beautiful plank for a simple aesthetic reason - the longer the plank is, the better the deck strength is.   As a result, the end of plank are positioned randomly, placed on the nearest beam but avoiding placing a joint with less than three or four plank on the same beam.     GD

Mark,
 
is ist right, that on French ships thy don't use the 3 But Shift or 4 But Shift System for the planking sheme?
If they use it, you have to change the ends of the planks in your last picture.

Mark,
 
is ist right, that on French ships thy don't use the 3 But Shift or 4 But Shift System for the planking sheme?
If they use it, you have to change the ends of the planks in your last picture.

Mark,
 
is ist right, that on French ships thy don't use the 3 But Shift or 4 But Shift System for the planking sheme?
If they use it, you have to change the ends of the planks in your last picture.

Per,
 
I've had a nice hour reading through your build log. If you are finishe, you will have a really nice longboat model. Very well done and documented.
I will definitly come back and read your log again, if I start building the boats for my sloop.

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 195 – Mast Wedges
 
So far, the masts have been temporarily stepped and placed in position through partners at the main deck level.  The openings at this level were centered so the masts would stand at roughly the correct rake, but were not sized precisely, nor were they cut perfectly round.  The next step in the mounting process was to fit wedges on to the mast at the partner level.  The wedges would secure the masts at the correct rake, but still allow them to be removed for the remaining bench work.
 
The first step was to size the openings, refine their position, and make them round – with a few inches of clearance around the mast.  The first picture shows this being done at the fore mast partners, using sandpaper mounted on one of the tapered mandrels described earlier.
 

 
When the opening was large enough to wedge the mast, the diameter was measured with dividers as shown in the next picture.
 

 
In the next picture a ring is being turned that will fit the mast diameter and the hole diameter below an enlarged and rounded section at the top.
 

 
The mast wedges were cut from this ring.  The next picture shows the turned ring cut in two and one half being checked for fit on the mast.
 

 
Each of these halves were cut into segments.  In the next picture a segment has been fitted to the mainmast mast and the mast positioned.
 

 
This allowed the mast rake to be measured and any corrections made before fitting the rest of the segments.  The next picture shows the main mast with all the segments glued to it.
 

 
Once wedged, the masts are held firmly in their final position but may be removed for further work.  This work includes final installation of the tops and the masthead trim.  It will also include installation of the deadeyes and futtocks for the topmast shrouds.  The last step before finally stepping the masts will be the fitting of mast coats over the wedges.  These will cover the woodwork shown above with simulated tarred canvas.  The masts will then be glued at the partners and the step and will be ready for the lower shrouds.
 
 
Ed

THE KEY TO USE CHERRY WOOD
 
‘’My mystery partner’’ will be starting  a model of a 74 guns as soon he finishes his actual model.  He wants to know if  cherry wood could be a good wood choice for his next build? He asked to see a picture of the darkest wood avaialable. Why not show everybody the answer and  at the same time, try to demistify if this wood could  be use in a model ship construction perspective.
For  3 different batches of cherry wood that I saw, the wood grain pattern was different each time. I have been working few years up to now and if I take time to regroup the observations I made during this period, I can observe  4 main wood grain pattern for this specific wood:
 
1- Sap wood is white and heartwood is somekind of  different brown.  Time  darkens and embellish condiderably the color.
 
2- By comparison, which is often the best way to learn a subject, pear wood has no grain pattern. This gives the wood an adavantage for the model maker enthousiast.  All the planks are identical for the wood grain. He does not need to select any plank,  all the planks have the same  identical  grain pattern. From the point of view, workability pear wood and cherry wood  are similar even if pear wood  has a slightly higher density. Finally, for the sandability, both are identical.
 
Cherry wood has  a grain pattern. This pattern is different on the top and on the side of the plank. The pattern is partially governed by the annual year growth . Ideally if the rings were smaller, cherry wood could be the ideal wood to use for us, modeler.
 
When you look at a plank from side or top the pattern can be completely different, This pattern  comes back often and it is pretty nice to see but on 1 side only.
 
3- The worst grain pattern we can find is when when the growth lines come perpendiculary to the lenght of the plank. This kind is the less desirable to use. The worst  mistake I could do is to use this pattern for the planking.
 
Ideally by decreasing   the scale of a model, we should also decrease the wood pattern of the grain. For the best results, we should find a wood grain which looks exactly like oak but at a much smaller scale. Does this perfect wood exist? I do not know.  One of the nicest wood I have seen for the planking is apple wood, yet another fruit wood, our best friend.
 
4- Each wood as his own advantages. Oak has a grain pattern which goes in the same way as the plank goes. Occasionally, a cherry wood plank will have the grain perpendicular to the lenght of the plank. This is exactly this kind of situation which must be avoid. If someone succeeds to avoid this trap, it should be possible to get a good result  simply by categorising the wood, not as a selling perspective classification as on the market, but as a perspective of use in model ship realisation.
 
For the frame,  the less attractive wood grain of the batch can be use and the best looking grain is kept for the planking.