DaveBaxt

Cheers guys for your early responses. Allan the three books you have put at the top of your list I already have. At the moment I am working my way through the 18th century but sometimes get drawn into an earlier period.Perhaps I will take a look at the Seawatch books . trippwj , I am pretty much interested in all the things you have mentioned , however building model ships is my main interest but definately getting pulled towards the history of sail ,especially some of the great battles and which ships were involved and what types were used. I am pretty much interested in anything to do with the age of sail. I have also found a local book shop which sells the magazines Model Shipwright and thinking of buying a number of these as I am finding these quite interesting too . Something whaich I asked about on a previous question I posted.

I have a birthday coming up shortly and I have been asked what I would like for a present to celebrate such an event. I thought this would be a good time to add to my Library of books. I am looking at something second hand and have narrowed it down to 2 possibly 3. books. The first is 'The Master Shipwrights Secrets' by Richard Endsor. This is actually new for just over £50 the second hand one I can get for £38. I am also looking at 'Ships of the line'Vol 2' by Brian Lavery for £60 or the same book but vol 1 and 2 for £80 I now feel I have several books of worth in my collection by Lees, Lavery and Goodman and one or two AOTS books but do not have the afore mentioned titles . So my question is although perhaps these books are not a must have but rather nice to have, are they value for money. personally I am thinking of 'The Master Shipwrights secrets' by Richard Endsor as I have read several reviews including one by Chris Watton. However I am also wondering if it would be more cost effective to go for both volumes of ' Ships of the line, for £80 Thank you for any thoughts or reviews on the above books.Best regards Dave

To be fair it was not my initial idea but perhaps one of the modellers who has built the Diana before me. So I thank you who ever you are and apologize for not acknowlegding your help at the time.

Yes. You just find yourself some dowel to fit through the hollow tube and reduce the diameter at the ends of the dowel to get them into the alligator clips. I also glued them onto the dowel using superglue. I measured what I thought would be the correct length on the model plus a little bit more and just pushed one of the dowels to the correct distance and drilled holes either side of the servomatic uprights thus locking the distance between the alligator clips. Both clips are adjustable but I only adjusted one in this case. There is proabably a more scientific way of adjustng the distance between the clips but this way works ok. I have used it quite a few times already and is very handy for exactly this sort of job. Hope this helps

There has been some confusion for me as regarding how the breeching ropes are attached to the bulwarks.I have read somewhere that it was tied to the ring and ringbolt by 2 half hitches. however not seeing much evidence of this from other than by Jason( Beef Wellington) I decided to post the question here on MSW.So another big thank you to Allan for finding this great explaination for me.Here is the lik to the discussion I have decided to follow the above piece supplied by Allan which states that evidence from a drawing in the Science Museum that a thimble is inserted into the ring and the Breeching is seized to this at the throat and then knotted. I am unsure what kind of knot is used but decided on a half hitch due to knots tend to tighten when subjected to heavy sudden loads . I did not add the thimble but added and a seizing to the ends of the ropes as well as the throat seizing as mentioned.Unfortuantely I do not have any tan coloured seizing rope but have ordered some and whilst I am waiting I will be using black seizing whilst working on the guns which will be hidden under the deck above.. According to the tables previously shown, the Breeching ropes work out at 0.7 diameter and 133mm long. I am not sure if this included the excess for wrapping around the bends or not so maked the 133mm on the breeching fope and the above is what it looked like. I used diluted pva glue on the ropes in the hope they would be easier to work with and will use some drops of superglue to stick them down in places if need be.The length of the Breeching rope worked out well from the previous table but the length of the gun tackle was much longer than the 85mm. from the tables. It was more like 150mm, so not sure if the extra was the wrapping around itself. For the gun hooks I used some copper eyelets and shaped them to look like hooks. After seizing the 0.25 mm rope around the single block , I soaked the block in pva glue and after allowing the pva to dry, I drilled the block to take the copper hook( blackened) I also did the same to the double block. Anyway here is the first completed cannon but still need to glue in place . Just another 25 to go.

Thank you Gregory, for your input, it is always welcome. I have the same drawing and for most part and is probably correct, however I have seen so many different versions and thought I would try and get to the bottom of it. Easier said than done.

I have gone over and re-read everything which has been lay down in this thread and would like to thank everyone for their help and paicence in this matter. So I think at the moment I am between a rock & a hard palce if I am honest . However In this case I will try and follow the above literature and follow the above testement posted by Allan. Another question I am afraid. In reference to the part whereby the above script mentions the period by 1790 and according to a drawing in a sience museum a thimble is formed in the eye of the of the breeching rope and a throat seizing to secure it. It then goes on to say the rope is then knotted. What kind of knot are we talking about here ( If anyone actually knows please answer) What are we talking about here Bends, half hitches or what? As previously metioned, knots are not such a good idea due to self tightening or is the thimble taking all of the strain? Sorry as there always seems to be more questions to each answer. Thank you once again for your help and patience in this matter. Best regards Dave

Thank you for that wonderful reply and so for my date of 1794 it would be a throat splice and a half hitch. Great stuff

Thank you Druxey , I will certainly look out for those issues. Thats a great help

You are too kind Allan and the photos would be welcome. I can see for the photos in the journal she is much more ornate than the Artois class frigate and the level of skill in these photos is another level especially the carvings. Regarding the journals, perhaps I could start with the later yearly ones to begin with. However I am currently saving my pennies for a copy of the book 'The Master shipwrights Secrets' by Richard Endsor but wonder if it is too early a period for my current study. Thank you again Allan for your input and quick response. Dave

Regards the above. I have read somewhere that the Cannon breechings are tied to a ring and an eye bolt, and I think a half hitch knots were used as are a number of models I have found..All the photos and drawings I can find are that the rope is seized to metal ring and according to Mondfields book 'Historic ship models' a throat siezing followed by two normal siezing are used. Any thoughts or clarity on thls? Perhaps One was used for a specific period and another for a different period. Laverys book 'The Arming and fitting of English ships of war ' Also states that the breeching ropes are seized to the ring bolt.At the moment I am specifically interested in the late 18th century .Was one used for certain size cannon.? As neither methods are permanent clearly the one which is tied could be altered during battle if the breeching were to be stretched in anyway . If newer ropes were used for whatever reason then perhaps the ropes would stretch further initially, rather than ropes which have been used for some time and the slack taken up either by seizing ot tieing. Perhaps ropes were even pre stretched prior to use. Just some of the issues running through my head prior to rigging the cannon on my HMDiana 1794

Just picked up a very good copy of the 2012 . I didn,t realize that it was an Annual and came out every year. Until I received the book. My primary reason for buying , was for the construction of the Frigate Minerva and learning something about plank on frame and scratch building. Although at this stage being a relative beginner, I feel I am a long way from scratch building. I have also seen a few other additions of Model Shipright come up second hand from time to time. I got this one for £10 plus delivery. I liked the look of what was inside and just wondered what peoples ideas of these books in general are and other years published? Best regards Dave.

Thank you Allan for your input and confirming what was also in David Whites AOTS Diana. In his drawing he also has two eye bolts either side of the gun port and has these horizontal as I have fitted them. I am unsure if this is accurate but thought it would be better this way for accomidating the gun tackle hooks and does not have rings like the eyebolt below for the breeching rope which is verticle ( not yet fitted on the below photograph for ease of fitting) I have looked at many different photographs and there seems to be many different ways to fit these eyebolts bolts

Great marking off in preparation for planking Mark and it must have taken a lot of time to get that just right. I look forward to seeing how you progress with the planking even though its a shame to cover up such fantastic framing.

Good to see you back at it David. It is always difficult to resume work after a break from a model. It is almost a year since I worked on my Endeavour and sometimes regret not finishing her before starting on my HMS Diana. Beautiful looking boats David especially those frames. Not too far to go now so keep at it. I am looking forward to seeing another beautiful finished Diana. Good luck David and thanks for your help.

Received the required rope from Ropes of scale and it does look rather good to start on the gun tackle. .The sizes for the 18lb Cannon Breeching ropes work out to be 0.7mm and 0.25mm for the gun tackle. I have made a small jig for drilling the inside of the bulwarks to take eyebolts and rings for securing the cannon. There is also an additional 2 holes for the outer eybolts for swinging the cannon fore and aft. The idea of the jig is to stop me drilling too deep and coming out the other side. Hopefully once I have drilled all the holes I am hoping to use the jig for ensuring I get the correct lengths of Breeching ropes.I

Another Dept to you Alan in an attempt to educate me , so I thank you kindly for the Link to Steels Document The Elements and Practice of Rigging 1794. Best regards Dave

Incorrect content Sorry

Thank you Allan for keeping me going with this and not giving up on me and also for your patience. I was told ages ago that Lees book,' The Masting and Rigging of English ships of war 1625 to 1860 ' is the holy grail for masts and rigging and when I first started doing this hobby not so long ago,I have always used his book. Thanks also for sshowing us the difference in the mast calculations between Danny Vadas and Lees book, which are very similar to what I came up with. Yes it looks like I will use Lees book for calculating the Fore mast dimensions together with the fore mast rigging. I think it should be ok to use the tables for the standing & running minus what is needed for the fore mast but I will compare rhe two resorurces for the Masts & yards . If anything seems to be out of wack I can check again with Lees.Once again I big thank you to Allan and Bob and for that matter anyone else and not forgelling all the likes I have recieved too. best ragrds Dave

That happened to me about the same time in South Shields during a spring tide. Not for the feint hearted.

Bob thank you for finding that spread sheet. Now that I have borrowed a PC with windows 11 and excel on I can have a proper look at it. I have managed to down load Danny's spreadsheet and the one I downloaded origonally onto a Chromebook , I was able access the calculations page but as it is many years since I did any spreadsheet work and only fairly small ones, I got lost off a bit and could not make any sense and some of the commands were lost on me, such as the 'If.............. ' command.. It made me a bit dizzy if I am honest. I will take another look at your link, but I think jumping into a spread sheet of someone else work and this large is probabaly beyond my apprehension. I must thank you again Bob for sticking with me on this one. Your patience holds no bound.

May I be so bold as to ask one more question regarding mast dimensions if I may. I see from the AOTS Diana was launched on march the 3 1794. I also notice that 1794 is a fairly important year for the subsequent change in mast dimensions and how to work them out. I f there is a change of dimensions in this year I am assuming if the ship is launched without masts and perhaps not made yet. In this case would we take the formula given for before 1794 or for after that year and after. Once again I am not sure if this would be much different other than a slight difference in the diameters. So really just a matter of interest and perhaps the diameters increased due to the increase in the amount of sail carried as time progressed. Just a thought so could be wrong. Best regards Dave

Phew I am glad I got that one sorted. So for my masting and spars I think I am pretty well sorted then. However apart from the breeching rope and the gun tackle I think I will leave the rest of the rigging for another day. But a huge thanks for walking me through this. Best regards Dave

My working out is different than the spread sheet. for a main mast length of 92.5 ft . According to Steel the diameter is 9/10 th an inch for every 3 ft for 1794 gives me 30.8x9/10=27.75" change to metric x 25.4 and divide by 64 =11.01mm Fore mast is 0.9 the length of the main mast after 1773= 83.25 ft /3ft = 27.25 x 9/10 = 24.975" x 25.4 then divide by 64 = 9.91mm. According to the book AOTS Diana they also have the main mast at 11.01mm but the fore mast diameter at 9.77mm . So another discrepancy. Any idea where I am going wrong???

Having looked more closely at the results of the masting sizes on Danny's masting sheet and looking at the diameter of both the main mast and the fore mast as the same 11.2mm on the model. I believe this to be incorrect but I could be wrong. I have taken my calculations from Lees book'The masting and rigging of English ships of War ' and as the lower fore mast is shorter than the main mast by 0.9 x the main mast = the fore mast then I assumed that as the diameter of the mast is calculated for 1" for every 3 ft of masting , then if the fore mast is shorter than the main mast then the diameter must be smaller. There is some ambiguity concerning Lees wording on this which perhaps I may have got wrong . In the Proportionate Diameters of the Mast section in Lees book FORE equates to 'The same proportions as given for the Main' My take on this would be for the same proportions as to the length of the fore mast and not main mast. I Hope I am making sense and wonder if it is possible to change the formulae in the spread sheet without too much trouble but beginning to think Allan is correct and we are just better off just working all this out for ourselves. There is however the possibility that it might be another incompatibility issue. However it is my hope to borrow a windows office 123 lap top installed and try this out for my own curiosity.Thanks again for all your help and patience. Best regards Dave