Jump to content
Nautical Research Journal Back Issue Sale! Now until Father's Day ×
NRG Photographic Model Ship Competition - All eligible to enter - Reduced memberhsip fee ×

BANYAN

SPECIAL CONTRIBUTOR
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,840

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by BANYAN

  1. BANYAN
    A warm welcome from downunder; look forward to seeing your work. cheers Pat
  2. BANYAN
    Thanks Steven, I will have a look around as there are a few down this away I will probably be up your way in the not too distant future and will give you a bell before hand. cheers Pat
  3. BANYAN
    Very nice work michael, this will result in a authentic looking paneling. Will that card be prone to 'swelling' in the water environment? I am sure you have thought of that and will be interested to see how you seal it, particularly the edges. cheers Pat
  4. BANYAN
    Thanks for the updates Tim, this is a very fine model and it is interesting reading how you research and approach the making of the various components - duplicate just allow usd to enjoy the detail and workmanship twice to remove them simply edit your post, and in the strip at the bottom showing the thumbnails of all your uploaded image files, simply click on the delete icon at the bottom of the thumbnail. cheers Pat
  5. BANYAN
    The anchors look good Steven, that chain looks prety good too - would you mind advising the links per inch please? Also is the shop local or online? I am assuming local so a trip up your way may be in the offing. cheers Pat
  6. BANYAN
    Good solution, a significant improvement of the model compared with what you started with. cheers Pat
  7. BANYAN
    Thanks for the feedback Eberhard and John; appreciate your suggestions. I think you may be right re the positioning of the chock as the darker section (extension) could be something else. John, WRT to the cranes, a good point and I will revert (again ) to the gooseneck option I think; however, note that "Victoria" was minimum manned (along mercantile manning standards), but that said ash removal would not have been overly onerous on the crew most of the time. I say this as one of the design considerations made by the designer ,and insisted upon by the build supervisor, was a heavier (than for similar RN ships) spars to allow her to be undersail for the majority of time (to save on fuel as suitable Coals were scarce in Australia at the time). The engines were provided to allow her to operate in any condition when in her 'saving of life at sea' role, or, if required, in battle . I have been looking for a 'direct' connection between the Contractual wording of "iron crane" and gooseneck davit (or derrick), just to verify this but have found nothing yet; may just have to run with this as an assumption. I was running with derrick as it is more crane like? I too initially, and have reverted, was thinking a more simple arrangement would have sufficed. Also, the Contract was very specific in using the term davit for the boats and the fish davit??? Oh well, yet another conundrum. Thanks again Pat
  8. BANYAN
    Hi, I think it really depends on the finish you want to apply. If painting the hull, you can edge glue with PVA or CA but if a clear, stained and varnished finish any glue will more than likely result in a 'splotchy' finish no matter how careful you are as the glue penetrates the wood. More experienced modellers may be able to give better advice. cheers Pat
  9. BANYAN
    Hi again, the distance seems OK to me but I will leave to more experienced and knowledgeable people to respond more adequately The bowsprit (outer end) for my Victoria (1855) is 23 feet (for a ship of 166 feet between perpendiculars and of 580 tons) so you are in the ball park I think ? I am unfamiliar with spritsail yards and the like so can't offer too much more to assist you; sorry. It is surprising what info is stored and what is lost. For example I have hundreds of letters written between the Crown Agency, the build Supervisor and the Governor of Victoria at the time, many of which refer to literally nearly a hundred drawings/sketches and plans - while the letters have been preserved, not a single plan or sketch has been cheers Pat
  10. BANYAN
    Hi Druxey, I read that as Main Mast above the deck 24? Asto the extension, this may relate to an extension of the head, but your ship may be a little early for that. Mid-19th C ships had extensions added to make them "Taunt" as described by Kipping and Fincham (that is tall). However, if we interpret the above deck measurement as being from the partners to the hounds (which is standard), the extension may be referring to the 'head' or doubling? cheers Pat
  11. BANYAN
    Looking good John; all very symmetrical cheers Pat
  12. BANYAN
    Hi again folks, yet another issue I am trying to resolve (well several actually) relating to the bowsprit and Jibboom (noting 1855 time frame) Q1. From Kipping I have sufficient information to dimension and shape the spars. What is not given, and not shown in any plan, is what ratio is used to determine the housing lengths (bed to step of the bowsprit, and the doubling of the jibboom onto the bowsprit. Is anyone aware of these ratios? As best I can determine the inner end of the bowsprit was only 5 feet - is this too short for a 23 foot bowsprit? Attached is a drawing I am doing which is superimposed on the profile photo of the ship. The profile and photo do not fully align as the photo is taken with the sip laying with a slight stbd bow inclination so the angles (and lengths change). Q2. You can see where I have circled or called out possible joints for the heel chock/jibboom. From what I can make out of this photo (not great quality as it was taken in 1867/8) is where I think the heel chock ends, but not sure where the butt joint is. Both options are viable according to Kipping and to Underhill, whereby some ships of this era still employed a small/short chock, whereas other ships, especially clippers, used a longer version. see other attached drawing from Underhill. I am leaning towards the latter (longer version) as there appears som rounding down (more than the proportioned shape of a jibbom) evident. that said though, this would leave a shorter housing? Hence Q1 (part 2) Q3. the last question relates to interpreting the bopwcap as shown in the image. My read is that as it is so close fitting it is more likely to be an iron cap rather the squarer and larger wooden (old style) cap? All comments ans suggestions most welcomed. cheers Pat
  13. BANYAN
    Thanks Eberhard, I've not found much either. I have assumed ash chutes as there is some reference to these in contemporary ship plans, and I have read that the ash, once raised was transferred by wheelbarrow to the lee chutes for disposal. The Contract called for portable 'iron cranes' which I read as 'shiftable' So three options; a gooseneck arrangement, a derrick arrangement or a full on crane. The NMM has sketches for two such cranes for this period, but they appear a little large and will have been obvious in the imagery. My assumption then is that when required the crane would be moved to the 'lee side' and would only need a reach to service the hatch and barrows. If a derrick was used, the reach may have been sufficient to allow the ash to be dumped overboard without transfer to a barrow. The derrick could be dismantled easily when not required and maybe why it cannot be seen in the imagery. I am leaning towards the simple derrick crane shown below. cheers Pat
  14. BANYAN
    Nice production run Steven (cheaper by the dozen ) cheers Pat
  15. BANYAN
    That cap rail sets the deck off beautifully Keith, love the tone of that darker timber cheers Pat
  16. BANYAN
    I have recently been transcribing a lot of documents and found the 'running' writing sometimes scrawled/written quickly could be hard to read. To my eye that word is Sprit (as in the sprit yard/sail) as fitted to the bowsprit/jib? It looks like the writer didn't close up the 'p' and uses the old english form of 'r' making it appear like a separate letter? Just one further interpretation cheers Pat
  17. BANYAN
    Thanks Tim, look forward to seeing the progress on this wonderful model. cheers Pat
  18. BANYAN
    Looks a good fit Michael; once you have the ladder sorted you will be in a good position to determine how the other gear/furniture will fit.. cheers Pat
  19. BANYAN
    Look forward to it Matrim; looks like you have researched her fairly thoroughly. cheers Pat
  20. BANYAN
    Nice work on the spars and rigging; coming along very nicely Augustus. cheers Pat
  21. BANYAN
    Hi Keith, could these be a more modern version of the 'compressor/chain stop' used in ships from the mid-19th century. They used a cam arrangement to lift or raise the cable; when raised the bottom created a smaooth surface allowing the cable to run, when lowered it formed a depression into which a link would fall then be 'stopped'. As a final 'safety, a guillotine could be lowered/screwed down to lock the chain in place. The mechanism was controlled by a tackle fitted to the lever in the early days. Attached is a versions from the 1850's manufactured by Browne and Harfield (patented by them). The general shape of your sort of alludes to something similar. Have you search chain controller or chain compressor in the yacht chandlers web sites? Probably have but just in case. cheers Pat
  22. BANYAN
    Geez that looks good Keith, really neat. Ah, I'm not the only one then (forgetting things that is!) cheers Pat
  23. BANYAN
    Looks like you are well and truly on top of this Keith (pun intended ). I very much like the idea of the slot with sliding cams to help retain the rail in place and at the correct displacement against the bulwark. In hindsight I also wish I had thought of painting and masking the hull before adding the cap rail, as painting that proved a source of some exasperation cheers Pat
  24. BANYAN
    Beautiful work as always Doris, your craftsmanship and the quality of the work continue to inspire. cheers Pat
  25. BANYAN
    John, Michael, Carl, Keith, Druxey, Eberhard - thank you all for your very kind comments and encouragement; but as we all know we are our own worst critics Thanks also for the advice re turning acrylic; I have noted that all away. I think my issue is turning speed as I have put the 10K rpm mod onto my lathe to get the higher turning speeds required for a clean wood finish. The lowest speed is mid 1-2 k rpm, which is probably still too fast Anyway it is done now and I am onto to completing the pivot gun as best I can. Still some research required on the subject of 'ship's cranes as I need to make that decision very soon. The Contract called for 'two cranes' for ash removal. Still not sure what way to go, as I would have thought a 'goose neck' davit would have been the go, but as the Contract was specific for the 'fish davit' I think they may have specified it as such. That said, a full blown crane seems a bit excessive and there is nothing showing on the imagery. Cranes were around at the time and I have found two 'possible' illustrations/drawings of such items in the NMM (for this specific period) but they seem too big. As far as I can tell, a simple goose neck davit over the hatch would have done the trick? Any ideas? cheers Pat

About us

Modelshipworld - Advancing Ship Modeling through Research

SSL Secured

Your security is important for us so this Website is SSL-Secured

NRG Mailing Address

Nautical Research Guild
237 South Lincoln Street
Westmont IL, 60559-1917

Model Ship World ® and the MSW logo are Registered Trademarks, and belong to the Nautical Research Guild (United States Patent and Trademark Office: No. 6,929,264 & No. 6,929,274, registered Dec. 20, 2022)

Helpful Links

About the NRG

If you enjoy building ship models that are historically accurate as well as beautiful, then The Nautical Research Guild (NRG) is just right for you.

The Guild is a non-profit educational organization whose mission is to “Advance Ship Modeling Through Research”. We provide support to our members in their efforts to raise the quality of their model ships.

The Nautical Research Guild has published our world-renowned quarterly magazine, The Nautical Research Journal, since 1955. The pages of the Journal are full of articles by accomplished ship modelers who show you how they create those exquisite details on their models, and by maritime historians who show you the correct details to build. The Journal is available in both print and digital editions. Go to the NRG web site (www.thenrg.org) to download a complimentary digital copy of the Journal. The NRG also publishes plan sets, books and compilations of back issues of the Journal and the former Ships in Scale and Model Ship Builder magazines.

Our Emblem ®

Modelshipworld - Advancing Ship Modeling through Research

Nautical Research Guild ® and the NRG logo are Registered Trademarks, and belong to the Nautical Research Guild (United States Patent and Trademark Office: No. 6,999,236 & No. 6,999,237, registered March 14, 2023)

×
×
  • Create New...