Matrim

Cheers, I have a bunch of paintings (including that one) of the Spanish action mainly because it is the Amphion directly next to the Mercedes. Since they all show the stern I have left them for my 'stern' discussion at some later point. The nice thing is I will have a couple of sterns to look at for the Amphion class design. I am actually intending to represent the Amphion as she was in this action under Sam Sutton.

That looks good, not that I am a full build expert in any way shape or form though...

Makes sense and dont we all hate fairing...

Thanks for the comments all. The bust is probably the best way to go unless some other compelling evidence can prove any other way. Good point on the sister frigates but they were built by different yards (Deptford and Northfleet) and four years later than the Amphion. The Aeolus was one of the frigates that unsuccessfully chased the Constitution though the relevant paintings fairly obviously concentrate on the Constitution with the British ships a threatening crowd in the distance. Something to keep an eye on though as that provide at least some more evidence.

While I draw the square frames slowly I thought a slight digression is in order to the subject of the figurehead. Now the plans do not include one so I am left on best guess really. We do though have several paintings. Lissa by Robert Dodd - Figurehad is a bust, might be wearing a wreath. The Amphion is notably smaller than the ship behind which is in turn larger than the one behind it. They are sailing extemely close together. All the ships are flying White ensigns at the read what looks like red ensigns at fore and mizzen peaks, the Amphion has a union jack at its bowsprit and a red commodores flag. The other ships show red commissioning pendants. Lissa by Whitcombe after a sketch by Midshipman Few (of the Amphion) - Union jack at the fore mast, a red triangular commodores flag (with a tiny tongue at the end), pendants as Dodd. Full figureheads (and similar on all ships). The ships appear in perspective and seem the same size. Red ensign at the rear and red ensign of the stays. Lissa by Whitcombe - another engraving off of a Whitcombe original except this time magically the pendant have gone white, the rear ensign is now white but the flag on the stays is blue except for the other ships wehich have white ensigns on the Mizzen Lissa by Dodd again. Figurehead is still a bust and vaguely looks like it might have a Hoplite helmet on, squadron ships also still showing white ensigns at the rear and what appears to be red elsewhere. Union jack at the bowsprit has gone Lissa by Pococok the younger - much less to see though you really get the differential sizes of the ship in the full painting. The bottom plate does show white ensigns at the rear but bugger all flags apart from the commissioning elsewhere. There is also a painting by a Lt Waldegrave which shows red ensigns at the rear and apart from the pendant/commodores flag a union jack on Actives Mizzen. This looks like a copy of the Whitcombe but I currently know little about this officer apart from he possibly being from a famous naval family. A Waldegrave was also injured or kille dwhen Hoste had the Bacchante. Might be a co-incidence. More info needed really. This painting, the Pocock and the Dodd all show the ships with drivers whereas the Whitcombe derived do not. So looking at those paintings that include the bow of the ship we can rapidly see that they contradict one another enormously and come into two camps Whitcombe - figurehead is a full figure though with little detail Dodd - figurehead is a bust with slightly more detail. Now both were known for accuracy of sails/rigging etc but of the two I have decided to go for Dodd for the following reason. In the mid 1790's (especially 1795) the British Navy went a bit decoration averse in their hurry to push out frigates as quickly as possible this means that a full figurehead is unlikely but a bust is possible as soon after restrictions eased again though the Navy never really went for the gaudy approach of the early years. Now relating the above to what is known we do know that Hoste requested the ships move with flying jib-bom over the taff rail of the ship in front (+1 Dodd) so to allow the French no chance to break the line. In terms of size the order went Amphion (Medium) Active (Large) Volage (Smallest) Cereberus (Medium) so (+2 Dodd). Basically you can see the correct size differnential in both Pocock and Dodd but not Whitcombe. According to his memoirs Hostes command pendant was a huge forked red one (+1 Dodd) O'Brien states, "decorated with Union-jacks and ensigns at the different mast-heads and stays, independent of the regular red ensigns at the Mizen peaks, we hoisted a commodore's pendant at the Amphion's main". Something possibly used by James as he also says, "The British ships immediately formed in line ahead, with, besides the customary red ensign at their respective peaks, union-jacks and ensigns, blue and red, at their foremast heads and at their different stays" But we know Hoste was under the direct orders of Vice Admiral of the White Sir Charles Cotton. So should show a white ensign to the rear as an indication of the squadron. This supports Pococok and Dodd and less Whitcombe though he appears hurt by having such an interesting variation in flags and as his (popular) plate was copied by other artists obviously had the flag colours changed. On more general matters Amphion is usually show portrayed as a greek (so classical robes) holding a lyre. The previous full bust of the immediate preceding Amphion (exploded in harbour whilst under Israel Pellews command) does exist in plan form and shows this. So I will keep on looking. Naturally given all the evidence if anyone else has any thoughts then please shout. Joss

Added to the list do you should be able to see the plans now.

Nice wood and rabbett!

If you are set on basswood then go ahead. I personally would not use it for frames/load bearing components of the ship as it is too soft. Carving is its main use to my mind. (Just an opinion though...) Joss

You could also look at Chas's wood choices for his cross section which is listed here. http://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/topic/643-triton-cross-section-timber-list/

Magnificent, I have also renamed the topic so that it does not get lost among other 'anothers..' and added the complete flag. Joss

If you bought it a year ago you can contact the company you bought it from and they should be able to replace it. Alternately (with your proof of purchase) go to the creating company itself. Any tutorial or construction guide would depend heavily on who made the kit as each would be different. Joss.

That is an interesting idea that works well. Congrats ona job well done.. Joss

Fishy plan mainly done though I will probably update it with the transoms when I get round to them. Next up the slow and tortuous square frames. Joss

So finally placed the cathead. Initially I thought it looked too far back and when I re-checked with the inner works plan I noticed that it was actually attached to the beam in front of the gunport one I was using. When I shifted it forward using the 110 degree angles the plans required it all fit a lot better. The construction line in the following picture has been dropped down from the cathead on the sheer where it contacts the cap rail and as a good confirmation it matches almost exactly the same point down below. Also matching were Steels inboard measurements. What did not match was the outboard. If I threw a line down from the end of the cathead on the sheer then it was about two foot further forward from where it was marked here. This end point used Steels distance outboard and looks more reasonable though I am open to suggestion about lengths that may not use Steel.. Joss

Magnificent work and well above my own standards..

Nice, do you find the wood holds the shape? I always worry it will try to un-bend... Joss

Thanks for the comments I should do some more history stuff but I am still number crunching the earlier musters/captains logs for data but usually have to fit that around the other stuff. My weakness is I do something and then see how to do it better. I have already re-drawn two of the stern cants and shifted their lines on the half-breadth after checking the original against mine and am now looking suspiciously at the forward hawse pieces as I do not like the line shape which moves in an unusually aggressive fashion midships so am suspicious something is wrong. At a guess it is the waterlines as when turbo cad brings its curves sharply round to contact the keel it can 'bulge' as it tries to rapidly bring the line round and in a more aggressive curve. In future an extra midpoint station line at the bow would help mitigate this perhaps. So I may re-address these lines when the fish plan is done. Joss

Tidied the off-topic comments on keeping warm etc. Pm's or shore leave for such discussions please as we just had a page and a half added to this 2 page log on irrelevancies. Cheers, Joss.

Since I just got the cathead sorted in another post I thought I would bring the log up to date. On on of the plans there is so 'extreme' cathead detail. The full cathead joins at the center line of the ship with some overflow on the beam I will scan, size and then just transplant the plan cathead across. Since that beam is practically on the station line and the deck plan does not necessarily relate to the cap rail I shall use that location for placement. Joss

Well the square frames certainly. It certainly is a lot of work doing these yourself. Joss

The framing plan is now almost done (bar some of the cants at the rudder end by the keel.. So basically I have got back to the stage I had reached when the site crashed... One difference you will note is that I have utilised the Foredeck bulwarks (allowing I have the terminology correct). Most of the paintings (definitely from the Lissa period at least) show her with these and my framing plan did include them though the sheer did not. Next up is the fish plan (as I like to call it) Joss

Nice arty shot of the framing as well

Just a little progress report. I had to chuck away all my previous square frames work and start those again. In the process learnt some more turbo cad lessons. Rather than carry straight on to the quaterdeck barricades, preparing a 'filled' framing plan and starting the hawse pieces I thought it would be better to run back over those lessons before i forgot them. First up progress (which looks remarkably like some of the previous shots) In order of importance the lessons learnt were A) Use the turbocad ;lock ability. At a guess at some point I had accidentally selected all of a layer/group of layers and then hit a key to move it slightly or adjust its stretch/shrink. When reviewing work done against the plans I had noticed the gunports seemed to be in the wrong location. When I looked further I found many other layers were slightly out if sync as well. In the end I gave up trying and found one of my previous saves that was correct (prior to all the frames going on) and utilised that. The little padlock in turbo cad prevents adjustments, whether deliberate or accidental, of the layer in question so it makes sense to have 90% of your layers locked and work to occur just on editing ones. I had been unhappy with the start point of my lines for the cant frames. I had originally started them at their start point but due to the nature of some of the turbo cad curves this meant a more pronounced curve often occurred at the start than I liked. So for the redraw I started the curve at the keel and then cut the 'excess' once the curve was in place. Now the difference is miniscule but I wanted something I was happier with so Previous Current There was also so funky work with what appeared to be a vertical frame extended from one of the cants Anyway I will probably complete the remaining frame sections at bow and stern then the barricade type thingys before updating again. Joss

I must be mistaking what you are after then as every book in existence will use the deck plans for layouts. Unless you mean the deck plans do not provide precise detail i.e 1st lt cabin, wardroom etc etc. If so then this info is probably best got out of steel or similar where he labels his example plans in far more detail than you see in most plan sections. The Swan book is excellent from a scratch building perspective, its weakness is you then want all of them and have to work years of overtime to pay for it....Ship modelling crack. Joss

Hmm I would have thought EdT's Diana books would have had a better interior room plan than the Swan as it is at least the same size. Then again this Triton is much earlier than those. Allowing I have remembered correctly and this is the 1771 Triton the NMM holds several of these http://prints.rmg.co.uk/index.cfm?subSearchString=triton&event=catalogue.qsearch&searchString=1771 Plus they 'may' have appeared in Gardiners early frigates (or possibly Steel for that). Someone may have a copy of either so can give some more guidance on what went where as necessary. Joss