Lieste
-
Posts
306 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by Lieste
-
USF Confederacy in 3D | Blender
Lieste replied to 3DShipWright's topic in CAD and 3D Modelling/Drafting Plans with Software
Rigged for navigation, the partitions are all appropriate, but on clearing for action most if not all were struck down, along with removable furniture.- 107 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- Frigate
- Confederacy
- (and 1 more)
-
3D Printing Cannons in Resin
Lieste replied to thibaultron's topic in 3D-Printing and Laser-Cutting.
But most sane people specified cylinders.... the box is a choice. -
3D Printing Cannons in Resin
Lieste replied to thibaultron's topic in 3D-Printing and Laser-Cutting.
Wow, those square rimbases are... a choice. -
Swivels tended to see use at least as boat guns through the whole of the latter part of the age of sail, alongside the smaller carronades after their introduction, which mostly displaced small carriage guns, or amusettes on field carriages, usually with a larger ordnance in the bow, and pairs of swivels on the bulwark. Not all boats were armed, and the smallest tended only to receive swivels. When not in embarcation, the swivels were provided for the waist gangways, the poop, the marine walk and/or the fighting tops (though some captains preferred a quiet poop, and disliked firearms in the rigging because of a perceived fire risk (Nelson for both counts as an example).. Later carronades were in their turn displaced by light howitzers or obusiers on field carriage to support the landing operation from the shore, with the large but light carriage being easily manhandled or carried by a few sailors or marines once ashore.
-
You may indeed. I'm English, I practice understatement and equivocation more than might be ideal.
-
There were slings on C16th ships, making up a significant portion of the headline gun numbers - fitted to the gun wale. The new 1721 brass swivel may be the first of its exact kind, but it is far from the first swivel/antipersonnel gun - and many of the early ones would use a preloaded chamber rather than the later cartridge muzzle loaded types.
-
Though Victory is likely to be using many Armstrong or Armstrong Frederick pattern ordnance of the same lengths... I've not got a comprehensive list, but there were fewer new cast guns and older guns in store than the required numbers at the time of transition, and major older vessels tended to keep their gun sets through refits to a significant degree, with some exceptions and aside from changes to the establishment (e.g upgrades of 6pdrs to 12 pdrs, supplementation by carronades, variations in numbers of qtr deck guns, replacement of 12pdrs (and 9pdrs for smaller classes) qtr deck guns by 32pdr carronades on a broad scale in the very end of the Napoleonic period and into the 1820s, as well as when rating changed the 100 gun 1st rates to 2nd rates with 18pdr middle deck battery. Morgan's chapter on armament is being pushed out in a few weeks and should answer these 'general' questions with specificity to Victory in 1805.
-
7.5ft and 9ft (breech ring to muzzle face) 12pdrs and a 9.5ft 24pdr (overall length is roughly 2 calibres longer with the cascable and button). The full suite of guns includes these common lengths... 32pdr 9.5ft 24pdr 9.5ft, 9ft 18pdr 9ft, 8ft 12pdr 9ft, 8.5ft, 7.5ft (land service iron (no breeching ring) 6ft) 9pdr 9ft, 8.5ft, 7.5ft, 7ft (land service iron 5.5ft) 6pdr 7ft, 6.5ft, 6ft (there are other theoretical lengths mostly longer, but the 6pdr was mostly deprecated by now) The group of rebored guns include other lengths of these patterns which I've only ever seen as donors for rebore natures... as well as some more common types, but that is deep into the 1820s, 1830s and beyond. They externally look identical to the original pattern of smaller gun, but with a larger diameter bore to suit their new purpose.
-
BTW AFAIK the end of reinforce sight patch is a rather late modification to the pattern, probably c1830+, early examples of the Blomefield predate the wide adoption of sights, and only the topline (breech-ring and muzzle swell) were lightly marked with no disparting block or hausse. The sides of the breechring may have quarter degree marks which meet the top of the carriage cheek on some examples, but I don't have extensive dated examples to guess at when these marks were in use - presumably before 1830.
-
6-pounder, Royal Navy cannon barrel - George III era
Lieste replied to Gabek's topic in 3D-Printing and Laser-Cutting.
The issue I raised and was confirmed in replies as being a more general issue than merely with Cura, is where the slice is joined as the outside ring and filled, then the inside ring filled to the outside in random layers of the print, rather than the 'proper' filling of the ring between the inside and outside loops. It is a slicer issue or one with the definition of an STL file and how it interacts with the slicer. Breaking each 'ring' into two parts (halves or a 'big wedge'/'little wedge' prevents the treatment of the outer loop and inner loop as two objects and the forcing of the proper handling of each closed loop without holes/islands. I've seen it particularly where the object originates as a profile and is a solid of revolution. It is only secondarily an issue of the linking of different longitudinal elements. Cura sometimes does the same thing with the automatic 'tree supports' if they are needed 'all around' and form an external loop (which is where I first noticed the behaviour before I saw it repeat on a model ordnance barrel). -
Size of a printer needed
Lieste replied to Frank Burroughs's topic in Modeling tools and Workshop Equipment
I would suggest considering the upfront expense on an Ecotank model of printer to be well worth the expense if you actually plan to use the printer when you want, rather than needing to ration the ridiculously expensive consumables of a typical inkjet. I have two - An Epson ET-2650 (A4 printer/scanner/copier) and an ET-7750 (A3 printer/scanner/copier), which work out cheaper than monochrome laser prints for 'average' colour prints on plain paper (though a coated paper does give better quality results - and noticeably increases print costs). I've so far recovered about half the cost of the printers in reduced printing costs and they are both still functioning and I expect them to do so for many years to come, because they are actually used, rather than left to clag-up. -
6-pounder, Royal Navy cannon barrel - George III era
Lieste replied to Gabek's topic in 3D-Printing and Laser-Cutting.
A solid of rotation - depending on the modelling software often has a start and stop and sweeps the surface around until the two 'ends' meet with zero gap. This (when it exists) can cause slicers to have a bit of a freak out... sometimes. I know that this can be a major issue with the interaction between Blender and Cura... and can be averted by making the barrel in two parts so there is a single polygon for the top, joined to a single polygon for the bottom - rather than one polygon which forms a 'just closed ring' or a ring with a hole in it. It is how the slicer interprets the geometry, rather than a problem with the geometry in the model as such. -
6-pounder, Royal Navy cannon barrel - George III era
Lieste replied to Gabek's topic in 3D-Printing and Laser-Cutting.
A single part joined at a semi-seam like that sometimes fails to print well. You may be better off with two halves - it is a problem for some slicers to have an edge which is outside to outside within the same part in a 'ring'. It can cause the bore to 'infill' rather than remain open at an edge in a 'random' point and can interfere with supports placement too. Two separate parts placed together so the bore isn't "inside" the outer perimeter of any single part can slice better in some cases. It doesn't have to be 'literally sliced in half - excising a narrow wedge from the lower surface 'below' the trunnions might be sufficient to avoid the problem, and better hides the 'seam' between the two elements. -
6-pounder, Royal Navy cannon barrel - George III era
Lieste replied to Gabek's topic in 3D-Printing and Laser-Cutting.
Yes, that captures the character of the gun. This design is very common - the precise balance of reinforce vs chase and the number and style of the astragals and listels will vary over the period of black powder artillery, but for a very long time almost all nations produced guns that broadly have this form. I believe that this is "gun". -
Is it a photographic artefact or does she look a little warped in that last image?
-
It does still look a bit too steep. The brackets are closer at the transom and wider at the sole than the red line for the taper. Check against the tables of dimension but I'd narrow the rear and slightly widen the transom going purely by eye...
-
6-pounder, Royal Navy cannon barrel - George III era
Lieste replied to Gabek's topic in 3D-Printing and Laser-Cutting.
Not especially convinced by the shape of the tulip, swell of the muzzle, or the muzzle rings and astragals. As a *rough* approximation the swell should be half a calibre from the muzzle and occupy half the length from muzzle face to the greatest diameter, continuing into the tulip the arc of the swell and tulip should be tangent at their meeting. The Tulip form should be a larger radius curve smoothly transitioning from the middle of the neck of the chase (where the astragal is) to be tangent to the swell. Details about the number and shape of mouldings between the muzzle face and swell vary according to the pattern, but the smooth flow of curves seems pretty universal, even as their proportions change. -
Carpenter's walk. Giving 'human reach' access to the hull so that caulking, plugging or other forms of emergency repair can be done while under way from the interior. Slowing the intake of water reduces the pumping burden, and identifying rot or other problems with durability before collapse reduces the risk of sudden foundering so more or less frequent access for examination was necessary.
-
That is the hold, rather than the Orlop - the deck situated just below the waterline, below the lower gun deck, but clear of the hold.
-
I think he means the astragal of the button, not a breeching ring, which is what I take from your comment. The A-F gun has a ring around the 'equator' of the button - an astragal with no listel, but otherwise similar to the astragals of the vent and chase.
-
72 OA doesn't sound right. Gun lengths tended to be in 6" lengths, from breech ring to muzzle face, and the cascabel and breech 2 calibres or a little over 7.3" - (roughly) 71.3" is a possible overall length from a 66" gun, but 72 doesn't fit the scheme. ... but the standard naval patterns for 6pdr only start from 6ft (72") and run up to 8.5ft (earlier to even longer guns including at least the 9ft pattern). I doubt that the ordnance was any shorter than 72" from breechring to muzzle face, or was improperly referred to by the other measure using an incorrect value.
-
For 3d printing at a not too large size (and with some ability to scale to suit) you could look at the sailor/gunner/rower crew sets by Alf Scherer might be useful. His stuff can be found over at MyMiniFactory - and while I haven't used any of his figures myself (FDM printer and smallish figures are not a fantastic match - Resin printers should do much better though). I have printed a number of his other models. Detail seems to be at around the level of older 1/72 scale plastic figures, but you can print/have printed as many as you need. Rowers/crew for a bireme and viking ships as well as C17th and C18th/19th age of sail peeps should give a fair bit of utility if they are suitable and the sets are inexpensive for a 'suck it and see' if you have a suitable printer (or a friend with one and the willingness to indulge).
-
That was a caronade rigged on the non-recoiling principle - the breeching absorbed the recoil energy 'in place' with only 'slack' in the carriage assisting. The first arrangement of their obusiers and very early caronades were mounted similarly to British Carronades with a long slide and a breeching that brought up the upper slide in the recoiled position. I think the date of conversion to non-recoil was a little later than 1805 - Martin (1828) says copying British practice starting in 1806, with the definitive order for the arrangement in 1811.
-
HMS Victory Renovation - Outer Planking Removed
Lieste replied to Steve20's topic in Nautical/Naval History
What is quite frustrating is that most of the ships at Trafalgar are given the 'raw' 1770s establishment of guns in most books about the battle, despite a 1794 general issue of carronades as supernumerary weapons, and a few examples being quoted of the replacement of establishment guns by additional carronades on the QD and/or FC, the formula 'QD and FC armament variously augmented or replaced by carronades in service' being particularly unhelpful. We know this was done on a per ship basis, and to a degree at the discretion of the captain (especially as it relates to roundhouse carronades before the (near) complete replacement of QD guns by carronades and the deletion of roundhouse armament from the establishments, but there has to be better and more data than the obsolete establishment of guns from before the advent of carronades, and a notation that carronades were sometimes added in various numbers and sizes...) Of course an AO authorising Carronades doesn't actually cast the numbers required... so there is going to be a delay between the new orders and the fitting of the last vessel to that standard, but it would be nice to have a better representation of the progression of changes and the actual and/or likely armament at the major actions, rather than a known 'probably not' fit of guns only. -
That 1860s US naval gun is a copy of part of a figure engraved in "Ordnance instructions for the United States navy." Unsure who copied the diagram by hand, or when, but that book is available online in various places including the Library of Congress.
Our Emblem ®
