Thukydides

I think your colour looks good. I don't think the following caveats are deal breakers to your methodology for determining the paint colour, but I figured I would note them. There are two main reasons why the colours will not match (both of which you noted): The lighting - The issue here is that in real life (and in paintings) things look very different depending on the lighting and what is around them. For example, looking at the door of my office, it is all painted the same colour, but the different faces are very different colours. This means that if you want to adjust using the ai (as you did) you need to make sure that the red deterioration you are measuring on the flag is in a similar lighting situation (in this case it should be in shadow). The yellowing - paintings mostly change colour due to the deterioration of the varnish layer (that is how you get the yellowing of a painting). This does not impact all colours evenly and depends on how much dirt and how long since the varnish was replaced. For this reason I would be careful about comparing colour change between two different paintings. If you want to do the comparison try to stick to the same painting (it was not clear from your explanation if this is what you did or not). That all being said, there is a broader question about how you want to depict the model. Do you want your colour to "be accurate" or do you want it to "look accurate", these are not the same thing. A model is a small scale representation of a much larger object and so light and shadows do not react the same way on these smaller objects. If you want it to look like a miniature version of the real thing then you actually need to do some tricks (your dry brushing was a good start) to try and simulate the impact of a light on the real size object. I don't have enough time to cover it all here, but essentially you may want to consider simulating some of the shadows and highlights as opposed to simply using "the correct" colour. I did a presentation on the topic for my model group (though I am by no means an expert) if you are interested in more info on the topic.

One option is just to buy some extra strips and plank the deck yourself. It will look better and then you can control the amount of planking you want to do. Well done on sherbourne, you are making good progress.

If it was me it would depend on how visible you expect the frame to be. If you are planning to plank the area (or only plank one side of the hull, then you could choose to do so on that side), then I would just build it up. Otherwise I would probably try to remake it (though I am a bit of a perfectionist, one I know a problem exists I have trouble unseeing it). That being said it is probably best to at least try option two first. You can then decide how much of a blemish it is and if you can live with it. In any case the model is looking great. Looking forward to seeing you progress it.

Are you able to elaborate on what you are doing with the "double wall"? It appears the end bit looks like it is wormed, but you don't show that process, are those separate pieces of rope or are they the ends of the three strands you split off to make the wall? This is really fantastic work. I am really impressed and am learning so much.

A very watered down paint, often with additives that help it flow into the recesses. It pools in the recesses increasing the definition of cracks. You can build it up in layers to increase the contrast. Often the second stage in the (very simplified) model painting process: base layer -> wash -> highlight. Edit, it seems I should have read all the subsequent posts before I answered, chuck beat me to it

I don't want to derail the conversation from your specific subject too much as my example is only somewhat related (British, smaller ships, earlier date etc...) That being said I am not 100% sure though I have trouble thinking on what else they could be. They can't be sweep ports as they are too low (most of them are just below the planking of the deck about the level of the beams. The contract for Perseus and Unicorn (ships of the same class) also make note of cutting scuttles for each of the officers cabins and the size quoted appears to be similar to that drawn on the plans. Only thing here that might be applicable to your modeling application is that the contract does note that they should be lined with lead. Yes this is the challenge of this, lots of confusing and sometimes contradictory views. If they are vents I suspect they must angle down (similar to the the example you showed), but they appear to largely be around the beams, just below the deck planking. One thought I had was maybe they run through the room and space between the frames. The second example is from 1727 so I suspect given the number (and regular spacing) of them that those are meant to be sweeps. Many of the earlier smaller vessels had them. Your planking is looking very nice. Well done.

Very interesting @Marcus.K., I appreciate the amount of work you are putting into this research. As @The Bitter End said I also find the research process to uncover obscure details as much fund as building models themselves. One thing that stands out to me with the vents is how many of them there are. I have found air vents on plans for HMS Camilla of 1776 (https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-83800) and also Daphne 1776 (https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-83787), but there are only 6 of them on each side. One for each cabin and then one near the bow. They are drawn in black pencil at about the line of the deck.

Congrats on reaching this stage. This is a very impressive kit and I am sure there are going to be some great models built with it.

Great work Andrew.

I am really enjoying this build log, learning so many things I was not aware of. I don't really have anything to add apart from great job.

Really good work. How did you handle the lofting at the bow? I found I had a lot of trouble with that when I was faring the hull for perseus.

Thanks Glen, the main change is that I have dropped down to about half the size (1/1200 vs 1/700 scale). This certainly brings some modelling challenges, but it allows the ships to be an appropriate size for use of the table top. The age of sail was about maneuvering into position and if the play space is too small then it just becomes a matter or rolling dice for the guns.

These files are a fantastic resource. Very kind of you to make them available for everyone.

1/1200 Vigilant Class Brig - Finished It has been a while since I updated this log as the vigilant class brig was sitting in limbo waiting on me to get around to varnishing it. Since these pieces are intended for gaming, it is important that a protective layer is applied over the whole model. This also helps to stiffen and strengthen the rigging and the sails as well as protecting them from the natural oils on your fingers. I used satin varnish as I want the colours to pop somewhat and we are at such a small scale that I felt matt varnish would render things too dull. Once the vanish was on, it was time to apply the water effects. First I used a small flat head paint brush to dab on the water effects. I am using vallejo transparent water for this. The paste appears white when added and then dries clear. The dabbing of the paint brush causes it to sit in peaks and valleys which gives the impression of smaller waves. Once this has fully dried, I mix some white ink with a little bit of the water effects and go back in with the smallest paintbrush I have to pick out the crests of waves and paint in some of the foam at the bow and in the wake. And with that the model is finished. You can see it below with a penny for scale.

Yes hope you are feeling better soon.

This is a very cool project.

The first source is from a national archives documents I have. The Caruana reference is because he transcribes part of TNA WO 55/1745 (1765) in his book and I don't have the original. The raw data from TNA ADM 160/150 (1794), I have transcribed in my research document for Perseus which I released a first draft of parts of it for a while back (see the linked post for the download): The relevant transcriptions of the primary data can be found on pages 71-73. Essentially, based on the guns carried by a particular class of ship and the stores that accompany them as well as some notes the documents had on the blocks, you can figure out what size of block / rope was used. I just compiled it all into one table to save everyone the effort. Note practice may have varied somewhat from ship to ship and this is mostly based only only 2 sources so a degree of caution with the conclusions is advised. The carronade data is from 1794, so it may not be completely applicable to the earliest use of carronades and things were changing fast at this point so they could also have changed practice in the early 1800s. I should add that I have some other sources from the period that differ slightly on the size of the breechings and tackles depending on the size of gun so that may indicate there could also have been variance on the block sizes, but these are the only ones I have found which give sizes for the blocks and the only one that gives details for carronades.

Very nice. Those are some nice neat joints.

Looking good David. 32 pdr carronades would indeed have a single double combo for the the tackle with 8 inch (3mm) blocks according to a list I found from 1794. The tackles would be 2.5 inch cir or 0.3mm diameter at your scale. That being said the difference will not be super noticable. You could combo the 3mm double with the 2mm single, then you will get the correct flow of the tackles even if the sizes are not exactly correct. Edit: Here is the full table for carronades just for completeness: Table 5.X - Breechings, Tackle and Blocks Per Gun Circa 1765-1794 Breeching Size (in) Gun Tackle Size (in) Blocks (Single) Blocks (Double) Size (in) Number Size (in) Number Carronades 32 pdr 7 2½ 8 2 8 2 24 pdr 6½ 2 6½ 4 18 pdr 5½ 1½ 5 2 12 pdr 5½ 1½ 5 2 Source: TNA ADM 160/150; TNA WO 55/1745; Caruana, English Sea Ordnance, 229.

She is quite the model. This will be a very impressive kit. It really is a pleasure to follow along and see how it developes.

Seems like an interesting project. I look forward to seeing what you do with it. One thing that stands out to me from the plans (though not strictly related to your project) is the use of the iron stock for the kedge. Do you know if this was common practice for the kedge?

Log #31: Framing the Stern Part II It has been a while since I last posted as much of the work has been incremental small pieces and so I didn't really feel I had a cohesive narrative to share. So while I have titled this post as concerning the stern frames (which do make up a bunch of the work), in general this is more of a collection of odds and ends I have gotten done over the past month. Stern Framing The first step in finishing the stern framing was to add on the filler blocks to the outside of the outer frames. These blocks provide the material for me to shape the curve of the lower part of the frames. The we made using basswood so they can easily be sanded down. Next I needed to add filler pieces for the transom. These are designed to help with the shaping of the flow of the planks up to the stern which I figured would be much easier to do by faring as opposed to trying to perfectly design the pieces. To start with I cut two pieces matching the shape of the bottom of the lower counter from my plans. These were then glued in place with the upper edge darkened with marker. I do this to help avoid overfaring. Once the filler blocks were in place I started the process of gluing in the filler pieces for the upper part of the transom. First I had to sand down the various pieces at an angle to make them conform to the shape of the upper frames. I don't have any pictures of this process, but it was mostly just a bank and forth process making sure I was taking off the right amount of material at the correct angle. I then took a perspective plan of the transom perpendicular to the angle of the upper framing. I then held it in place with clips to allow me to adjust the positioning of the filler pieces. And here you can see all the filler pieces in place. I should note that I did leave a bunch of material on the filler pieces to allow me to sand them while on the frames to conform the shape to the proper curve. Then I turned my attention to the lower counter. I drafted a template for the shape of the outer curve which I used to mark where I needed to sand to. I used the same template flipped to the right to get the other side correct. You can see from the below picture that there is a minor issue with the position of the filling blocks for the upper transom. However, I am not really concerned with this as it look correct on the top and I left sufficient room between the bottom of the filler pieces and the upper framing of the windows to allow for me to make adjustments. The main point of these pieces is to correctly space the frames and define the shape of the upper quarter gallery. In the end they will not be visible as they will be fully covered. Then to stabilize the frames for the sanding I added two support pieces joining the final bulkhead to the stern frames. Bow Gunports The bow gunports also needed to be worked on. I had previously shown how I had added the bottom and tops of them, but now it was time to cut the bulkhead to make room for the port. I then carefully sanded the area before using the plans to mark the location of one side of the ports. These could not be done with the others as they need to be perpendicular to hull at that point since they are sided by cant frames. The same jigs as previously shown were used to make sure the port size was consitant. Waterline I also took this opportunity to mark the waterline. As previously mentioned the waterline is not actually parallel to the keel so I had previously measured and marked the point at the bow and stern to get the correct angle. Now tipping the model with the little bit of wiggle room available on my build board I used my trusty Lego + bluetack combo to mark the consistent waterline along the bulkheads. I need to do this now as I will need to know the position of the waterline as I plank. Also it will help with properly positioning the Wales as they touch the waterline around midships. Current State of Affairs And here is the current state of affairs after a whole bunch of sanding. I have not fully sanded the inside as I am probably going to wait until the external planking is complete to help with stability. However the rough shape is now correct. Next up I need to frame the quarter gallery doors.

There was quite a bit of variation in length of the cannons and there is likely no way to know what exact lengths were on Pegasus. In fact it is likely there was more than one length of cannon on her. That being said, I would recommend taking a look at Caruana's book on English sea ordinance (it is very expensive but you might be able to borrow it through your local library). He discusses the issue in detail and makes some general observations as to which lengths were used on which ships at which times. I will try to remember to take a look when I get home to see if he has anything to say about sloops in the late 18th century. The fully framed model books on the swan class ships which you can get from seawatch books likely have a discussion of the cannons. The authors did tonnes of research for those books so I would defer to whatever they have to say on the subject matter. @thibaultron has made available some very nice models of guns which you can find here: Finally, I have transcribed one set of dimensions from 1780 which I include part of below just in case you find them helpful. It has dimensions for three different sizes of 6pdrs. 1780 Gunnery Tables by Thomas Walton Source: RAM G3n/35a; Caruana, English Sea Ordnance, 218-219. Date: November 1780 DIMENSIONS of the EXTERNAL parts and CALIBRE of IRON GUNS of each NATURE and LENGTH in INCHES and DECIMALS. November 1780 Nature 9 6 4 3 Length in Feet 8½ 7½ 7 9 8 6 6 5½ 4½ On the Base Ring 17 17 17 15.88 15.8 15.5 13.6 13.6 11.6 Before the Base Ring 15.16 15.3 15.4 14.3 14.[0] 13.85 12.1 12.05 10.55 On the First Reinforce Ring 14.7 14.76 14.84 13.55 13.5 13.52 11.75 11.84 10.2 Behind the First Reinforce Ring 11.2 14.36 14.2 12.97 13.0 13.02 11.3 11.34 9.8 Before the first Reinforce Ring 13.34 13.42 13.4 12.2 12.25 12.18 10.57 10.57 9.3 On the Second Reinforce Ring 13.15 13.25 13.22 12.0 12.05 12.05 10.52 10.57 9.15 Behind the Second Reinforce Ring 12.63 12.75 12.8 12.52 11.55 11.55 10.25 10.07 8.75 Before the Second Reinforce Ring 11.76 11.86 11.7 10.7 10.7 10.67 9.3 9.3 8.25 At the Muzzle Astragal 10.16 10.15 10.5 9.2 9.2 9.35 8.18 8.18 7.15 At the swell of the Muzzle 13.15 13.25 13.3 11.87 12.05 11.95 10.4 10.52 9.[?] Thickness of Metal Before the Base Ring 5.47 5.54 5.59 5.32 5.27 5.09 4.44 4.42 3.[?] At the Muzzle Astragal 2.97 2.97 3.14 2.77 2.77 2.84 2.48 2.48 [?] At Charging Cylinder above the Calibre 1.26 1.33 1.38 1.66 1.61 1.43 1.23 1.21 [?] Distance From behind the Base Ring to the hinder parts of the Trunnions 3:5:61 3:0:51 2:9:9 3:8:45 3:5:1 2:5:01 2:5:24 2:2:66 1:8:[?] From behind the Base Ring to the First Reinforce 2:5:14 2:1:7 2:0:0 2:6:8 2:3:4 1:8:56 1:8:56 1:6:8 1:5:[?] From behind the Base Ring to the Second Reinforce 2:0:93 1:9:5 1:7:8 2:3:18 1:11:76 1:4:9 1:5:35 1:3:63 1:0:5 Diameter of the Calibre 4.21 3.66 3.21 2.91 [???] equal [???] parts of the Calibre 4.8 4.175 3.68 3.312

Well done, she is a lovely model.

Great job, getting the planking done is an important milestone. For next time, one way to help with keeping things lined up is to do the planking in bands. Chuck's planking videos describe the process. You are now entering one of my favorite parts of a build. Lots of visible progress once you get past the planking.