Thukydides

I don’t know how you manage to design and build so many ships so quickly. She is a very interesting looking ship with the drop keels and bow chasers.

Those pumps look really good, great job on the metalwork.

You are right, that is very possible. At the end of the day even if we think marshall made the decorations up, what do we replace it with. In the absence of other primary evidence I would say what he makes up is more reflective of a likely scheme than anything I could come up with.

So will you be tapering th plates to achieve this? I am struggling to visualize how this would work?

Fantastic job, she looks lovely. Congrats on having another build done. Do you have any plans for what you want to do next?

I know at least for sphinx the painting was based on perspectives done up by draughtsman based on the plans. Now where Portland was launched prior to the paintings it is possible a model of it existed or that marshall actually saw the ship in question, but it is possible he used some creative license with the decorations.

It is interesting how in the pictures above there are sunk in straps around the whole rudder, but then the pintles are bolted to those straps. Was this a uniquely Dutch thing or was it used elsewhere? One thing that is unclear to me from all this discussion is if the overlap needs to be such that the lower plates (those closer to the keel) overlap the upper plates (those closer to the waterline), then how do you keep the plates parallel to the keel as practically speaking doing plates from the keel up is not easy due to having to slip the next row under the previous one.

There is a 1768 contemporary model that shows the attachment for the flag staff, It is hard to tell from the resolution on the RMG site, but there is clearly a loop of rope so there must have been some sort of pully so it could be raised or lowered. I suspect not a full block as they likely would have depicted it if it was, more likely just a metal hoop or maybe a sheeve in the staff itself? https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-66316 https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-533928 Edit, actually on second reading it seems the model was made in 1974, so probably not a great source

Just as long as you replicate my later versions not the earlier ones . Some of them are frankly awful, but this model was meant to be a learning process so by the time I am done hopefully I will somewhat know what I am doing. As an update, this is what I have found works the best at this point (an update from my previous post where i detailed my method) is to do as follows: Use a needle to pull the whole rope through itself at the starting point. Split the pulled through strands into the three segments and use super glue on their ends to make sure they don't unravel. Weave each of those ends back and forth through the rope pulling them through with a needle. Ideally you want to weave between the strand not through them, but this is sometimes hard to achieve given the small scales. Pull everything tight and while left under tension coat the splice with watered down fabric glue and leave to dry for a few hours. Use a fresh blade to cut the ends off and then cover the splice with a watered down coat of matt varnish. In all stages use the smallest possible sewing needle that will allow you to get the rope or strand through the eye.

I am not exactly sure which ones you mean, but if it is the ones I think they are it looks like at least one end is secured to the bits. See below:

She looks fantastic, looking forward to seeing her in the case.

Log #71: Raising the Boom Next up is the boom. I rigged the block for the boom topping lift in much the same way the other blocks seized to the mast head were done. The main difference is I used a 3.5mm block instead of the 3mm ones. I had wanted to use a 4mm one, but as I have previously discussed, when I went to buy them they were no longer available and so I had to settle for 3.5mm. I also have been experimenting a bunch with the fake splices and I am slowly getting better at them, though at the same time they are slowly getting closer to a real splice. According to steel the topping lift should be 4.5 inches cir, this works out to .57mm, but as I didn’t have any 0.6mm rope I instead used 0.5mm. Counteracting the topping lift we have the sheet tackle. For this I used 0.45mm line copying BE’s arrangement. For the sheet line I used 0.35mm line. Steel seems to indicate this should be 3 in cir which works out to 0.38 so close enough. I am still having a bit of trouble with the different names between the alert book, steel and the kit instructions, but as there are so many mistakes at this point I am mostly just making sure it makes logical sense and roughly corresponds to steel / the alert book. And here is the current state of her. Now that all these counteracting lines are in place I need to tie them all off to get rid of the clutter. You can also see I am still working on the tackle for the boom topping lift as the block is spliced onto the line, but is waiting for the glue to dry before I cut off the ends. Thanks to everyone who has stopped by for the encouragement, she is really starting to look like a sailing ship now.

Great tip on the rings, they really do look much more to scale. Amazing work as always.

Fantastic, unfortunately there is no way I could ever fit this thing in my house .

Fantastic work, you have a lot of patience to do all that masking.

The funny thing is that is still probably a paraphrase. He likely said "We're not gonna know nuttin" They found copper platting and tree nails so likely dates between 1775 and 1850.

Looks great, how thick is that tape you are using?

Is this from a national archives document?

If you take a look at steel (dated a little later than flirt's launch) https://maritime.org/doc/steel/tables/pages/131-BrigOf160Tons.php it gives the shrouds for the fore mast as 5in cir (0.63mm di at your scale) and the ratlines (on the next page) at 1in cir (0.12mm di at your scale). If you scroll through you will find he also gives the same for the mainmast. There is also available online an earlier version of steel's tables transcribed https://www.goldenhind.ru/steel_en/dimensions.pdf However, it does not have as much detail in the 1781 tables and the ship of 14 guns appears to be a ship rigged sloop rather than a brig.

This is my problem, my workshop is my bedroom or (if I am generating much sawdust) my kitchen table. So I have almost no room for any large tools. So I am always interested in small things like this that will potentially enable me to at least be more accurate and speedy than using my hand held pin vice.

Perhaps it meant that small nails (as opposed to large ones) were used to make it not hold on to the keel as well as of the nails had been driven deep into the keel. Alternatively is it possible the false keel was still coppered? Just separately than the rest and the small nails redera to nails that held this copper to the false keel but didn't go through to the keel itself?

I think you made the right choice. Where they are not obscured if you paint them first it shouldn't be to bad, especially if they are going to be a lighter colour than the hull. The detail looks like it would work with drybrushing well which is minimal effort and if you paint the hull later, the overspill won't matter. Could even consider masking them off after painting if you are worried about the steadiness of your hand, but hard corners tend to be pretty easy to follow as long as you take your time and don't try to get right up to the edge immediately.

I have the veritas ones and they are really nice, only about 3 inches long each. https://www.leevalley.com/en-ca/shop/tools/hand-tools/miniature-tools/chisels/72391-veritas-miniature-chisels?item=05P8501

Looks great Allan

Great job, looks very nice.