allanyed

Fantastic!! Very nicely done Bug Allan

'Bug, I am enjoying your build log very much and kudos on some really fine work. I totally agree with Peter that the grates should be replaced. His photo shows the grating peripheral pieces nicely. It is usually the case that it is better to make the proper gratings as close to the size on the drawings as possible, then make the coaming and head ledges to fit the grating, not the other way around. This may put the assembly off by a hundredth of an inch or two, but will look much better. Don't forget that the head ledges rest on the coamings rather than the coamings on the head ledges. Sketch below may help a little. Allan

Hi Shipman The Imperial system is a relatively young system, not appearing until 1826 and is different in some ways than the previous systems of English units. English units were the the units of measurement in England up to 1826 when they were replaced by Imperial units , which evolved as a combination of the Anglo Saxon and Roman systems of units. Prior to the Imperial system various standards have applied to English units at different times, in different places, and for different applications. The two main sets of English units before the Imperial system was developed were called the Winchester Units, used from 1495 to 1587, as affirmed by Henry the VII, and the Exchequer Standards in use from 1588 to 1825, as defined by Elizabeth I. These English units were replaced by Imperial units on January 1, 1826 by a Weights and Measures Act which kept some but not all of the unit names and definitions. Allan

Davyboy I cannot find what the difference in length is for British units and Imperial units but the British did not use Imperial units until the 19th century (1826) Honestly I do not know which measurements changed in 1826 when they went from English units to Imperial which of course changed again in 1965 to metric but I would like to see what the differences are if anyone knows. I did a lot of searching but only found a reference to a pole standard of 6 feet based on outstretched arms of a 6 foot tall person, nothing about how long an inch is in English units versus Imperial units. Maybe they were the same, but ????? I suspect for our purposes there is little or no difference, but if anyone can share their knowledge on this that would be great. TIA Allan

Very happy to see another new member, welcome!!! Allan

Sorry for the very late reply David, Yep, I was referring to the red linings. One thing to keep in mind for future builds. I assume the instructions were wrong or missing regarding the corner joints of the coaming and head ledges for the hatch openings. They were not cut at an angle, but rather lapped with the head ledges on top of the coaming pieces. Not a huge deal as your joints look quite nice, but thought you might like to know for the next model, hope you don't mind me pointing this out. See sketch below. (ignore the dimensions as these were not for Victory. Again, for the future, the copper sheets overlap so there should be single rows of nails, not twin rows, both horizontally (about 30-36 nails) and vertically (about 10) . I am sure this is another kit error because someone at Caldercraft did not do a thorough research. There are very detailed drawings on page 225 in Goodwin's Construction and Fitting of Sailing Man of War. ( I would post the page, but not sure that is permissible so redrew part as below) Some feel it is probably better not to show the nail pattern at all at 1:72 😀 Allan

The larger the scale, the easier it is to show fine detail and subsequently the more time that is involved to achieve it. Look at the one or two 1:24 builds here on MSW to get an idea of a REALLY large model. Classic British models were mostly1:48 but the contemporary model of Lady Nelson (your current build) at RMG is 1:32. Allan

Hi Dave I really don't know about kits as they are more of a modern convention using modern methods and tooling (and I wish we did the same and adopt metrics in the US), but if you are looking for accuracy in scratch building or kit bashing and can find contemporary drawings for English ships up to 1826 they are usually 1/4" = 1 foot in English units. FWIW The English units were replaced by Imperial units in 1826 by a Weights and Measurements Act. There are other contemporary drawings I have seen in 1/2" = 1 foot and 1/8" = 1 foot. The British Establishments, The Shipbuilder's Repository, Steel's Elements and Practices of Naval Architecture and more, also use English units. An interesting thing I found is that the contemporary model of the LN at RMG is built to a scale of 3/8" = 1 Foot but when RMG gives the dimensions of the model in the description they are in metric. https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-66562 Allan

DO, A cringle is a hole along the edge or in the corner of a sail, rimmed with stranded small line. Metal grommets are sometimes used as part of this as well. The fact that you are asking if someone sells holes (cringles) makes me wonder if you are asking about the grommets or something else altogether. Probably just a little bit of language confusion so just thought maybe you can clarify. Hope all is well in Madrid!! Allan

Thanks for signing up and I am glad to have helped, even if only in a small way. Allan

Juraj, Sorry to say but Amati does not always provide materials to scale. I hope this is not the case for the sail material, but if it is woven it will probably not be to scale. Plus, if it is cloth and you need to sew seams and such, there is no way to stich at scale that I have seen. Cheers Allan

The above mentioned books are great if you have them but there are a lot of contemporary drawings on the RMG Collections website on masts and yards that can be downloaded for free in low resolution. There also a number of high resolution contemporary drawings from RMG on the Wiki Commons site for various ship sizes and eras. Most of the high res are about 75 mb so cannot be loaded here. Two examples from 1780 that are only about 30mb each follow. Allan

Thanks Mark!! Is the 4mm with the planking or just the top timber itself? OC, Sorry for the confusion, my fault. I was only looking at what the kit dimension was as it appears heavy in the photo, but I know what it should be based on the scantlings for the size of the ship and era. I was curious to see if Vanguard got it right as this is often wrong on some kits. The top of the top timber for the 1745 Establishment and again in the Ship Builders Repository (1788) and Steel's Elements of Naval Architecture (1805) show it should be about 4 inches, which would be about 1.58 mm at 1:64. If the total with inboard planking, top timber, and outboard planking are measured, they would total about 3.5 mm at 1:64. Allan

IF I am understanding you correctly Turbocad allows you pick the center, then a point on the arc, then the second point to complete the arc. They call it an arc center and radius function. Unfortunately, TC is not free but TC 2019 for beginners is cheap and may suit. Allan

Juraj When you say suitable materials, I assume it is silk span not cloth as there is no woven cloth in existence that is appropriately scaled at scales smaller than about 1:12 or perhaps 1:24. There has been a LOT of discussion on sail making in the past year here at MSW and worth studying. There is also an excellent pamphlet for $7US by David Antscherl available from Seawatch books as well as YouTube videos on making realistic sails using silkspan. Allan

Mark, Interesting question. I don't know that there is a formula as all ships types have different shapes. You could go on the safe side and take the length along the center station from port and starboard where the top of the coppering ends, then multiply it by the length of the ship. It will be more than you need, but a safe number. Take a string from point A to B below and multiply that length by the length of the model. Keep in mind the plates overlap 1.5 inches but measuring at the largest part of the hull will compensate for the amount needed. According to Goodwin in The Construction and Fitting of the Man of War on pages 225-227, the plates should be 4' 0" long X 1' 3" and nailed to the hull, not bolted with a 1/4" nail every 1.25 inches or so. He gives very detailed drawings on page 225. Depending on your scale, it may be best to leave out the impressions of nails. Most kits plating is totally out of scale with dimples that are too large, too few, and protrude rather than indent. You have a great opportunity to show them as they actually were. Allan

Mark, The dimension I am curious about is the moulded dimension at the top of the top timber. Sketch below. THANK YOU Allan

You are very welcome Marinus. If you will you be following the tutorial articles on how to properly do your second layer of planking be especially careful that the garboard strake does not go to far forward as on your first layer seems to have done. This, along with forgetting to taper the planks will yield the high sweep Viking ship appearance and not leave enough room for a full run of every strake. As an obvious fan of Victory and hopefully Nelson, I hope you have signed onto screenwriter Adam Preston's Trafalgar TV series as noted in my signature below. He is gaining traction on getting the series going. Allan

FINE work Juraj! I am look forward to seeing Smuggler make progress. Does your kit include sails? Looking at the Blue Jacket kit on line I only see photos of Smuggler without sails, thus my question. Allan

Just saw this old video that some may find interesting and useful. I am no fan of CA, but this is intriguing, if not for our model exploits, for around the house.

Hi Mark, It is hard to tell from the photos, but what is the in and out dimension at the top of the top timbers (not including the planking)? Just curious as Vanguard has a great reputation for accuracy and this is one item where other kit manufacturers are sometimes off. Thanks Allan

Beautiful fairing of the frames!!! This will allow the planking to go much more smoothly. Allan

Marinus Going back a couple weeks to the treenails..... at 1:72, the diameter will only be about 0.02" for the hull planking and 0.14 or smaller for the deck planking. These can be difficult to make even with bamboo and a high quality draw plate so patience is needed. At this scale, it is probably best not to include them. With dark wood hull planks you would need to use a similarly colored wood and there are no woods that can easily go down to this diameter other than bamboo which will probably be too light. Keep in mind, to replicate the hull trennals as if it were actually framed, you will need well over 10,000 of them just on the hull. If you only use them on the bulkheads, it won't look right, so maybe consider forgoing their use altogether Even contemporary models at 1:48 do not always show trennals and none that I have yet seen at your small scale. Alternatively you can drill the holes at the correct diameter easily, then rub some PVA in the holes a few at a time and sand as you go. The sawdust will fill the holes and be close in color. Regarding the planking, it takes practice and is rarely easy. Have you studied the articles here at MSW by David Antscherl on spiling and heat bending by Chuck Passaro? The strakes of first layer are not tapered in width going forward but does not matter on the first layer except for being good practice. If you study the articles you will see that the planking tapers in width for all planks below the wales if it is to look realistic. They give step by step information that will ease the pain. 😀 Allan

At 1:64, if wooden treenails were used on Syren, they would be about 0.012"- 0.16" diameter for the deck planks. Making trennals at 0.16 is a challenge even with a Byrnes drawplate and an appropriate wood such as some species of bamboo. More models are wrecked by having treenails that are oversized both on the hull and the deck so I believe your decision to leave them out is a good one. Allan

Crob Welcome aboard and enjoy the ride. Allan