allanyed

Jon, I don't know which I am enjoying more, your build or the research that you did to get the photos and other information. Kudos Allan

Lacking additional information, if all Lunenberg schooners carried only 8 dories this seems to be the best information to go with. It is very nice to see research going into a project like this rather than accepting that a kit is always accurate.

Good question Derek. I looked at some contemporary photos of fishing schooners of the early 20th century but many of the photos are grainy at best and difficult to see. None appear to have covers over the entire stack, but two that I found MAY have covers over the top most in the stack. A couple of photos that I found are below. There were more as well that popped up with a quick search on the internet. Assuming they were usually not covered I imagine they had drain holes with plugs like small boats of today. Are you speaking of the original Blue Nose? Looking at a bunch of contemporary photos of fishing schooners of her size, they seem to have at least 5 and usually 6 or 7 dories per side. I am curious if there were any rules or ratios of the size of a schooner and the number of dories, or perhaps it had to do with the size of the dory and type of fish they were targeting. Can you share your source regarding only 4 dories per side? Thanks! Cheers Allan

Hi Amalio You mentioned you found the brick material in a previous post in Alamania (Germany?) Did it come already shaped as small bricks or did you make the bricks with some material that you got from them? I have made silicone molds then formed bricks made of plaster with some success, but would like to learn more on how you achieved such nice finished pieces. I suppose wood could work, but the texture you show is superior to wood even at our scales. Thanks Allan

Dave, Goodwin shows a shallow groove cut into the hull in which the channels sit plus the various types of knees and standards and such that were employed over the years. I don't know if this groove was used in actual practice or not, but for the model I am sure there are a lot of methods used by members here that are successful. The following is just one that has worked for me over the years. if you just bolt and glue the channels to the hull then add the support brackets or standards, whichever is appropriate for the time of Endeavour, it should be plenty strong. I find it easiest to drill both the chain plate holes and the bolt holes in the channels before gluing them in place. Keep in mind that the slots with covering boards for the deadeye chain plates did not come into use until 1771 (Goodwin Construction and Fitting, p. 187) so, if he is correct, there were still just be holes through the channels for the dead eye chain plates in 1768. For the bolts that hold the channel to the hull, the bolt hole diameter should be such that it allows the bolts (brass rod works well) to fit easily but not be a sloppy fit. I then glue the channel in place. Once the glue is cured I drill with a slightly smaller bit through the predrilled bolt holes and into the hull so the bolts will fit snuggly when tapped home. A touch of epoxy is a good idea to be sure the bolts are actually holding the channel. Once you add the chain plates and deadeyes there will be even more strength. Hope to see pics of your work!! Allan

We have an unspoken agreement after 52 years of wedded bliss.... The bliss is because I say nothing when a QVC package arrives at the door and she says nothing when a package from Gilmer Woods, McMaster Carr, Syren, or other of my sources arrives. Even-Steven as far as we are both concerned. I no more understand why she buys some things any more than she understands the stuff I buy, EXCEPT we both know if it gives each us some kind of pleasure in its own way that is enough for us to know. (A pretty decent set of machinist squares can be found for $30 or less.) Allan

Why use just the plans from a kit rather than the contemporary plans for the actual details? There are contemporary drawings including two profile drawings and all her decks as re-fitted in Deptford in 1768 for her exploration voyage and possible additional changes in 1771 when James Gordon took command and Cook went to Resolution. I assume the kit plans and replica were based on some of these but which ones? The contemporary drawings are very high resolution and free, so probably better than anything in the kit or the replica. There are actually two contemporary profile drawings, one of which shows her original lines plus ticked lines showing the alterations to be made at Deptford. The other profile drawing is after the alterations. If you use the deck plans, be careful. There are deck plans from Deptford in 1768 showing her refit design, plus another from 1771 at Woolwich. i did not study them to find the differences so there may be some, or maybe not. They are all on the Wikimedia commons site. Go to the site and scroll down to the eighth page. All of the drawings can be downloaded in high res. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Ship_plans_of_the_Royal_Museums_Greenwich Following these drawings will insure an accurate model based on original sources. Allan

Thukydides, Caruana is probably the best source and Lavery is also very good for information on guns based on contemporary information. Goodwin is a great source for many things, but sorry to say it is not of much help for rigging, including the guns. Allan

Gregory, No worries, if I had a dollar for every one of my own mistyped posts here at MSW I would have retired five years sooner!! Allan

David Have you looked at the six color photos of the model of the Earl of Pembroke (renamed Endeavor after its purchase)? https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-66316 This is a modern (1947) model, but as it is at RMG I would guess there is some credibility to its construction (or maybe not???) Allan

Hi Gregory, I agree with you that Lavery is an accurate source, but I think you left out a couple words 😀 " A gun tackle consisted of a rope fixed to a single block, passed through a double block, back through the single block and through the double block again." Cheers Allan

I second and third the above. The lower side view has the bore off center at the muzzle by 0.65" assuming the barrel is 9'6" long just for starters. This is probably not a good drawing to use for any model. It shows at the bottom that Trazzy Entertainment has a copyright 2011 on this drawing and they are indeed a game developer. Cheers Allan

Doug, If you are like most of us, once you get a little sawdust in your blood you will forget plastic. You will also go through a lot of agita while learning, but it is so worth the efforts. You are very lucky to have over 40,000 teachers here at MSW to give you a hand so as suggested above, start a build log. Research your project as much as you can but if the research stalls, which it certainly can do at times, we are all here to help as much as possible. Dare I say GO Steelers or are you on the east side and an Eagles guy? I was raised in Western PA so the entire family, right down to the grandkids, bleed black and gold. Allan

Welcome aboard Doug. PA?? Pennsylvania??? Allan

Hi Vahur, Not really, but Eastern European, as all four of my grandparents came to the US from Ukraine, about 600 miles south of Estonia, between 1910 and 1914. I must admit, I used Google translator in my post above. My French and Italian are rudimentary but my Estonian is non-existent. Allan

Hi Marcus, Just my own personal take on this, but I would use the hardest and closest grained wood that I could find. It is easier to control the cut of the hard wood with SHARP chisels, sanding sticks, files and scalpel, taking little cuts at a time. Kevlar gloves?? Neat idea, but based on your experience since going to these, do the gloves cause more slips because you lose the feel of the wood when using a scalpel or chisel? Would love to hear more about this. Allan

Vahur Try https://www.gilmerwood.com/search/results?utf8=✓&q=holly They are a great supplier. Can't speak for pricing with overseas shipments though. Head päeva Allan

Ian, the number of ropes on a lid depends on the ship and era and possibly the size/wieght of the ports. For opening, some had two rings and ropes that came to a single pulling rope, and of course many had two independent ropes for opening. For closing some had one rope and ring, some had two. The first photo is not too clear but you can see two ropes for opening and one ring for the closing. I agree with Jacek that the inside rope would not be rigged when the port is open as it would be something else to get in the way of working the guns. The first photo is blurry with zooming in but you can see a single ring for closing the port and two lines for opening. The second photo is pretty clear in that there is a single ring for the opening rope. The third shows two rings for the rope to pull the port closed. The last shows two rings and ropes made into a single going through the hull. Lots of choices, depending on the ship. Allan

I hope you know how lucky you are. With your supply you could plank a hull. What a beautiful color that would be!!! Allan

Jaager You may be right but I would be disappointed to learn that the old model makers were lazy and took short cuts in this manner. As the lids are all painted, possibly we just cannot see that there are two layers. Sorry for the quality of the third photo. There are lips on these ports on the sides and top if I remember correctly same as the other models created by the linings. I did find a French contemporary model, the Ville de Paris which has lids with the inner layer smaller than the outer layer, but so far I cannot find any British models with this construction. Photo of her ports is below. I checked another dozen or so contemporary models and the lids were all constructed with the inner and outer layers being the same outside dimensions. As you said earlier, if the ports are closed, the construction style you decide to go with will not be seen 😀. You mention a thin layer over the end grains. Which photo/drawing is this? I looked in Goodwin and cannot find this. THANKS Allan

Jaager It is the inside the port - of the sill - at frame level - raised - not flush with the outside planking level- I must be a bit dense tonight as I cannot figure, for sure, what you are describing. I am sure it is just me so sorry about that 🙃. Can you perhaps post a picture? Reading Goodwin's comment on page 188 in The Construction and Fitting he indeed calls for the inner layer of wood to be smaller than the outside of the port lid, with the outside matching the thickness of the planking but I cannot find any photos of contemporary models with this kind of construction. To the contrary, all of the photos I can find show the lid total thickness with both layers of wood is the same as that of the planking. Additional photos from Preble Hall follow. I think Goodwin is a VERY important work, but as with any "modern" book, it is usually a good idea to research contemporary sources IF available to confirm anything. It could very well be that both styles of construction were used at some points in time. I would love to see contemporary information and/or models showing the lids as Goodwin describes as I have used Goodwin's description in at least one previous build. Allan ]

Hi Brian, I have a four piece set of steel machinest squares and use all of them on every build, so yes, I think these are a good investment. I use them on fully framed models and bulkhead type framing as well. Worst case, I would get a small one and a large one with the latter being at least as high as the cap rail from the building board. Even with the square, be sure your building board is true in all directions. For really small items and spaces, Lego blocks form the grandkids work very well for me, thanks to a tip somewhere here on MSW in the past year or two. Allan

I just noticed something on the painting I posted above which gives me pause. There is a double block hooked to the carriage which means there is a double block at the bulkhead as well, but even then it appears that the line starts at the double on the carriage. This would have the loose end coming from this block which would be in the wrong direction. From everything I have found to date, there were never two double blocks, even on 32's which were the largest guns on Victory. So much for accuracy on this painting (which was done quite a few years after Trafalgar)

Jaager Not sure exactly what you mean. A drawing would help. In the meantime 😀................ The lid is two layers, one horizontal, one vertical. Total thickness of the two layers matches the thickness of the outboard planking so when it is closed and rests against the stops on the sides and bottom of the port the outside of the lid is flush with the surrounding planking. Unless the side of the hull is perfectly vertical the bottom of the lid has a slight bevel to match up the opening. The top of the bottom sills are not visible whether the lid is open or closed as there is a stopper piece. The bottom of the upper sill can be seen as there is no stopper piece. The outboard sides of all the sills are covered with the hull planking. Hope the following photo of a contemporary model in the Rogers collection will help a bit. TFFM Volume II has excellent drawings and description of the port lids &c. Allan

Thanks Gerard!!