allanyed

Omega It looks like a mass produced decorator model. Sorry to say this probably does not represent any real ship and is likely a figment of someone's imagination who had no knowledge of real ships. One example, if any ship actually had turrets in the stern like on your model, there would not have been the four cannon in those turrets as there is no room for the carriages or people to work them. A quick search on the internet showed the red crosses on the sails are similar to that used by the Portuguese. Dragon figure heads are more akin to Scandinavian vessels. If you do a search here at MSW, you will find a bunch of these mass produced pieces about which folks have made enquiries and may find additional information that could be interesting for you. If you do want to refurbish it, go for it. It could wind up as it was meant to be, a fun decoration for your home. Allan

You can pretty much include all lines, including buntlines, leechlines, sheets, and tacks. If you look at some contemporary model photos such as those at RMG and Preble Hall, you can see how they rig as most contemporary model do not include sails. I agree with your decision not to install sails as there are no existing kits that I have seen or heard about that have sails that are remotely close to being to scale. One photo of a model at Preble Hall as an example without sails follows. Hopefully other members will have suggestions of where to look for more information. Obviously you will need more close ups &c but this will give you an idea of the look without sails. Lots of beautiful models are ruined when cloth sails are added unless the model is a large scale such as 1:12 or maybe 1:24. If you do decide to go with sails, consider silkspan. There is an inexpensive booklet by David Antscherl available from Seawatch Books and some You Tube videos on how to make sails with silkspan as well as some information here at MSW. Allan

Ciao Matiz If you tell me we are going to drink Brunello de Montalcino and have olive oil from San Casciano or Luca, I will try to get there next week!!! One of my all time favorite restaurants in San Casciano is Ristorante Nello. They had wines in their cellar that were far older than I am, a true step back in time. Surely they are vinegar by now, but it was such a delight to see these old vintages still being cared for. Sorry to go off the ship modeling track but this has brought back many wonderful memories. Allan

Buona giornata Matiz, She is looking beautiful. I wish I was still traveling to your part of the world as I would love to see your model in person. Alas, since retiring the work trips every two or three months to Toscana (mainly Firenze and San Casciano) have come to an end. Hopefully I will be back in the next few years and we can sip some grappa together in Pisa. Ciao Allan

Rich, You show a photo a big block of wood that is being rasped, but I think Laggard's issue is regarding planking. I may be dead wrong but I would think rasping planking that is less than 0.1" thick to start with could be too hard to control. I find various shaped home made sanding sticks with 80 or 120 grit take off wood very quickly and are easy to control for flat, convex, and concave shapes found on a hull. Allan

Hi Glen Warm welcome to MSW. At least you only did one big project before discovering this motley crew. Most of us had no such source when we did our first build and the second, and third and on and on but here we are, still going after it but with a lot more knowledge being shared by others. Cheers Allan

Ed, I use the method (sort of) that Jaager describes. For truly tiny gaps, and wood that is to be left unpainted, force PVA into the gap and sand. The sanding will create the wood flour and fill the gap. For gaps more than 0.01 or so, it may be better to take out the errant plank before putting in the next one and redo with no gap. Don't know where you are in PA, but GO STEELERS!!! If you are an Eagles fan my apologies for my cheer for Pittsburgh. Allan

Not to worry Lag, Most of us have issues at times getting planking to be tight. Next time study the tutorials here at MSW by David Antscherl and Chuck Passaro and if you follow their methods you will be able to throw out the putty. Allan

Ron, This is one of the most difficult jobs, at least it always has been for me. Another build brought this up yesterday for a different ship, but the solutions varied. Chisels and sand paper, belt sander and hand sanding, plane and sanding. Did you hand sand with sanding sticks or ???? I agree that Ed's mini wooden hand screw clamps are a joy to use. Love your workmanship!!!! Allan

Steam may be huge overkill for our modeling purposes. I find that the Kammerlander method of soaking the wood in water anywhere from 5 to 30 minutes, depending on the thickness of the wood, then heating with a hot iron works very quickly and very well for both soft wood and hard wood up to about Janka 2000 (Castello is 1820). English boxwood is a challenge but I save my little supply for carving work small pieces that would be prone to breaking with other species. (English boxwood is J2800) A video of the Kammerlander method was posted here at MSW last year by member Dziadeczek. Allan

Jaager, Shaping the narrowing in several directions is a challenge to say the least. I mark the thicknesses along the two outboard edges of the completed knee of the head all the way around then temporarily glue a block to one side somewhere in the middle. The block is big enough to be able to hold with several fingers and thumb. Then I carefully sand it close to the lines on one side with my belt sander. Once close, I remove the block and temporarily glue to the sanded side and repeat the sanding on the other side. Once this is done I use a big sanding block to finish. A plane maybe a great way to go to make the tapers, but based on TFFM, the taper is not a straight line as there is a slight curve for the first few feet in the area of the upper portion of the inboard most hawse piece. This can be handled using the end of the belt sander and hand sanding, but a plane may prove difficult. This initial taper ends at what I THINK would be below the hance as described in the 1719 Establishment (the 15" dimension you indicate.) I don't know if this was something on all ships, particularly Centurion. The balance of the taper going down would then be 15" to 13" at the foot. Chisels would work as well but my chisel skills leave something to be desired. If this description sounds complex, the actual execution in making the tapers is worse. Allan

I am a bit late to the party but am happy to see a new scratch build! If you don't mind a couple comments that are meant to encourage, not discourage regarding the deadwood forward and aft and the moulded dimensions of the top timbers, please let us know. Allan

I don't if this will help Jaager. It is a combination of scantlings from the 1719 Establishment and the bow photo of Centurion from RMG. Hopefully someone more familiar will have better information specific to Centurion 1732. There is a lot of detail on this area in TFFM Volume I but I don't know if ratios would be apropos for a 4th rate of 1732. At the top, the width of the stem is 21" and the knee of the head is slightly thinner (19"?) at the top where it fays to the stem. The taper to 8 inches at the foremost part of the knee of the head was found using the photo itself. The taper going down is using width of the foot of the knee of the head matching the width of the keel forward, which the 1719 Establishment shows to be 13" for a 60 gun ship. Allan

Glenn, Looking fine!! I hope you don't mind a question, but I have never seen a dead eye with five holes. Is this something from the kit and/or is this based on actual contemporary practice? Vanguard has a great reputation for accuracy so I assume it is accurate. Practically, it looks like it could make sense, but I have only seen a lanyard make five passes with either open or closed hearts on contemporary models and in rigging books. Thanks!! Allan

Considering what Druxey wrote, the sailing rig was available but probably not used if for normal shore excursions where rowing probably was the standard means of propulsion so it is possible there were choices to be made depending on which was to be used. I wish George Wells and his machine were nearby. I'd tell him I was David Filby IV and ask to take a ride back in time instead of forward. At least going back I know which years in which to avoid stopping, starting with 2020. Maybe some member can build a new one like the one George used with success. I'd be happy to supply a five point seat belt to make it a little safer.

Hi Spyglass, What you state makes perfect sense. As with so many instances on finding information on rigging I keep looking but cannot find much contemporary to Royal Navy ships' boats in the 17th century to the early 19th century. that describes cleats on the booms other than a cleat for the peek downhaul located under the boom. Steel has us following the description for schooners and sloops for launches and long boats, using hooks into eyebolts on the mast and taffrail for the downhauls and such. He also describes downhauls on cutters leading to the deck. Could you please steer me to a source on cleats on the booms as this search has been extremely frustrating. Many thanks for your help! Allan

Hi Kev, Great catch! Horses were indeed in use on British ship's boats from the mid 18th century due to the problem with the sheets getting in the way of the tiller. It was put on the transom as you show. Remember that a double block had holes side by side unless they used long tackle blocks which had holes one above the other. Perhaps this is what was on the Bounty launch. I realize the kit calls the boat a jolly boat, but if this is supposed to be the boat on which Bligh sailed away, it would be a launch which was bigger than a jolly boat and constructed much differently. As mentioned in your other post Artesania Latina sells the same kit in different packaging and calls it the Captain boat for the Spanish ship San Juan Nupomuceno As suggested in your other post, if you go to the free download of Steel's Elements of Rigging and go to boat rigging chapter you will find a lot of contemporary details on rigging your boat although it is a bit confusing and as it sends you back and forth referencing one boat as a guide for others until you eventually get to what you want. Still it does have a lot of information you may be able to use now or on future projects. https://maritime.org/doc/steel/ Cheers Allan

George I am glad this subject came back to life as I learned something new today, thus it is a good day. In response to your question, as seems to be the case in so many instances, the type of wood for the decks depended on which era and which deck. Some decks had two different types of wood and even two different shapes of planks. The orlop and platforms were generally made with Deal rather than oak and often made into pallets with battens on their underside as they were not secured permanently to the beams. Rather, the pallets were held down with battens or rested in mortices that were as deep as the thickness of the planks, sort of overlapping (overloop from the Dutch) the beams, thus the name orlop, the slang abbreviation. (I never knew the origin of the word orlop until today🤪) In the late 18th century, gun decks sometimes were laid with top and butt or anchor stock planking for two or three outboard most strakes rather then parallel strakes. As oak became harder to find, elm was used on some gundecks as well. Elm was strong and had a great advantage of not splintering when hit with cannon shot, but rather broke into chunks. For the hull planks, whatever floats your boat as the saying goes. Oak on a ship does not work on a model as it shows grain so much it looks as odd as the walnut found in some kits. I prefer softer woods if it is going to be painted, otherwise hard woods are my personal favorites. In my experience I have not found that fruit woods such as apple or pear are any more difficult to work than castello or padauk, all of them being between about 1660 lbft and 1810 lbft on the Janka scale. Once the plank is cut to the proper shape I have been able to bend all of these with water and heat. Poplar and basswood are popular and much easier to work but the softness is troublesome for some people. I have seen a lot of models planked with yellow cedar in the past couple years that are absolutely gorgeous even though it is soft by comparison (580 lb ft). Allan

Kev, Looking at photos of models at the RMG Collections website, Mays' Boats of Men of War, and Lavery's Arming and Fitting, I could not find any contemporary rigged models or drawings showing a cleat on the boom. There may be more details in Steels Elements of Rigging which you can down load for free. It holds a wealth of information for the very late 18th century and into the 19th century. https://maritime.org/doc/steel/ Scroll down to the rigging section in the table of contents and then click on the appropriate page and there is information on rigging ship's boats starting at about page 220. I found it a bit confusing, but the jist was that there was mention of eyes and bands round the mast at the boom jaws for various lines, but no mention of cleats that I could find. There may have been cleats but I have never seen any contemporary information that indicates they were used, perhaps other members here have. Your first post asked about a launch, and then the next post mentions a jolly boat. Based on your signature you have a jolly boat from Bounty. Purely as a point of information the boat on which Bligh was put was a launch, probably about 23 feet long. The term jolly boat in the late 18th century was sometimes interchangeable with small cutters of 16 feet to 18 feet. Artesania makes the same kit with different packaging and markets it as a boat for the Spanish ship Nepomuceno which I found to be rather strange. See side by side photos of the both kits pictures below. Allan

Welcome to MSW Eurus (AKA Greek god of the east winds -- I had to look it up😃) Your opening struck a nerve. I too wanted to be a naval aviator but it was not to be so I headed to sea as a merchant marine engineer and so my romance with the sea began. I love that you started with something manageable for a first go at ship modeling. As you move forward, if you are going to forego scratch building and go with kits please read everything here at MSW on the many kits that are out there. There are quite a few that are top quality and yield beautiful and historically accurate results. There are also some that create a ton of agita for the builders because of poor instructions, poor quality materials and many with out-of-scale and/or inaccurate parts, and so forth. Also be sure to read the forum here on piracy. There is a list of kit pirate manufacturers to avoid and build logs on kits by these manufacturers are not permitted here. Know that you have a huge library of previous posts at MSW from which to learn as well as more teachers/helpers than you probably want. Cheers, Allan

Tim, No apologies necessary, we are all short of knowledge in this hobby of ours, just depends on the specific subject that we are encountering. I just did some more searching and found the following information that might be of more help. From Lees' ................. As before, the heart is 1.45 X the circumference of the stay. The diameter (width?) is .075 X the length at the widest point and the thickness is twice the DIAMETER of the stay. The inside opening where the lanyard lies is 0.33 the widest dimension of the width and the smallest part of the opening was 0.25 the widest dimension of the width. I cannot find anything regarding the circumference of the lanyard, but assuming five passes, it would be the widest portion of the inside opening divided by five. Unfortunately there does not seem to be anything straight forward so most of us are without total knowledge (I hate to say ignorant 😄) As Mark suggests, once you have the sizes you need, confirm with the supplier the dimensions, at least the length and width outside. Allan

Bob, As the shrouds are in pairs except for a swifter when there are an odd number of shrouds I cannot see how anyone can get the two upper deadeyes in any given pair at the right position if done off the model. Even the swifters, which would have a splice so there is one swifter port and one starboard, would be problematic. If you do a search here at MSW on setting up shrouds there are a lot of posts on how others have gone about setting up the shrouds with success. Allan

You have joined the club Without Helm. We ALL have gone through this, and even after MANY years we are all still in the learning mode ( I know I am) Allan

Hi Tim, Forgive me but I am not sure I understand your question. If you have the circumference of the stay or collar (from Lees or Vadas or contemporary sources tables) you can size the heart. Once you figure the size, check that against the hearts you find to see if they are the right size. Example HMS Bristol, a 4th rate ship launched in 1775 Length of the ship on the gun deck: 148 feet Breadth: 40 feet 7 inches For 1775, only the breadth was used in the initial calculation for the length of the masts. Length of the main mast - 2.23 X 40.583 =90' 6" Diameter of the main mast - 0.9" per three feet of length -- 0.9X30.2 = 27.18" Lower stay circumference- 0.5 X 27.18= 13.59" (diameter 4.32") The heart would be 1.45X 13.59= 19.7" long (and about the same width at the widest point.) 1:48 scale 19.7"/48= 0.41 inches long If your ship had preventer stays, a quick calculation is that they would be 0.7 X the size of the stays so the hearts would be proportionately smaller as well. Based on the scale of your model and having figured out the proper stays' circumferences at scale size, you will be able to check if the hearts that you are looking at are the right size for any give stay. I doubt that kit or after sales suppliers are able to offer enough sizes to help everyone what with various years, rates, scales, &c. but they may be close. If they do not have the various sizes that you need, you might consider making your own. I hope someone checks these numbers in case I missed something 🤪 I hope this was of some help to you Allan

Without Helm, Hope you don't mind a little constructive information as building these little guys can be harder than the full size hull at times. If you would like the scantlings for everything on the boat, please feel free to PM me. Just need to know the length and type of boat for which the scantlings would be. There are "how to" posts on planking small boats like yours here at MSW. I notice that you seem to have run out of room at the bow because the planks are not tapered as they move forward so maybe consider taking a look at Druxey's recent build log (click on the image below) for some great tips on making a ship's boat. I think you will find this to be extremely helpful in making a boat that looks great. Allan