Jump to content

allanyed

NRG Member
  • Posts

    8,149
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by allanyed

  1. Assuming you are correct Craig, and I think you are, I cannot believe how stupid of me not to just take the line all the way through to see such a basic thing by myself. Allan
  2. Sorry guys it is not the deck. The deck line (top and bottom of the planking) is shown in red on the original draft. I will zoom in further to see if it helps. Will mark the line in question with arrows Druxey, good point. Thanks Allan Line question BBB.PDF
  3. The below drawing happens to be the Artois, but it is similar to many others. Is there a name for the line marked below. I have traced it in magenta on the profile plan to see if I could figure it out, but it does not seem to hold any significance. I am sure it has significance as lines were not arbitrarily drawn on these plans so I am curious to know what it is about. The deck line can be seen in red on the original plan so it is not the deck. TIA Allan Line question AAA.PDF
  4. This is a great subject..... what size are chain rudder pendants on various size ships? They were to prevent loss of the rudder if it became unshipped and needed to be sized to hold onto the rudder and hardware. I would not rely on Caldercraft having the right size without doing some research. 19 links per inch seems to be almost double the size that could be used. Assume an oak rudder on a 74 gun ship weighs about 7000 pounds. 3/8" chain can hold about 7000 pounds so with two chains, one port, one starboard attached to the spectacle plate, it can hold double that amount. 3/8" chain links are about 2" long. At scale these would be .028" long or about 35 links per inch. I cannot find any specifications so far, so hopefully a member will have sizes from contemporary based sources. (Walther railroad supplies has chain up to 40 per inch.) Allan
  5. It depends on the ship I suppose. Many have them that are above, others between. The location of the bolster needs to be such that the anchor hawsers come into the hull on the appropriate deck at a level that allows installation of the bucklers and their respective support lumber inboard. Allan
  6. As to shaping, for me it depends on the thickness and species of wood. I prefer to shape them to match, but if it is thin enough you can soak the piece and then bend it around a jig that is made to match the shape of the hull and hit it with a hot air gun much like edge bending planking. The bolster is probably best carved to shape due to its relative thickness. Regarding the filler piece, what is the purpose? The Bounty model at RMG has no filler piece between the cheeks nor do any contemporary models that I looked at unless the hawse holes are between the upper and lower cheeks as on the pic below. Not to say the plans you have are incorrect, but seem not to be the norm. Allan
  7. David, Regarding the cheeks, the parts I know of that fay to the cheeks and hull are the wash cant, bolster, and/or trail board. Looking at the contemporary plans of Bounty at RMG I am not sure there is a trail board but it just may not be shown on the plan. As to parts above the cheeks, are you speaking about the main rail and lower rail? If not, sorry to put you into another book that you may not have but there is no easy/short explanation to cover the entire head area. There are about 30 pages going into the details of every piece of the head that took me from a frightened rabbit when it came time to make these parts to a place of comfort after studying them. TFFM Volume II, starting on page 206. It covers main rail, false rail, lower rail, upper cheek, lower cheek, and much much more. Allan
  8. For the future, ----- it can be done with relative ease using the methods Chuck Passaro presents in the four part video on proper planking techniques, or cutting from a sheet to get the bend rather actually bending a strake. I have done both and it depends on the scale more than anything when deciding which route to take. If I try to bend a piece I make a jig shaped to match the turn at the bow, then soak the pre-sized port and starboard pieces overnight. In the AM I can gently bend each piece around the jig and hit it with a hot air gun until dry. Need to remember they are mirror images as well. Easy peasy (most of the time) Allan
  9. Roger are you talking about Tommy Thompson? An old article (2019) can be read at https://www.stuartmagazine.com/stuart-life/people/treasure-hunter-tommy-thompson-in-jail-until-he-admits-where-50-million-of-gold-is/ Allan
  10. Welcome aboard. You have made a very wise decision in your choice for a first build, you obviously did your homework. We lose too many novitiates because they have chosen kits that are too advanced or are poorly designed. Allan
  11. Have you researched any contemporary plans and models of other 20 gun ships around the time of the Greyhound 1720? I just found some with a quick search on the RMG Collections site, including Tartar (20) 1734 and Biddeford (20) 1727 that you might find appropriate and helpful. Allan
  12. Hi Phil, Your rigging work looks extremely neatly done! It may just be the angle of the photo, but It looks like you have the aft shrouds first which would be unusual as the starboard forward-most pair was rigged first, then subsequent port forward pair, and so on moving aft. The stay was then rigged after all the shrouds were rigged. Allan
  13. Hi D Welcome to MSW!!!! I enjoyed reading your post, especially your desire to do research to get things done accurately. My concern is that this is your first model so it may not be the best choice for a number of reasons for a first time build. Do visit the MSW Articles data base for lessons on such things as proper planking of the hull and a plethora of other useful items. For the hull planking the Antscherl article is tops, but you may also benefit from the four part video on planking by a member here at MSW. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCWooJ1o3cM. Enjoy your voyage here at MSW. Allan
  14. The eyes, hooked blocks and stropped blocks are marvels. Great pics, thanks for posting. Allan
  15. Goodwin is one of my favorites in general. His research has saved many of us countless hours of our own research. This layout was a new one for me so a good day of learning 😀. Before seeing this sequence I was relying on that given by Lees but I am not so sure he was including the idiosyncrasies of cutters in The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War. This brings up a question, for me at least, would cutters fit within the meaning of his title or were they of their category for some things such as rigging? Allan
  16. Your work is astounding. 😀 Question, hope you don't mind. Were the forward shrouds set up like this on the cutters rather than the common sequence, ie: pair on the starboard then pair on the port, etc. with a swifter being the aftmost rigged with an eye splice if an odd number of shrouds? Allan
  17. The copper plates appear to be far more realistic than provided by many kit makers. Nice job of putting them on the hull! Allan
  18. I realize this is not seen for the most part on POB, but regarding terminology, internally there are footwales, clamps, quickwork, thick stuff, and lining but nothing called planking.😁 Allan
  19. There was an order of dressing of rigging and it made sense once I found it and used it. It varied slightly as new lines came into use such as mizen preventer stays in 1793 or as removed such as truss parrels superseding parrels on the topsail yards in 1806. Pages 158 -159 in James Lees' Masting and Rigging gives all the details. While it is nothing like your ship, the example below of the order of dressing of the lower foremast on the Victory, from a fold out page in Longridge's, Anatomy of Nelson's Ships may be of interest. Allan
  20. I think you are talking about the wales as the fenders ran vertically near midships. If that is the case, the wales were in fact reduced in thickness at the stem on the real ships down to the thickness of the surrounding planks so they could seat in the rabbet at the stem without sticking out and thus being susceptible to catching on something and being ripped off. They were not reduced at the stern, but I can see how this is a problem for you as the "walnut" is notorious for being porous and brittle and not very well suited for ship models compared to other species some other kit makers provide. Allan
  21. I get it Chuck and it was fun while it lasted, but why is there still a Non-Ship build forum that has cars and what not? It does not matter to me, but curious why one is OK the others are not. In the end MSW is 44,000 times better than any other ship modeling site!!! Allan
  22. I imagine many of the members have already seen the videos and know the story how she was sunk by the British in 1708, but for those who have not, this is an incredible find, worth billions of Euros/dollars in gold, silver, gems and relics. In looking at the video, there looks to be some interesting things regarding Spanish ships of the San Jose era. One that jumped out at me is the cannon. There is no cascabel but rather an ornate loop. Time mark 1:08, 1:46, and 2:20 show these very clearly. Allan https://www.mensjournal.com/news/colombia-holy-grail-of-shipwrecks-20-billion-treasure
  23. I like BC for brass as well. For copper I have been using diluted liver of sulfur as I can blacken it after it is in place without worry about scratching the surface during installation. Another plus is that LoS does not stain the wood and a quick rinse/wipe down with a wet paper towel is all that is needed for once it has been applied to the part. Wish it worked on brass as well. Allan
×
×
  • Create New...