allanyed

Welcome to MSW Geoff!!! Planking varied in width but the widest portion along a strake was in the range of 10 inches to 12 inches. Look at some contemporary planking plans to see how they tapered. https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/search/planking expansion drawing As the taper at the bow was in the realm of half the widest portion midships, using the wider planks makes sense. Once tapered, you still need to shape them as you cannot just glue them in place without having lifting problems. Study the planking tutorial by David Antscherl in the Articles data base here at MSW if you want to learn how to spile planks and if you are going to use strip stock, study the four part video on planking by Chuck Passaro. Allan

Hi Tom, Please email me the drawing you posted in DXF and DWG format at your convenience and I can see if I can play with it on my program. Just in case also send Worst it as a PNG or JPG and I can go from there. Thanks Allan

I would limit the keel to four pieces, maybe five at most. With five pieces they would still be less than 25 feet long each. Allan

Lees (or me😀) may have this wrong or it may just be a matter of terminology but on page 80 and page 91 of The Masting and Rigging of British Ships of War he describes the larger lower block of the pair, or larger sheave if a fiddle block, as used for the topsail sheet, not a tack. He makes no mention of there being a tack for the topsails. Allan

Hi Bill, What nation and which lines are you referring to for the long tackle blocks (fiddle blocks)? I cannot speak for earlier dates or nations, but according to James Lees on page 68 of The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War, fiddle blocks were used from 1719 until 1806. On page 166 he describes them being used on yard arms and where ordinary double blocks could foul up. Regarding those on the yard arm, before and after that period two single blocks were stropped together. Hope this helps Allan

As the keel on Hancock was 115 feet 10" long, I suspect there were no more than five pieces. Looking at contracts of 28 gun and 36 gun, British frigates, the keels were made up of four and five pieces. The 74's called out for no more than 6, but they were about 25 feet longer than Hancock. The deadwood aft looks overly complex. Did you get this pattern from a contemporary source? Several patterns from Goodwin's, The Construction and Fitting of English Ships or War, page 29, ISBN 0-87021-016-5 follows. You can see the various dates that may be appropriate to Hancock even if these are British versus USS. Allan

Somewhere in the past I saw then current photos of the Victory model by Longridge and the planking had a lot of cracks and/or lifting if I remember correctly. Hopefully someone knows where to find the photos and can post them. I seached the net and specifically RMG with no luck. I have not personally seen it on "modern" models going back to 1978, but you may want to check with a museum expert such as Grant Walker at Preble Hall at the USNA in Annapolis to get their input as they have a vast collection. Allan

WELCOME TO MSW The above is absolutely the best advice. The kits are high quality and you will learn skills that will be used on even more advanced models, be it kit or scratch as you move forward. Allan

No you are not, it is the end result that counts. This is worth a try if I ever make the mistake of doing another 1:96 scale project 😀 Thanks Roger Allan

Thanks Paul, much appreciated. I usually do the same, but to be to scale I needed to use 30 gauge wire and it does not work so neatly. Thanks again!! Allan

Look at a color chart of a given brand against the painting and you can see what colors are close. If you want an exact match you will most likely need to mix colors to get what you want. The below is how I would start, in this case using Liquitex, my favorite acrylic tubed paint that is easy to find, I also attached a PDF which may be more clear. Allan Liquitex chart against painting.PDF

That's the truth. I just made a couple using 30 gage and it was tricky. I wrapped the wire around a drill bit of the appropriate diameter then removed the "spring" and clipped the rings. How do you make your rings? Allan

I wonder how much the colors in the painting have changed over the past 200 years. Has the Turner painting been restored or is it the aged original? You can see a lot of restored paintings on the net to get an idea of how much paint color can change over the years for a variety of reasons. Allan

Welcome to MSW David. Obviously there are no color photos of the Victory in the 19th century so color photos we see are modern era colors. They may be a close match, but maybe not. Also, prints are not necessarily the same as the actual color if you saw the ship in person. Go with what makes you happy but whatever you choose, consider going with high quality artist tubed acrylics, not the bottled craft paints. Two of the most important differences between craft paints and artist acrylics have to do with pigment content and lightfastness. Artist acrylics have higher pigment content than craft paints, making the colors of artist acrylics more vibrant and deep. Artist acrylics have a higher viscosity than the bottled paints. The bottled paints are not as lightfast as artist acrylics, which means that they will fade more quickly. By the same token you can protect the bottled paint with a protective varnish, but if you want the colors of your paintings to stay true for many years, go with artist acrylics. Allan

Hope to see you again next year (for the Chianti festival in Greve 😀) and see the model in person. It is gorgeous!! Ciao Allan

Lacking better information, the beams in late 17th century or even very early 18th century ships should be reasonably close regarding size and spacing for warships. For merchant ships, it may be a different situation.

Are you speaking of the Dutch ship from 1628? If that is the ship, there were several decks and each deck would likely have had different beam sizes and different distances between each beam. If there is an inboard profile drawing or deck plans, these would show the beam sizes and spacing on each deck. An example is below. It happens to be Antelope (50) 1703 You can see the beams in cross section so can determine sizes and spacing. Allan

The planking does not look like each strake runs up to the bow, but it is hard to see in the photo. The photos below show how the planking ran in reality and how some kit planking is instructed. It does not matter how the first planks run as they will be covered by the second layer but it is great practice to do the first layer the way the second layer should lay if only to learn how to do it. It seems like the planks in your photo look like they are running as in the pic on the left below rather than the way they were done in actuality as in the photo of a contemporary model on the right. It is probably just a matter of terminology, but there does appear to be a false keel in the photos you posted. See the second pic below of a contemporary plan. In the end do what makes you happy, it is your shipyard after all 😀 Allan

Great questions Tom. As far as I know, the wedges were hammered into place but due to their shape and size of the opening they could not fall through even if they got a little loose. Perhaps they were checked and "reset" on occasion. The drawing below may help. It is from The Construction and Fitting of the English Man of War 1650-1850, page 169 by Peter Goodwin, ISBN0-87021-016-5 Allan

Welcome to MSW Simon. Wish I could help you but hopefully some members will have built the old Billings kit and be able to offer some help. Allan

Sorry, I should have posted the below pics in my previous post. You can see the ring of wedges in the sketch below. Allan

Neatly done! Keep in mind there were wedges used to anchor the mast in the partners. For the future, you might find the following interesting. This one is for the upper deck for a ship smaller than Victory, but the design principals would apply. Allan

Hi Richard Strakes on a ship usually consisted of planks about 25 feet to 30 feet long so about 3 1/2" long at your scale. It may be easier to install full length planks and cut butts with a scalpel so it appears they are individual pieces of planking making up a strake. Does the kit show planking where all strakes end at the rabbet (unless a drop strake is needed)? If any amount of realism is of interest, the planking methods in the four part videos by Chuck Passaro are of great help if you are using precut strips. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCWooJ1o3cM You might get some ideas if you take a look at a planking expansion drawing such as ZAZ3918 of the Sphinx on the RMG Collections site for an idea of how the planking was done outboard and inboard. It gives the lengths of the planks on each strake and shapes and tapering as well. Allan

Sounds interesting. Can you please give missing information as requested by Chris below when this forum was first put up in 2019 to give book reviews. I did look up Sam Willis and he appears to be a prolific writer with good reviews. In this section of the forum, one finds all things book-and-magazine related: questions, discussions, and of course reviews. Many of the reviews have been tagged by a moderator with the label "book review". Some of the reviews have not been tagged in this manner because, well, they don't really give as much information as one would like to see when reading a review. A good review is more than just, "I read this book and I like it/don't like it." All of us like to find out as much as we can in advance when considering parting with our hard-earned cash, so how can a reviewer make a review more useful? You can get an idea by looking at a few of the tagged reviews. Here are some things you should include: 1. The title of the book. Put this in the title of your post as well. 2. The author's name. 3. The publishing data, i.e. name of publisher and date of publication. If the book you're reviewing is not a first edition, include the publication date for the first edition. Same goes if the book is a reprint. 4. Pertinent specs such as format, number of pages, whether the book has photos (color or B&W), suggested retail price, etc. 5. Modelers are especially keen to know if the book has plans, drawings, color plates, or any other such informative goodies. What kind and how many? Good quality or bad? Anything particularly noteworthy? 6. Summarize the contents of the book. What does it cover? What doesn't it cover? We want to know what's in it! 7. And finally, give your subjective opinion of the book. Did you enjoy it? Why or why not? Are there highlights or shortcomings that you think potential readers would appreciate knowing about? Let them know! We look forward to reading your submissions!

One of the best Bluenose models we have seen here at MSW. Kudos!!! Allan