allanyed

P.T. Barnum had a valid point, even as far back as circa 1850..

Allan

23 minutes ago, Lieste said:

I don't think that a 'vast trove' is terribly useful if it is too soft to *reliably* read, when it is possible to find the same information largely for free.

I totally agree, why pay for a modern reproduction when the contemporary information is available for free.   I don't mind spending money when necessary, but in this case for the 1787 pattern of French cannon, it was available in good quality at no cost.   Now, where can I find similar information on earlier versions of French (and Spanish) guns?🙂

We have drawings of seven patterns in their various calibers and lengths for English sea ordnance from 1625 to the early 19th century (over 90 drawings) and would like to have a complete accounting for Spanish and French patterns as well.  

Allan

Your model, your choice.  I believe that in reality the running rigging lines would be made of the same material, thus the same color when first rigged.  Weather and time will change the colors so any new lines would probably look different color-wise than rigging that has been in place for some amount of time.

Allan

Welcome to the fray Charles

You are among 43,000+ new friends

Allan

12 hours ago, Srenner said:

So your saying keep it square, the galley sticks out under the overhang of the forecastle circa 1730 design?

Looking at the contemporary drawings at RMG and those in the Blanford (20) book by Peter Goodwin, the galley stove was on the lower deck and the stack came up through the upper deck well aft of the forecastle and foremast.  Other 20 gun ships like the Greyhound had the forward most gun aft of the forecastle which was established at 7' 7" fore and aft, and had no overhang.   Regardless, as Hamilton suggested, if accuracy is not a priority for you, go with what makes you happy.  It is after all, a hobby.

Allan

I guess it is time to get the Admiral involved as she is a retired French teacher.   HOPEFULLY the naval terminology will not throw too many clinkers into the fire.

Allan

Warm welcome to MSW from the other side of our planet.   You have 43,000+ new friends and a ton of build logs not mention the fantastic articles on rigging, proper planking, and much more in the Articles database here at MSW that will help enhance your models.

Allan

22 hours ago, Lieste said:

It is still lacking the 4pdr (lange et court),

No problem Lieste, thank you kindly for your help.   For our scales, I believe I can use the ratio of the shot diameter of the 4 pound to the 6 pound and reduce the bore and barrel diameter the same 12% (approximate) and keep the same lengths as the 6 pounder without notice.

Allan  

So far I found no deck plans for a 20 gun 1719 Establishment ship like your Greyhound (20) 1720, but there are deck drawings of 20 gun ships closer to your date versus the 1785 that you posted above in the RMG Collections website that may help you.

One example: https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-83764

Brian Lavery also gives 11 pages of text and drawings regarding layouts in The Arming and Fitting of English Ships of War on pages 155-167.

As this is a 1719 Establishment ship, I assume you are using the 1719 Establishment list of scantlings starting on page 241 in your Goodwin book as it gives you 18 pages of contemporary dimensions, including those for a 20 gun. 

Allan

21 hours ago, Keith Black said:

You can toss the whole lot in the bin, I know because i bought a set.

I strongly second this comment.  They will not cut through even softened brass and they burn hard wood.  The only good thing is the box and the vials in which I placed good quality bits.   Look at the bits here for a wide variety, fast delivery and reasonable price for high quality bits.

https://www.mcmaster.com/products/drill-bits/drill-bits-11/    Keep in mind the old adage, you get what you pay for.  FYI, McMaster Carr has a distribution center in Robbinsville so not terribly far from you.  I used to be able to order and personally pick up anything they had when we Iived in NJ.  I don't know if that is still the case, but worth a call.

Allan

Hi Vane,

If you have not already seen it and if you want to get rid of the shine on the copper plating, there is a recent thread here at MSW on how to do this easily and give a more realistic looking finish at no cost.

https://modelshipworld.com/topic/34218-how-to-accelerate-very-quickly-the-aging-of-copper-hull-plates/#comment-973585

Allan

Welcome to MSW.

We have 43,000 members all over the world.   It would help if you could give some information on who and where you are and some details on the model such as how many years old is the kit, what scale, etc. for those that might be interested in building this for you.

Good luck

Allan

Lieste

THANK YOU.  

Allan

Welcome to MSW.  Very lovely work on your model!

Allan

3 hours ago, jbcallender said:

Here is the deck plan from Matthew Betts' book on Terror, which is very close to your Erebus plan.

I agree with you it looks like Betts mistakenly used the plans for Erebus rather than Terror in his book.  Note that not only are the round openings like those on the contemporary drawing of Erebus, the hatches match those of Erebus rather than the Terror.  Certainly not the end of the world, but interesting none-the-less.

Allan  

Eberhard, I am PMing you regarding the rest of the project.

Merci bien

Allan

The openings in the upper deck are intriguing.  It looks a lot like the Erebus but maybe the kit plans combined the two ships into one as they were both bomb vessels converted to Arctic service.   Regardless, your planking looks very well done.  Thanks for sharing your build.

Allan

Erebus signed by Francis J. Laire, Master Shipwright, Chatham Dockyard.    

Drawing of Terror signed by shipwright William Stone in Chatham in 1837

Thanks again Lieste and Waldemar, your thoughtfulness in your replies is very much appreciated.

Allan

Hi Tiziano,

Did you cast the cannon barrels using metal?  They look very real.

Thanks

Allan

4 hours ago, Waldemar said:

Jean Boudriot, Hubert Berti, Artillerie de mer. France 1650-1850, Ancre, Paris 1992, ISBN 2-903179-12-3

This looks like a winner. but the problem is the cost as it will not be inexpensive.   

I did some more digging and found the following website that gives a lot of good information on Spanish ordnance.

https://www.artillerianaval.es/artilleria-de-ordenanza/

5 hours ago, Waldemar said:

Spanish national archives.

Waldemar,

I did find the website for the archives in Madrid but cannot find a search function and am at a loss.  Do you have a link?

Thank you!
Allan

Does anyone know of a source for Spanish and French cannon pattern drawings from the 17th century through the early 19th century based on contemporary sources?  I would be grateful for any information.  

Allan

EXREMELY beautiful model!  Like your carvings, the scratch built pinnace is something everyone should see and aspire to.

PLEASE do NOT take this as a criticism, but rather as a question only. Is there a reason you used Blomefield pattern guns instead of Armstrong pattern?  Your title is 1765-1778 so the use of the Blomefield guns is confusing to me as they did not come into use until 1787 (Caruana, The History of English Sea Ordnance, Vol. II, page 257)

THANK YOU for sharing your build!

Allan

Mr. MIllar

Can you post the pics and explanations in the kit instructions? 

Thanks

Allan

Hi Nearshire,

Out of curiosity, what is the width of the planks in your kit?  The reason I ask is that the first layer of strakes (which really does not matter) looks wide in the photos.  Hopefully that is not the case on the second layer.  From Goodwin's The Construction and Fitting of English Men of War, page 50, the bottom planking was from 10" to 12" wide at the dead flat.  This would be 0.10" - 0.12" (2.54mm to 3mm) at your scale.    This will make it easier to prebend the tapered planks with heat (ala the method in the Passaro videos) compared with if they are too wide.

Allan

On 3/14/2023 at 9:16 AM, Nearshore said:

I have looked at all the build logs and searched other forums for suggestions on how they are supposed to lay. I did find a few pics but nothing that really focused on this part of the build.

There are hundreds of contemporary ship models on the RMG Collections site, many of which have photos in several views that might be of a little help.  One example is below of the Hercules (74) 1760.  All views of her can be found at  https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-66271

Allan