Jump to content

allanyed

NRG Member
  • Posts

    8,149
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by allanyed

  1. Welcome aboard and thank you for sharing your build with us. Excellent start! Allan
  2. I absolutely agree with you Gregory. I based my comments on other conversations Tim and I have had off site. Your comment about the transoms is spot on. 😀 Allan
  3. Hi Gregory Unfortunately this does not apply to this model as it is based on RMG plan ZAZ7361, or most, if not all, launch plans for that matter. I made this mistake on my first attempt at this model and scrapped it when I realized it was totally wrong for this particular boat if based on the body plan. This plan and two other launch plans follow as examples. Allan
  4. Hi Gary. Go to the subject below. As it turns out it there was a typo on my part when transcribing the Euryalus contract as you and I recently discussed separately. modelshipworld.com/topic/33732-tuning-copper-sheathing Allan
  5. At the time Bray was on the Pallas (36) in 1774, IF she prescribed to the 1745 Establishment for a 36 gun frigate she would have carried three boats, 23 foot longboat, 30 foot pinnnace, and 24 foot yawl. (W.E. May, The Boats of Men of War, p.56) Are the boats in the two drawings by Lt. Bray the same boat and are they the yawl or the longboat? Anyway, I think this is going off track, albeit very interesting, and hopefully gave the info Alan needed to start with. Allan
  6. Hi Cad Welcome to MSW. It would very polite if you would post a small introduction in the new members forum with a little about yourself. As this original post is 9 years old, it might not get many looks but your input is great, thanks for sharing! Again, welcome aboard Allan
  7. Roger, Sometimes the research is as much, or sometimes, more fun than the build when something like this pops up with the little details like the forward step that you mentioned. Allan
  8. There is no doubt that the term jolly boat refers to the smallest of the ships' boats and whether they were cutters or some other design seems to always be up for debate. Looking at books by Lavery and May they both refer to jolly boats. May gives scantlings for all types of boats for 1705 and 1800 but nowhere is there a jolly boat listed with scantlings. Lavery goes into some detail about what they were on page 223 of The Aming and Fitting of English Ships of War. He writes that jolly boats appeared to be cutters of 16 to 18 feet and one authority said that four oared cutters were called jolly boats. In doing a little digging I found the following drawing called Seamen Painting a Jolly Boat by Lt. Gabriel Bray of the Pallas which he did in 1774. It looks like a four oared cutter to me but I may be dead wrong. Allan
  9. While a yawl, not a launch, there are some similarities on the drawing below with what you show . It is available in high resolution (18mb) on the Wiki Commons site.
  10. THANK YOU BRUCE!!! It turns out it was a typo on my part afterall. Cheers Allan
  11. Actually I think we ALL get enjoyment or would not be so keen on our hobby so I believe you are in a majority. After all, why bother if we are not enjoying what we are doing. We all have different desires and priorities of what to include in any build on which we embark, but none are wrong, just different. Allan
  12. Hi Håkan I think you were referencing Druxey's post, but either way, the idea is an excellent one from both of you no matter the name we call the instrument being used😀 Allan
  13. My priorities have usually been as-built drawings, contract, design drawings (as you are using) and scantlings in that order if based on the Shipbuilder's Repository, Elements and Practice of Naval Architecture and The Boats of Men of War. If the time period is covered by scantlings found in the 1719, 1745. or 1750 Establishments I would put the scantlings ahead of the design drawings. It is more often than not a combination, but still keeping those priorities in mind where there is a conflict of information. The scantlings I listed in my launch build log are based on the same drawing you mention, where available, and those found in The Boats of Men of War where dimensions are not available or if the parts are not shown such as the ears, gunwale and knees to name a few. Allan
  14. Everything Roger and Jaager said times 100. They are absolutely correct and you would be wasting your money IF realism is an important part of this hobby for you. Personal tastes comes into play so realism is not the same priority for every builder. It is after all, a hobby. I am in the same boat with Roger and Jaager, so would emphasize there is no cloth or method of sewing a sail at 1:60 scale in existence that will look remotely realistic. If you must have sails there is an excellent and inexpensive booklet on sail making using silk span by David Antscherl available from SeaWatch books. https://seawatchbooks.com/products/swan-iv-sail-making-supplement-from-the-revised-and-expanded-edition-by-david-antscherl Allan
  15. Very neat workmanship Tim. Are you using the scantlings for dimensioning your timber or stock sizes of wood? Regardless, from the photos everything looks really close to scale and looks great. Allan
  16. Dick, Just tuned in and wanted to go a step past the "like" button. You obviously love the research as well as the building and I would agree that it can be as fulfilling as making sawdust. Excellent presentation, thank you very much for sharing. Allan
  17. Thank you Bob I thought it looked quite a bit too large from the photos but was not sure. Thanks for confirming. I wonder if that could be corrected by modifying the kit material or making one's own keel, stem and post. Thanks again Allan
  18. Hi Sid, Those gratimgs look "grate"!!! Did you make these or are they from the kit? I realize some may not find this important but FWIW, normally (I know, there seems to be far too many exceptions than there should be in shipbuilding😀) the battens run fore and aft and the ledges athwartships. There appears to be some of both. Thanks for sharing your build, glad to see you back! Allan
  19. Sort of like tuning a steel drum, where they pound the top in various places and thicknesses to get different notes. Allan
  20. You may be right, but I am researching further. The copy of the original came from NMM back around 2010, maybe earlier but as it was from circa 1803 it was a typeset canned contract with blanks to fill in dimensions. I could very well have mis-typed it when transcribing. Unfortunately the copy of the original has gone missing what with several moves in the interim. I think I know where there is a copy of the original copy and will try to find it. Thanks everyone Allan
  21. The hard part for me was the drawings in 3D. I am not bad at 2D but a total neophyte at 3D so needed a LOT help from a fellow member here at MSW. What took him an hour took me closer to 10 hours, probably more. If you do not do 3D I bet a fellow member here would be willing to help. It would be great to share a drawing for any member to use. I can do the same with the ones I have for long guns for late 17th century. I learned that a drawing of a particluar gun pattern can be scaled as needed by the printer which is a big help. Good luck! Allan
  22. Good for you ticking the frames for the planking! I am impressed with the fact that the number of frames looks to be spot on for a 21 foot pinnace. Kudos to Model Shipways! Many other kits have oversized frames and far too few of them. Can you tell us the sided and depth dimensions of the keel? It is hard to tell from the photos. Regardless I realize it is what the kit provided. See below with 1:24 scaled dimensions based on scantlings from May's Boats of Men of War Looking forward to the planking. It seems to always be something of a challenge! Thank you for sharing your build. Allan
  23. Have you considered resin printed barrels? I paid $12 for 18 barrels in two sizes of barrels to the 3D printer I found on line where-in I supplied a 3D drawing of the barrel shape that was appropriate for that particular era. Took a few days but they came through with no problems. Allan
  24. Hopefully the odd title will attract some attention and an answer to my question. A question was asked regarding coppering between the false keel and keel on Euryalus (36) 1803 so I did some digging and found very little except the following from a contract for two of her sister ships, the Astrea and Curacoa. It is relatively clear, except, what the heck is tuning up copper? I know the term as used in a musical instrument or a fist fight, but not in this case. Note that the instructions to use tar and hair in the scarphs was struck out in the contract. The False Keel to be of one Thickness 6 inches thick, to make the Main and False Keels together 1 feet 5 inches below the Rabbit, to give Scarph to the Scarphs of the Main Keel to be laid with Tar and Hair, and sufficiently fastened with Nails and Staples. The Sides and Bottom to be filled or sheathed with Copper and to have thin Copper put between the Main and False Keels all Fore and Aft properly tuned up and fastened, the labour to be done by the contractor.
  25. Hi Tim Sorry if I am being dense here but I really do not understand why there are notches in the keel. The keel was 3 3/4" square at midships (0.156" = 4mm at your scale) and tapered to 3 3/8" X 3 3/4" at the stem and post. Is it to help locate where the frames go? That makes sense, as in the end the floors will be hidden from view anyway. Looking forward to the next update, thank you kindly for sharing your work with us. Allan
×
×
  • Create New...