allanyed

Your model is a testament to your abilities as well as what a top quality, well designed, kit can yield. Kudos to you and Chuck both. Allan

Hi Yves The majority of us do this from time to time, you certainly are not alone. I have spent hours searching for the right word even knowing I had used it previously but forgot what the word was. Windows instead of lights, thick instead of moulded, the list goes on. I am curious though about the beam you mentioned on the forward part of the upper deck. I just can't find anything like what you describe in the above photos of the contemporary models. Thanks again! Allan

Hi Yves First and foremost, thanks for sharing your lovely build! To what beam are you referring? The upper deck is not shown in the first photo you added in post #362 so a bit confusing. I searched the National Gallery of Art but cannot find any photos of this model. There are a number of photos of a contemporary model of Bellona at The Royal Museum Greenwich that I found. (Maybe you can ID the beam you mention on the photo below from RMG as part of the upper deck in the waist can be seen in this photo) Prior to skid beams being introduced about five years after Bellona was launched, spare spars were laid from the fore edge of the quarter deck to the aft edge of the forecastle and the boats sat on top of these which would probably be appropriate at time of her launch. I would guess the gangways and skid beams were added at some point later on so could be appropriate on the model depending on the year. I may be completely wrong but pretty sure the Bellona did not carry any dinghies. At her time of launching in 1760 third rates carried five boats, a 32 foot long boat and 2 pinnaces and 2 cutters. By about 1780 she would have probably had a 32 foot launch in place of the long boat, as well as a 32 foot and a 28 foot pinnace, and two 25 foot cutters. (W.E. May The Boats of Men of War) Allan

Jim Rather than base a decision on advertising, there are hundreds of build logs of dozens of vessels here at MSW. Some kits get five stars, some don't. Spend a few days or weeks studying the many choices available. Look at the wide price ranges and when it comes to quality remember the old adage you get what you pay for. Allan

I agree it looks nice on the carriage. Unless having room for building a bulkhead and stanchions on which to mount a swivel gun the carriage is an alternative way to go. Allan

Good choice at this scale. At 1:85 any caulking is really not necessary and more often than not, it is out of scale and obtrusive looking. Still, your choice is a good one. Black tissue paper glued to the edges also does a very nice job of it as it is thin enough to be to scale and is much cleaner looking than pencil. You can find this on-line and at most craft stores. One package will last for many many years. Your planking looks very neatly done. You mentioned lengths. The lengths you chose are hard to tell in the photos. The lengths of deck planks near the center line of course varied a lot with the deck furniture and openings, but the longest "straight"pieces would be in the neighborhood of 3 1/2"- 4" at your scale. It is too late now, but they were normally laid in a three or four butt shift. (see first drawing below) It appears in the photos that you used a two butt shift pattern. I assume this is a kit error, but something to keep in mind for future builds. Regardless of kit or scratch, maybe consider getting a copy of Goodwin's The Construction and Fitting of the English Man of War or other book that covers an array of items. Much/most will apply to ships of other nationalities. There are dozens of other books as well, but this one covers a lot. An example is the deck planking of decks carrying cannon. The four or so outboard most strakes were often anchor stock or top and butt pattern for the added strength on decks that had cannon rather than straight pieces. See second drawing below. Both drawings below are from Goodwin's book. The first is on page 58 and the second is on page 52. Is there a reason you are not using PVA glue? I don't think there are many fans of contact glue in ship modeling, but may be wrong on this. Allan

That is quite a compliment, but alas, I am no expert compared to some. There are a number of written sources of terms and meanings mentioned in other logs and forums here at MSW. I will be honored to follow your build and help where I can and I very much admire you for wanting to learn. Allan

Looks a lot like the drawing of the 1/2 pounder swivel gun (3 feet long ) from Fort Ticonderoga on page 59 of volume I of The History of English Sea Ordnance by Adrian Caruana. Using the photo as a basis, I estimated the bore diameter at about 1.5" which is close to the Caruana drawing for the 1/2 pounder. As the carriage is modern, MAYBE there was none to begin with and it was on a swivel as Caruana describes for his example. Were 1/2 pounders ever carriage mounted? Allan

I do the same thing, collecting saw dust from my thickness sander. I turn off the vacuum that collects the dust for a few passes then collect the dust in small jars for each species. I dab a little white PVA glue in the tiny gaps and push in some of the sawdust with a finger, let it dry, then sand. Is it perfect? Nah, but it does look MUCH better than those tiny slits. Is it easy to sand, yes, very easy, in my experience. Obviously, tight fights without those little gaps is best, but.........stuff happens. Allan

Thanks, that is what I thought might be the case. The middle piece has three gallery lights, but they probably had no way to translate from Spanish to English so called them windows by mistake. Again, just a minor matter of nautical terminology which must be a very difficult thing for the folks making the instruction manual and drawings when it comes to translating. Thanks again Allan

Do your instructions call these windows or something else? There are lights (not to be confused with lanterns) and ports but no windows on these ships. I realize this is a terminology thing so a very minor point to many folks, but I am curious. 😀. The translation from Spanish or Italian to English for many nautical terms has to be very difficult for kit makers as it is something of a language of its own. Allan

The only way to know for sure is if you can find an image of the contemporary plans. OcCre probably based their plans on something, so maybe check with them or the Maritime Museum in Barcelona and the Naval Museum in Madrid to see what they have available. As with scratch building, research for kit builds is a good idea before plowing ahead. Allan Something to consider, but that is up to you in the end. Look at the various build logs here at MSW and compare to photos of contemporary models on the RMG Collections and other museum sites and you will be able to see which kits would approach what you are looking for. While the below is the HMS Diana 1794, not the Spanish ship, I suspect the gallery lights (windows) are closer to what would be the case even on the Spanish ship Diana Allan https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-82174

FWIW, the Lettie Howard looks to have it as on the left. This of course is a modern photo so who knows if it is how things were done late 19th century. There are a bunch of photos of Ernestina (Effie M. Morrisey) on the Library of Congress website that may help as this is prior to reconstruction. The latest rebuild for Ernestina was recently finished at Bristol Marine in Booth Bay so they may have better information for you. Allan

Hi Doug, When the time comes, just as an FYI, if you have not seen it, there are two new build logs on the Bounty launch that may interest you in the scratch build forum. One is for a large scale, and the other for 1:48 (which can be changed for whatever is needed.) It is set up so anyone can build it with a minumum of tools. IF this is of interest, let me know and I can PM or email you (or anyone interested) the drawings at whatever scale you want. Allan

Never thought of it in that term Roger, but makes sense. Very interesting. Allan

I see this is your first post Ricky (apologies if I got the wrong R. Hortman), so welcome to MSW. Allan

Great find Craig. This is one unusual plan with the number of tholes but only a few thwarts shown. The aft platform/QD with the beams is definitely one example of what could be the solution for other boats. Lacking information to the contrary, this at least gives ammunition if the solution is questioned. Hopefully there will be other plans showing this kind of detail. Many thanks!! Allan

And room as well as weight! They were for ships anchors handling so totally unnecessary. I would bet they were removed at some point, but I think most model builders would include them to show these features as they show some nice details.

Thanks Druxey. Unfortunately all the drawings I have been studying for this project show risers that end well short of the stern. I never noticed this until now. I blew up the plan and see what you mean. Yes, the copy 7848 does seem to be correct. And another thing about which I am unsure. The aft platform always is shown on plans as suspended in air. Did the boards run athartships? If so, were there clamps (C) on which they rested? If they ran longitudinally, why is there no support shown at the forward end, be it a small bulkhead (A) or a deck beam (B) of sorts?

Details, details. Any thoughts on how the stern benches were supported along the sides and aft. Most, if not all plans show them resting on the aft most thwart, but nothing I have found so far with details on how else it was supported. The risers end more than four feet forward of the transom so are not used for support. If this were extended it would make the most sense, to me that is. Thanks in advance Allan

Hi Kiwiron, Lovely build, thank you for sharing your log. For future consideration note that actually the plates overlap 1 1/2", they never butted together. This might be difficult and may not look good with the kit plates as they look to be much too thick. At your scale they should only be about one to two thousandths thick so likely have no choice unless you go to copper foil which is a good choice. At your scale, nail dents (not raised bumps) would be barely visible. See the sketch below. (The copper paint looks very good by itself.) One point about which I am curious, hope you don't mind. Did the kit call for the port lid stops on all four sides? I am pretty sure Victory is like most ships of that era in that they were only on the bottom and sides of the port to keep the lid from swinging in.

Tim, This looks like the drawing Craig and I discussed elsewhere. Looks like a copy of 7361 with different handwriting for the legend and scantlings. Thanks.

Welcome aboard MSW VeeBee Hope you enjoy the voyage!!! Allan

Tim, My fault on not noticing this when doing the drawing edit. That pretty well cinches the decision for me. No planking on the dead wood it shall be. They have the aft frames actually sitting on the dead wood rather than using half frames ending at a bearding line and the rabbet follows the top of the deadwood on the plans so it appears this is how it was done. This actually makes thing easier on the model, I think. Allan

Tim and Craig, The drawing 7848 is shown as no image on the RMG Collections site. Can you PM or email me this drawing? Many thanks Allan