allanyed

I am not a kit builder (so far) but I can see this as a beautiful project if/when the time comes that I am relegated to a small living space with a few hand tools and sandpaper to make at least a little bit of sawdust. Allan

I use the booklet as well with a variation or two. First I use tape to hold the span to the frame. Also, make sure to use the plug when wetting for the first shrink and again when painting. Do remove once wetted or when the paint is applied so it does not stick. I like to do two coats of diluted tubed artist acrylic. Allan'

Tthe blocks sizes can be determined from the tackle circumferences. For example, the circumference for the tackle for a 32 pounder, based on the mid 18th century Naval Regulations was 3". For the smaller guns they were 2" to 2.5" circumference. The lengths varied slightly and are also given. For the 32 pounders the tackles were 60 feet long. For 18 pounders as a comparison they were 54 feet long. Using Lees formula for calculating the lengths of the blocks on page 164 of The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War, the block sizes would be as follows. For 3" circumference rope for 32 pounders 3/3.14= .96 0.96X1.1X1.0625 =~9" at your scale .09"X25.4 = 2.3mm long For the 2.5" circumference rope for 28 pounders 2.5/3.14= .8" 0.8"X1.1X1.0625X8 = ~7.5" /100 = .075X25.4 = 2mm For single blocks for 2" circumference rope for the 12 pounders the blocks would be 1.5mm long at your scale. While the blocks would vary in size for the size of the gun, keep in mind that with the exception of the 32 pounders, for the running out tackles there would be only single blocks used. For the 32 pounders there would be one single and one double block for each tackle. Caruana goes into this on page 386 in volume II of The History of English Sea Ordnance. Same holds true for the training tackle. We often see incorrect blocks on models where one or two doubles are mistakenly used on guns smaller than 32 pounders. Allan

Jason, While they do not usually make mention of paint, do you have a copy of the Jason contract? I have found that if you can find a contract for the ship you are modeling, the scantlings and such are extremely helpful overall. There is a 14 page contract for a number of Artois class ships, including Jason 1794 at RMG. https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-459306. As it is a relatively modern ship, the contract was probably printed with typeset so easy to read compared to the hand written contracts from earlier years. Allan

What is a harbored hardboard plank? Are you sure you do not mean the garboard as in your other post? Thanks Allan

Hi Mr. Design, What vessel are you building? The planking tutorial in the article data base by David Antscherl is worth some hours of study and use when doing your build. https://thenrg.org/resources/Documents/articles/APrimerOnPlanking.pdf Of particular importance is the following comment in that article. The point of this photo is to show the forward end of the first strake, the garboard strake. It should not be carried high up the bow rabbet: a common beginners’ error. If the garboard is carried up too high, the remainder of the hooding ends of the planks (the ends that fit into the rabbet) will be crowded together and be too narrow, or too many drop strakes will be required forward to compensate. There are details in a number of books and you can also study contemporary planking expansion drawings found on the RMG Collections site. https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/search/planking expansion plan If you use these, notice that there are both inboards and outboard planking expansions which must obviously be done differently. Allan

You are absolutely correct Mark. I went to the site and it does indeed give credit to Mr. LIghtley. Thanks for the catch!! Allan

Further to Bob's comments, if you start with round stock (dowels) you can anchor a hand drill and use it as a mini lather, but are probably limited in the type of wood. Obviously oak is not a great choice as it is so grainy, but some of the other common species used for dowels might work for you. In addition, for British ships there are quite a few scaled and/or dimensioned contemporary drawings of masts and spars on the RMG site and I think a few on the Wiki Commons site. David Lees gives dimensions of all spars and masts covering 1625 to 1820 using ratios as an appendix in his book The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War. There are also spread sheets available here at MSW in the articles data base by Dan Vadas, (https://thenrg.org/resource/articles) The Vadas sheets use the same ratios as Lees except for the period 1670-1710 where unfortunately he made up his own formulas rather than use those provided by Lees. Allan

From Naval Miscellany by Angus Konstam, 2010. (I have no idea what his sources are): The Nelson Chequer was a color scheme adopted by vessels of the Royal Navy, modelled on that used by Nelson in battle. It consisted of bands of black and yellow paint along the sides of the hull, broken up by black ports. In the 18th and 19th centuries, vessels of all nations were painted in a variety of colors. Captains were allowed great latitude in the way they painted their vessels, as it aided identification in battle. Periodically the Royal Navy sought a uniform color scheme; In 1715, an Admiralty order decreed the use of yellow and black, and a uniform color within. However, this was generally ignored. Again in 1780 the Admiralty then issued a further order allowing captains to paint in yellow or black. Below is the stern of a contemporary 50 gun model at RMG circa1715. https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-66365 Someone apparently did not get the memo.🤪 Allan

In addition to colors keep in mind that the names were not normally painted on the stern of RN ships prior to the 1771 order of the Admiralty. They were allowed until the Admiralty rescinded this in 1782 so it is only a ten or eleven year window where the names were commonly found. Were there exceptions, probably. This order from the Admiralty obviously changed again many years later, but I am not sure if was in the late 19th or 20th century. Common sense comes into play here. Flying false colors and such was supposedly used on occasion when coming on the enemy. Having your ship's name on the stern would pretty much negate the idea of flying a false flag. I don't know which Granado you are building as there were several built by the RN over time, but look at photos of contemporary models in your time frame on the RMG collections site for some ideas. Their model of the Granado 1742 has the lower counter painted black and no name is on the stern.

Rob, Welcome!!!! "Kit bashing" is a great idea with some kits to take the model to the next level, especially the planking, replacing the gratings, and replacing the bowling pins provided with belaying pins in some cases. You might consider taking a little time to study the planking tutorial by David Antscherl here in the MSW gallery and the YouTube videos by Chuck Passaro It takes time, but there is SOOOOO much information right here in the MSW build logs to study that will help you. Study the scratch builds as well as the kit builds to get a better idea of what can be done. Allan

I second the motion. Every newbie would be well served to start with this three vessel series. Not only will it give you useful experience in the build, but will teach you what to watch for in future kits if you go the kit route or even help you with scratch building techniques if you choose to join the many members hanging out on the dark side. Welcome to this motley crew. Allan

Your version is a huge improvement with the brackets not being plywood. Are you going to add the breeching loops which were used on Blomefield pattern guns which came into use about 1787, including on the Artois class ships such as Diana? Small note for the future.... your gratings look good as they have no openings next to the head ledges and coamings, but the battens on the gratings ran fore and aft rather than athwartships. Allan

Never having been in even one, let alone all, grand lodges could you please help me understand how this relates to ship models? Many thanks. Allan

I may not be understanding this clearly but with all the silicone molding materials that require only a single pour, this seems complex. For small parts I make a master of wood or modeling clay. I then pour an ounce or two of mixed two part silicone molding material into a small paper or plastic cup. The master is then set into the liquid silicone so that it is completely submerged but with the top surface of the master just barely exposed. Once the silicone is cured, the master is popped out and the mold removed from the cup. For small parts such as wreaths there is no need for a stiffener for the mold. The mold can then be used to make parts using casting resin which only takes a few minutes to mix, pour, cure and remove from the mold. Allan

Glenn brings up an important point. Sapelli or the "walnut" found in some kit boxes are not appropriate woods for ship models in most cases. It is porous with a lot of visible grain and often brittle thus difficult to work. A tight grain should be a major consideration. Consider buying a good quality wood and replace the sapelli. Boxwood, Alaskan cedar, basswood, Swiss pear, and other species folks here can recommend. Dry bending works, but there is nothing wrong with soaking a strip before shaping as it often makes it easier to shape plank around the bending piece as seen in post 7. Both methods have worked well for many members. Allan

I respectfully disagree. There will be problems as the bulkheads are not marked out for the proper width of the planks. The width of the strakes is dynamic from stem to stern but these appear to be the same width their entire length. Bob, I realize most kits do not show proper planking techniques but if you have not already done so, study the videos by Chuck Passaro on how to plank a hull. It will help to wind up with a high quality realistic planking of your hull. Allan

Welcome to MSW!!! Not sure what series Dave is referencing, but there is one that others have tried and have great things to say. https://modelexpo-online.com/Model-Shipways-Shipwright-3-Kit-Combo-Series_p_5465.html Hopefully you can find these from some other supplier that is not so far away from you.

No matter how you do the hold down, pins or clamps I have found that the best way to go about the heating process (at least for me) is to use a heat gun. A hair dryer will work, but it was frowned upon by the admiral when I did that. An industrial heat gun is easily adjustable plus had higher temperature limits and was cheaper than a hair dryer. It is sometimes hard to maneuver a heating iron around the clamps and pins where as the gun gets heat to all points. Allan

Hi Highlanderburial It appears you did not mark out the plank widths at each bulkhead which may be part of the problem. The width of the plank is dynamic as it goes from the stem to the stern. If you have not already done so maybe consider studying David Antscherl's planking writeup here in the MSW Articles archive and Chuck Passaro's videos on planking and you will have an easier time of it on the next planking job. Allan

If you need to use the pre-cut strips, you can probably succeed using Chuck's method instead of what you show in your photo. What you show does not follow his method. After lining out the bulkheads and subsequently tapering the width of the plank follow part three where you can see that there is a hold down for the plank so it does not ride up and a former piece with the curve that is needed. Allan )

Thank you for the compliment!

Hi Ross! What scale? Plank on frame might be a bit difficult at 1:85 if that is the appropriate scale, but certainly can be done. As the boats were stowed right side up do you want the interiors to look realistic, including having all the pieces to scale? I have had the most success using a method similar to what Frolich describes in his book Art of Ship Modeling. It is also described in detail in volume II of HMS Euryalus. You can also try a method similar to that used by several kit makers including the Medway long boat by Syren. A 38 gun frigate of 1794 would probably have had five or six boats including a 24 foot launch, a 30 foot pinnace, a 24 foot cutter and 18 foot cutter plus two smaller boats based in information from May's The Boats of Men of War.. It sometimes varied from ship to ship based on the preference of the captain. For a model, most folks would only include 2 to 4 boats. You can find great information, including scantlings for each boat in the W.E. May book. Below are a 1:48 scale cutter, pinnace, and launch built using the methods detailed in the Euryalus book. Allan

I agree totally. If you have misunderstood it based on the RMG description, you are certainly not alone!!😁😁 RMG is run by people so as with all of us, mistakes happen, including the written descriptions. This would not be the first I have seen. This may be the case here as there is one man per thwart rowing so would be considered single banked by any definition I have ever seen. I just did another quick definition search and every one that I read states a variation of the following A boat that is "double banked" has two crew members sitting on each thwart, each pulling an oar on their side of the boat. In a "single banked" boat, there is one person on each thwart pulling one oar. There is no mention anywhere of empty thwarts between rowers. With a breadth of about 6 feet, there is not enough room for two rowers on one thwart. There has been a lot of discussion and sketches here at MSW lately regarding the minimum breadth for a double banked boat and the consensus is that it would be at least 6 feet 9 inches and more likely wider. Allan

BE She looks like a really nice boat!! Is she single banked or double banked, hard to tell from the photos on the box. It seems to have twelve thwarts but 6 tholes per side so I assume single banked. By the same token from the photo it looks like there are six pairs of tholes lined up for the same thwart so every other thwart is not being used. At 1:64 scale and 29mm breadth that is only about 6 feet so it leads me to believe single banked like the following RMG model and plans.