allanyed

Hi Dziadeczek I was not referring to the capstan which obviously has nothing to do with a round house. A round house, or poop (from the French for stern, La Poupe) is a totally different thing. The poop sat atop the quarter deck. Examples of 50, 64 and 74 gun ships follow. I may be wrong on this, but I believe the term came from the fact that the deck beams of the round house had a round up from 8" to 12" depending on the era and size of the ship. Compare this to a range of 6" to 8.5" on the upper decks, and 3" to 6" on the gun deck, again depending on the era and vessel size. Allan

Hi Doug, One point to keep in mind going forward, the grating, the opening of which are about 2.5" to 3", should be closed on all four sides rather than open. I find it easier to make the gratings then fit the head ledges and coaming pieces around it. Overall the size may be slightly different than on the plans, but very close if not right on the mark. Allan

As stated above it takes a library, albeit a small one to get started. Great advice has been given above. I highly recommend Goodwin's The Construction and Fitting of the English Man of War and Brian Lavery's The Arming and Fitting of English Ships of War 1600-1815. For rigging, there are several, but the best by far, and I think many would agree, when it comes to explanations and accuracy, is David Lees' The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War 1625-1860. There are also free sources that are useful. The formulas in Lees' book for sizing masts, spars and lines have been put into a spread sheet by the late Danny Vadas and available here at MSW in the Articles data base. It is spot on except for the period from 1670 to 1711 where he did not use the right initial formula so everything is completely wrong for that time span and should not be used. To learn how to properly plank ships of that era the 4 part You Tube Video by Chuck Passaro and the article Primer on Planking by professional ship modeler and author David Antscherl, both of who are members here, which can be found here at MSW in the Articles data base are hard to beat. Even if you are kit building, these articles and books will help you immensely. And there are thousands of free low resolution contemporary plans and photos of models on the RMG Collections site as well as free high resolution versions of nearly 1000 of these (along with about 2000 low res) on the Wiki Commons site. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Ship_plans_of_the_Royal_Museums_Greenwich It is all part of the journey and should be a most pleasurable one. Allan

Hi Mark, Thanks for the additional photos, they are great to see. MANY thanks for the compliment on my scantlings book, I really appreciate your thoughtfulness in mentioning it. Allan

Either this or the Primer on Planking by David Antscherl in the Articles section here at MSW will serve you well. I have used both methods and find them to be equally effective in yielding tight fits and proper tapering, especially at the bow to avoid, or at least minimize, the use of drop strakes. Allan

Hi Gregory, This is probably just a matter of terminology, and your reasoning about the glass panes makes a lot of sense, but when I looked at the plans you posted on your build log there is no round house (poop) so this is a little confusing. I did find a contemporary model of a similar size ship on the RMG Collections site that does have glass panes on the doors of the bulkhead under the QD, but it looks like there may be panes on the center part of the bulkhead as well. Just as a side note, researching the scantlings in the various Establishments starting in 1719 , The Shipbuilder's Repository (1788) and Steel's Elements & Practice of Naval Architecture there is no poop (round house) on ships smaller than 50 guns. There are a lot of photos of 50 gun and larger ships at RMG that show the round house and the panes are on the doors as you suggest. Some of these models also show panes on both the poop and the QD bulkheads between the doors as well as on the doors. Lots of choices from which to pick😀 Allan

Hi Jon Wayne Kempson's paper in the Articles database here at MSW addresses the lofting of square and cant frames that may be of some help. DraftingShipPlansInCAD.pdf Allan

Keep up the good work!! I realize this is the first layer of planking so far. On your second layer of planking, will you be following the same sweep of the strakes where they follow the line of the gunports or more like how the planking actually laid as in the contemporary model of the Bellona below? I marked the run of the planking with a black lines so it is easier to see. For those that have not seen them, there are 8 great photos of the contemporary model of Bellona at RMG which are pretty clear even at the lower resolution and show the planking very clearly as well as the photos in Yve's Bellona build log here at MSW. Thanks for sharing your build! Allan

Your P-51 is fantastic and it brought back memories of the Red Baron P-51 that the late and great Daryl Greenamyer flew at the Reno air races and his quest for the altitude record in the F-104. I worked for PPG Coatings and Resins division back in those days which provided the technology and paint itself for the 104 and had the privilege of meeting him several times. Four of us flew up to Tonapah, Nevada from SNA in Orange County and was up close and personal at Mud Lake in 1976 when he was going for the low altitude speed record. He broke it unofficially that year, but made it official the following year. Allan

Hi Mark Many many thanks for the photos and drawing. I hope you don't mind my asking, but how did you get those great photos? Allan

Hi Ken, VERY neat work! One comment/question, hope that is OK. It may be me or the photos are not clear, but your blocks look to be mostly upside down. Allan

Doug, I have had the extremely good fortune of having mentors in various areas of this hobby for many years that have guided and taught me. Each of them is a member here at MSW so you are in a good place as everyone seems to be happy to share their own knowledge and experience. Forgotten things??? My memory sucks so a good library is also extremely helpful. Some folks here have hundreds of books but personally I have far fewer in total and find that I only use about a dozen of them on a regular basis. Allan

Thanks Mark What I recall seeing is mostly see single row for the orlop and double rows on decks with a larger number of hatches as well as ordnance. Barring anything more concrete that is the route I am going on this experimental project. At 1:200 scale a lot of details are being left out or simplified but the pillar rows can be seen thus my desire to do a little research into it. Allan

Hi Bob, Glad to see another member join the spiled planking club and avoid the completely unrealistic and poorly done planking designs seen in many kits. Allan

Why do you say this? The rope on on the left looks like cable laid rope which was commonly used on stays, preventer stays et al. The quality looks typical of many kit manufacturers, that is, it's horrible, but the twist does seem to be OK depending on where it is to be used. Thanks Allan

Huge welcome to MSW Mango! Allan

There are pillars between decks and I have found scantlings for them circa 1800 in Steel as well as the Establishments, but what I cannot find, so far, is if they are in a single row or double row depending on the deck. What I need at this point is specifically for a 32 gun, mid to late 18th century. I can see a double row of pillars in the photo below under the QD but cannot find information on the pillars under the upper deck beams. I did look at quite a few inboard profile drawings of 32s and similar size vessels but none of the ones I researched show any pillars on the plans. Any help would be appreciated finding a book or other source that gives specifics or even general information on pillars on various size vessels. At this point I am assuming a double row would be appropriate for the UD but would love to see more information based on contemporary sources. TIA Allan

Thanks Roger, much appreciated. Now, anyone have any suggestions for exceptional restaurants? If they have kidneys on the menu, I'm in!!!

Thanks Ken! Great suggestions all!!! We were considering MSM, as it is one of the places that is still on the France bucket list. Thanks again Allan

Hi Doug, If you want to replicate treenails, which would be wood on Bounty, and have it look like it is fully framed, figure at least 5000-6000. If you plan only to treenail the few frames from the kit, maybe consider leaving them off. No matter what you decide to do SUBTLETY is key. They should be barely visible otherwise it will look like so many of the models we see that look like they have a very severe case of acne. Metal is inappropriate, but making wooden treenails is not difficult and various methods have been discussed at length recently here at MSW including using draw plates and hypodermic needles as drills. Allan

Welcome to you up there in big sky country. Allan

Ordinarily, "modern" vessels are not my cup of tea, but as I am reading D-Day, 6th of June by Stephen Ambrose once again in preparation for our second visit to Normandy next spring, your build log has been of special interest to me. I have gotten a much better feeling of the design and size of these vessels from your work and thank you for posting the many fine photos. This trip will include Carentan, Caen, St. Mere Eglise, and hopefully a couple other pertinent towns in Calvados next spring. If you (or anyone here) has spent at least a few days in the landing areas, suggestions on "whats and wheres" from hotels to restaurants would be great. Any other book suggestions would also be welcome. The only other ones I have read that cover D-Day are E Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne by Ambrose and The Longest Day by Cornelius Ryan. Allan

Penfold, Thank you for the compliment. 😀 Allan

Penfold The short answer is that ordinarily you would not see the name anywhere on a Royal Navy vessel until more modern times. The Admiralty did not allow names on their vessels with the exception of between 1780 and 1790. I have seen two or three contemporary models outside this time period, including the Bellona 1760 that did in fact have a name on the counter. Presumably not having the name had to do with minimizing information available to enemy nations. As she was built as a Cherokee-class 10 gun brig sloop for the Royal Navy perhaps Beagle, while not a warship in later years, continued to follow this edict throughout her life. I realize we see a number of kits that have names on the stern, but with the exception of that 10 year span this was not normally the case in real life. Note that when they were on the stern they were painted (not carved letters) and usually, if not always, on the upper counter which are part of the stern timbers. There were also specifications on the sizes of the letters that varied over that 10 year period. Allan

It is great to see someone like yourself wanting to delve deeply into the history of the vessel and do a lot of research! One of the great things about selecting this particular vessel, is that you have the 10 very detailed contemporary plans available at RMG from when she was converted to a research vessel so you can make sure the kit got it right or fix things if they got something wrong. Have you found many/any differences between the contemporary plans at RMG and the kit version of Terror? Allan