allanyed

Definitely not the one I have.  I will do a bit of research to see what I can find similar to your yours.  Thanks Paul
Allan

I love the tool holder.  I have one but it is a Veritas and a great device but it has not worked for me on my very narrow carving chisels.   Is the holder/guide you use commercially available?
Thanks!!
Allan

Ferrus manus.... (that looks like a flesh hand in the photo😀)
Have you looked at the methods used in the books by the masters of the tiny scale, McCaffery, McNarry and Reed?  They cover how to make rigging items such as blocks, what materials to use for lines, and more.   Your scale is larger by comparison, but there may be some great tips for you.
 
Allan

NB
Using filler blocks is a wise move.  If you have not already studied it, the contemporary model at RMG may be of some help not to mention the plans they have of Diana 1794.  Note that as she is post 1790, she does not carry her name on the stern which was by Admiralty orders (maybe not universally adhered to😀)
https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-66303  


 

I am working on the Blomefield 3D files now. Right now I'm in the middle of a month long family emergency. When it gets resolved (hopefully by the end of this week), I'll draw the 32 pounder as the next one.

Allan it was Veritas, this is photo from a uk supplier. It’s not a link as they often disappear but it shows what you are looking for.
Regards
Paul
 

Definitely not the one I have.  I will do a bit of research to see what I can find similar to your yours.  Thanks Paul
Allan

I love the tool holder.  I have one but it is a Veritas and a great device but it has not worked for me on my very narrow carving chisels.   Is the holder/guide you use commercially available?
Thanks!!
Allan

Thank You
I havent tried but I dont know why you would do that.  At least once the pear blocks are available I mean.   But while you wait You could try dying them.  Several people do that and it looks great.  Greg Herbert did that with my blocks on his Speedwell model.  These are basically my BARGAIN rigging blocks dyed with Fiebing's dye.  You can see these are darker than those posted by the other Greg...I dont know what color dye he used or how long you have to soak them for.
 

It looks like it may be too late on this project but did you look at printed cannon?  I have purchased them at 1:64 for about $0.75 a piece including shipping (in the USA).  I sent an STL drawing of each size to the printer and had them back in about a week.  They are as detailed as the drawings including the cypher even at that small scale.  I have 2D drawings of various size Spanish barrels used circa 1765-1808 and 1718-1765 but we have not gotten to these in 3D yet.   You are welcome to the 2D if you want to get them done in 3D drawings so you can get them printed.   A larger scale printed British barrel of 1760 can be seen https://modelshipworld.com/topic/35120-armstrong-frederick-cannon-by-allanyed-124-scale/ to get an idea of the detail. 
Smaller scale pieces are below in the British Commonwealth pattern circa 1650-1716  Note the conical trunnions for that period.
Allan
 

I love the tool holder.  I have one but it is a Veritas and a great device but it has not worked for me on my very narrow carving chisels.   Is the holder/guide you use commercially available?
Thanks!!
Allan

Hello and thank you again for all the likes and nice comments.
today I finished the second lower finishing  I made it one and a half time. Don't ask me  But now it's done  Tomorrow I will start with painting them. The left is the new one.

I’ve just sharpened my miniature chisels for the second time
 

I bought these with a large dose of scepticism as apart from 4 years rearing chickens I have spent all my professional life in the pursuit of the best cutting tools. I’m in my mid sixties now, so that’s been a while.
 

As expected, when they arrived they were not finished when it came to edge confirmation. I spent the best part of a day getting them  to where I thought they could best perform.
 

I have just completed the hull on the Syren model HMS Cheerful which has been done in Costello Boxwood. These chisels have been exemplary. I can happily state that the whole process would have been much more difficult without them.
Those previous 2 pictures are trying to show that the steel used is good enough to take a “shaving” edge. I know it’s a little bizarre to shave your own hand and I accept no responsibility for any of you attempting similar, but it does prove a point.
 
This is a simple set up using 600, 1000 and 3000 grit stones in a sunken bath of water.

After completing a hull, it took less than an hour to reinstate a good edge on all three chisels.

Its not easy to get a good shot of the edge with a phone camera.

Get in touch if I can help with your chisel sharpening challenge. I’m sure you recognise these chisels and I have no relationship to the manufacturer. They are however the real deal, albeit in miniature.
 
Cheers folks, I hope that might be useful.
 
regards
Paul

Thanks to fellow member Ron Thibault's work in preparing   3D drawings of the Armstrong Frederick pattern, a realistic barrel was easy to have made.   Details of the George III cypher and the flash pan as well as astragal rings can be seen below.
Allan
 

 

 

Using the well researched book by McKay is a brilliant move.   
Allan
 
 

Kolvir
Don't neglect the contemporary drawings at RMG Collections -  https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/search/Valiant plans   - and the scantlings which can be found in the book Scantlings of Royal Navy Ships which includes the 1719, 1745, and 1750 Establishments.  They should make for a complete set of information for you.
The plans on the RMG site are low res but you can buy high res from them although they are not cheap.  There are five high res plans of the 74s Ramillies' (1763); 'Terrible' (1762); 'Russell' (1764); 'Invincible' (1765); 'Magnificent' (1766); 'Prince of Wales' (1765); 'Marlborough' (1767); and 'Robust' (1764) on the Wiki Commons site that you may find to be better as they are super clear and will be apropos for a mid 18th century 74.   They can be found on page two of https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Ship_plans_of_the_Royal_Museums_Greenwich&filefrom='Hayling'+(1760)+RMG+J0259.png#mw-category-media   Hope this is a little help.
Allan

You mention the ship Mars but then the Speedy.   There were many ships named Mars from different nations so a clear answer is not easy.  Assuming you are speaking about the Speedy of 1782.  If you use the design by Steel shown in James Lees' The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War dated 1795 it may be OK.  He also shows a version from a model built to the 1745 Establishment that is similar.   Earlier and later designs were different.
The photo below is from  The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War  page 23 ISBN  0-87021-948-0  The battens taper from 4 inches thick to 2 inches thick according to Lees.  The outer part of the battens rest on top of the rim rather than ending at the same height.   Maybe too complex to duplicate at 1:64, but adding the taper to the battens should be reasonably easy.
Allan

good evening everyone
day 191 -6 foremast standing rigging
with the lower shrouds completed onto the futtock shrouds, the deadeye assemblies are slightly different to that of the Caldercraft Victory in that the futtocks actually keep the deadeyes from pulling out rather than a catch that locks them into the channel
the futtock staves are just a piece of 1mm brass rod

 
 

Many years ago, my friend passed away. He was only 41 years old. I was actually working on this ship when I received a phone call to tell me the terrible news. I painted a tribute to Daniel on one of the bulkheads: 
 

Over the years, the partially completed ship has been on display in my living room and I see that memorial every time I looked at the ship. I could not bear to cover it up forever, so I installed some magnets - those silver things on each corner of the hole. This way I can remove the grate and look at the memorial. 
 

Once the grate is installed, you would never suspect that it could be removed to reveal a hidden message inside. 

Post Eight-one
 
Quarterdeck knees
Prepping the knees didn’t take that long, but it helps to have a system.

2088

2098
Fitting these parts does mess up the painted bulwarks, fortunately there is plenty of room for cleaning up. Were I doing this job again I would have left the area of the beams covered by the knees unpainted before fitting, also the sides of the hanging knees where they attach to beam and Lodging knees.
Easier to touch in the paintwork rather than scrape away, and then have to clean up and re-touch anyway.
 
This time I fitted the full hanging knees first, followed by the short versions, and then the Lodging knees.

2092
This photo shows the trimming necessary to allow the knee to sit flush with the beam camber. The rebate on the back edge was lengthened a little to allow the knee to meet the beam camber at the deck clamps.

2099
I had imagined that fitting the Qtr deck Hanging knees would be trickier than those of the Foc’sle due to the tumblehome of the topsides.
Surprisingly I found the opposite, but perhaps my experience with the Foc’sle improved my dexterity.

2114
As with the Foc’sle the Lodging knees presented little issues.

2107

2118
I also added the hanging knees fitted below the Waist beams. Three should be fitted but the aftermost location is fouled by the large cleat to take the Fore sheets.🤔

2106
The Foc’sle beams were given a clean up.

2109

2115

2119
 
Onto the deck layout.
 
 
B.E.
22/09/2023
 
 
 

Kits are simplified, but you can modify things to make them more like the 'real thing' as little or as much as you wish. Allan has shown you how it was done in the mid to late 18th century on British ships.

You mention the ship Mars but then the Speedy.   There were many ships named Mars from different nations so a clear answer is not easy.  Assuming you are speaking about the Speedy of 1782.  If you use the design by Steel shown in James Lees' The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War dated 1795 it may be OK.  He also shows a version from a model built to the 1745 Establishment that is similar.   Earlier and later designs were different.
The photo below is from  The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War  page 23 ISBN  0-87021-948-0  The battens taper from 4 inches thick to 2 inches thick according to Lees.  The outer part of the battens rest on top of the rim rather than ending at the same height.   Maybe too complex to duplicate at 1:64, but adding the taper to the battens should be reasonably easy.
Allan

Hi Bob,
It is super that you went ahead with building your own ship's boat.  (There were no life boats back then 😀)  For the future and for those that may be building this kit there is a good set of scantlings for ships' boats available that can be found in Boats of Men of War and Scantlings of the Royal Navy.  Attached is the Excel version.   Note the breadth of the thwarts for example.  They would have been about 9.5" (0.15" at 1:64)  broad.  Looking at contemporary plans there is about a 21" (0.328" at 1:64)  space between them.  (There were variations over the years and regarding the type of boat, but 8 to 10 inches would be about right.) For a 14 gun sloop there were likely a 16 foot long boat or launch and a 24 or 25 foot pinnace.  In 1777 an 18 foot cutter may have been added.  These were probably all single banked, not double banked as the kit shows. There are a number of high resolution plans for various types of ship's boats on the WikiCommons site as well as a lot in low res on the RMG Collections site that may be of help as well.
Allan
Boat Scantlings 1-28-14.xlsx

Your build is fun to watch, your work is lovely!   Gonna be fun not breaking the sprit or knocking over the model while maneuvering with the rigging.   
Hope you do not get bitten 😀

Hi Bob,
It is super that you went ahead with building your own ship's boat.  (There were no life boats back then 😀)  For the future and for those that may be building this kit there is a good set of scantlings for ships' boats available that can be found in Boats of Men of War and Scantlings of the Royal Navy.  Attached is the Excel version.   Note the breadth of the thwarts for example.  They would have been about 9.5" (0.15" at 1:64)  broad.  Looking at contemporary plans there is about a 21" (0.328" at 1:64)  space between them.  (There were variations over the years and regarding the type of boat, but 8 to 10 inches would be about right.) For a 14 gun sloop there were likely a 16 foot long boat or launch and a 24 or 25 foot pinnace.  In 1777 an 18 foot cutter may have been added.  These were probably all single banked, not double banked as the kit shows. There are a number of high resolution plans for various types of ship's boats on the WikiCommons site as well as a lot in low res on the RMG Collections site that may be of help as well.
Allan
Boat Scantlings 1-28-14.xlsx