allanyed

Too many entries to click 'like' on, so consider them all liked! One small point: the window frames would look much better if you squared up the corners. All the other carved work is lovely.

Thank you Jason and Allan  for you help in the problems with the quarter galleries and wales , It seems to me that every time I deviate from the Caldercraft drawing and use other means there are consequences further down the line. As I wasn't happy with the quarter galleries where they meet with the top of the wales, I decided to check the position of the top of wales against the Caldercraft plans ( heights above the keel at each gun port)  there are some discrepencees between this and the distance below each gun port taken from the AOTS book. It is my belief that as I altered the height of the gun ports to ensure that the Bloomfield cannon would be central in the gun port , I may have changed the position of the top plank of the wale, when taking measurements from the gun port.  I therefore decided to use the measurement from the keel at each gun port from the Caldercraft plans  instead of from the bottom of the gun ports ( measured from the AOTS Diana). Interestingy enough this has not altered the height of the wale of any significance at the stem and stern. For what it is worth I decided to remove the original first planks of the wale and re position them( using new ones)  and taking  the measurement from the keel and hopefully this will give the lines a better look. 
          Jason your idea of the quarter galleries in the kit being too big is definately worth exploring and may be the answer I have been looking for. Allen the problem with the counter is not that it bends too far as bending it further would move the quarter gallery further forward and then would end up too close to the last quarter deck gun port. If anything I thought about extendng the frame to move the stern counter further aft if anything  but think that is a bit drastic. Allan I am pleased you posted those drawings as it does look like the supplied stern galleries are way too big. I will need to check these sizes with the AOTS book sizes as I am unsure how to take the sizes from RMG Diana and see where I am with this.
          I would like to thank you guys again for your help and guidence as it is helping me a great deal. I would also like to thank everyone else for all the likes as this is encouraging me to keep going.
                Here is what I hope is the final position of the wale . These are the 1mm walnut planks which sit under the final layer of planks. I will probably use walnut for the wale as this will be painted black.
         
  

A wise decision!!!  
 

Glenn,
What of the upper decks?  😀 If you do go with treenails, they really should be barely visible.   Bamboo is easy to draw to very small diameter and is subtle in color. But, for 1:64 they should be about 0.011 to 0.015" (0.3mm to 0.4mm)    Drill bits that small exist, but making treenails that small can be an exercise in futility.  It is easier to just drill the holes then fill the holes with watered down white or yellow glue then sand the deck while the glue is still wet which will fill the holes.  Small sections at a time are called for.   Alternatively you can drill, sand and then spray a clear coat to keep the dust in the holes.   Testing scrap pieces is of course a good idea if you have not done this before.  Cheap bits are not worth the trouble, but good jobber bit prices may be prohibitive. 
 
It is easier for the hull as they have bigger treenails closer to 0.6mm diameter at 1:64.  The downside is that there were well over 100 frames that would have been be treenailed so even if only in the areas not painted or coppered there are several thousand needed.   Fun times!!!
 
Allan

Hi Glenn,
At your scale it is a very nice change to see a fine job of planking that has not been ruined with stark out of scale trennals as seen in so many build logs.  Less is more, and none is probably best.
Allan
 

Best quote of the day!!

Hard to tell from the photos what is what dimensionally, but you are right it does look oversized.  
David, maybe the below will help.  From RMG for Diana,  Artois et al     In the photos it seems the counters do not curve far enough forward.  Might just be the angle of the photos.   Pic at the QD is below to check.
Allan

 

Best quote of the day!!

A wise decision!!!  
 

No treenails with any of deck planking😀

Best quote of the day!!

Hi Glenn,
At your scale it is a very nice change to see a fine job of planking that has not been ruined with stark out of scale trennals as seen in so many build logs.  Less is more, and none is probably best.
Allan
 

Best quote of the day!!

Best quote of the day!!

Hi guy's! A little over a month and 15 more frames added. Fairing continues after every 5-6 frames. I can't stress how important it is to fair as you go along. The hull shape is constantly changing, so the previously faired section needs additional work in order to match the newly faired section. Additional supports were added above the gun ports.

Mike

Thank you! I too have admired the legendary skill of Doris and her creations.  She is an inspiration to us all. 
 
The first photo was ripped from the Seahorse website, and is of the original test model. I don’t know the exact fabric used, but it’s got to be soft cotton or linen. If you Google something like “seahorse Badger scratch” you can find the original build logs in English and Polish. 

-Meriadoc

It is so good to see such a well executed card model.   After following Doris' build in years past, and now your build it is great to know card models are an alternative way to create a masterpiece. 
 
What is the material of the sails in the first photo?   
Thanks
Allan

Regarding your builds for the Mayflower and Golden Hind, what do you mean by "set"?   Cannon were not typically run out unless being used.  If you want them as they would normally be sitting they would either be inboard with the muzzle of the barrels secured up against the bulwarks or sometimes the cannon were turned to lay next to the bulkheads in a fore and aft position.   With the tight quarters and the passengers on Mayflower having only about 70 feet of deck space, having the cannon laying fore and aft against the bulkhead may make more sense.
 
Many folks probably don't care but keep in mind that English cannon patterns  and carriages in 1577 and 1620 were different than later patterns starting with the Browne and Pitt patterns in the 1627.   Even the carriages were quite different.   Small caliber cannon carriages such as those for minions and sakers that Mayflower carried sometimes only had two rolling trucks and the rigging was different than in later years.    
 
Allan

I cover with oil inside and out to the same level.

Hello,
Do you ever see a painting of a ship and become struck with the magic, serenity, or majesty of the scene and wish to try to create something similar in a model?
 
I had picked up this kit of the Badger from Seahorse, intending to keep it around as a back-burner project with no clear start date in mind. Something to piece together as I mulled over problems on more important projects:

Months before that, I had found floating around the internet a 19th c. painting by one Richard Brydges Beechey of a ship of the line taking in her sails (HMS Asia of Navarino fame- and look at those stu’n’s’ls coming in):

I saw this painting and thought, “wow, that would be a magnificent effect to pull off some hypothetical day when one has room for a giant fully-rigged ship of the line in one’s house and has mastered scale sail manipulation, scale gravity, and patience!”
Then, for better or worse I realized I didn’t have to wait for some hypothetical day and could give it a go with the Badger; it has enough sails with the addition of some royals (likely enough for an ambitious commander to rig up), it’s in the stash, and I need experience so might as well try. And now this is my main project. This is not how this year was supposed to go. 
 
Before going much further, I want to talk about the ship. There is a well-known Jotika kit as well as the fantastic Seahorse paper kit I’m building. Plans and log excerpts from the ship are available in Nelson’s Ships by Peter Goodwin, while background history and even more plans are available in Howard I. Chapelle’s The Search for Speed Under Sail. 
You may have heard this ship introduced as Horatio Nelson’s first command, however that is almost certainly not quite the case, as Chapelle records.  The Badger in the admiralty draft (lines taken June 1777, Portsmouth)-and thus in all the models- was indeed an effective patrol sloop which quite impressed Vice Admiral Gayton on the Caribbean station, but by October she was in a sorry state and he indicated in November correspondence that he would have her replaced with another vessel he had purchased. Young Nelson took command of “Badger” essentially at the start of the new year (‘78) and the logs indicate a refit is taking place at that time. After this point new things are mentioned in the log not mentioned before- royals as well as a spritsail topsail set on multiple occasions. 
 
It is never mentioned in the log, but we can be confident that the ship was replaced and the winter was spent transferring everything useful over to the newly purchased brig, whose name was now Badger, and she simply inherited the log and navy register position of the previous Badger. I think this was a common enough practice in the history of the navy, especially when it had to maintain numbers despite high wear & tear on a foreign station. The takeaway is that we have no idea what young Horatio Nelson’s Badger looked like exactly. But we know in astonishing detail what Lieutenant Everitt’s Badger looked like!
 
Chapelle’s data include spar dimensions from the admiralty draft and a sail plan, which indeed differs from the lovely Seahorse plans. The kit plans generally have spars a bit too long and masts a bit too tall (and the boom is too short and the gaff too long). 
Book vs kit- not to scale:

 
Below is a detailed model shown in Chapelle’s book:

The main mast is to have a spread yard for the foot of the topsail on a rope horse (as opposed to putting the gaff and boom on a separate pole) and an improvised flying main course on a slightly smaller crojack- held in place only by the halyard. 
 
This disparity in spar sizes presented a bit of a dilemma but I’m thinking I will stick with the dimensions from the kit,  as this project is much more about stunsail art than historical accuracy, and the differences are not drastic. (Definitely has nothing to do with the fact that I had already enthusiastically prepared some spars and am too lazy to go back and redo it in this case..)  Furthermore, I’m nervous the visual effect I want to achieve might not work as well with the slightly smaller top-hamper- this entire project being one giant visual experiment after all. 

{Intermission music}🎵

 
So about building the actual ship.
I started sticking the hull together in January. Goes together like a charm. Buy the laser-cut parts. Stick the frame together.  Cover with paper cutouts for stability. Do your longitudinal strakes with gel CA applied only to frame edges.  Final planking with printed paper (but you must edge-paint everything appropriately on the outer layer). Then it was time to do the wales, various deck fittings, and engineer cannons using toothpick shafts, paper layering, wire bands, and a glue drop for the ball.  





 
I dry brushed the guns lightly with dark grey, but forgot to add touchholes…

The kit includes paper wedges to roll cannons with, but I found this concept to be unworkable with either thick or thin paper for 1/100 four-pounders, thus toothpicks were butchered for my guns. 
 
I’ve also been assembling the laser-cut blocks, preparing the masts and larger spars, and starting to think about scrap experiments to try to finesse the clewed-up sails and dangling stunsails. 
I made a rough plan to relate the visual effect of the painting inspiration to the actual ship I’m building with its particular spar anatomy. 

And I’m taking bets as to how long you think this will take to finish
The nice thing is that this time, I don’t have to engineer the entire rig and belaying scheme from guesswork and low-budget research. Seahorse has it all planned; I just need to make a few additions. Those will be:
-Flying royals (needed for visual effect)
-Flying main course (will look nice and it’s even correct) 
-Stunsail inhauls (needed to achieve the dangly stunsails- for some reason these lines are absent from the Seahorse drawings) 
 
Wish me luck!
-Meriadoc

Regarding your builds for the Mayflower and Golden Hind, what do you mean by "set"?   Cannon were not typically run out unless being used.  If you want them as they would normally be sitting they would either be inboard with the muzzle of the barrels secured up against the bulwarks or sometimes the cannon were turned to lay next to the bulkheads in a fore and aft position.   With the tight quarters and the passengers on Mayflower having only about 70 feet of deck space, having the cannon laying fore and aft against the bulkhead may make more sense.
 
Many folks probably don't care but keep in mind that English cannon patterns  and carriages in 1577 and 1620 were different than later patterns starting with the Browne and Pitt patterns in the 1627.   Even the carriages were quite different.   Small caliber cannon carriages such as those for minions and sakers that Mayflower carried sometimes only had two rolling trucks and the rigging was different than in later years.    
 
Allan

Ahhhh, teak decks.   The old adage, would you rather spend your time on the boat working on the teak decks or would you rather be sailing?  Not enough time for both. 
Do boat yards use teak anymore?  Teak and mahogany are endangered wood species so with most of the remaining trees in Myanmar and their problems, is it even possible to get teak in any quantity?   
 
We have a carved 7 piece teak salad bowl set from 1969 (wedding gift).   The boss keeps a close eye on it in case I get any crazy ideas about using the wood for other than salads.  
 
Allan

Very good point about the line size.  If you can squeeze double the line through the holes in the blocks the line is twice the circumference that it should be.  In general most builders find that undersize is better looking than over size on ship models.    
Allan

Great video Kevin
What is extra nice is that you show the mistakes and explain what causes these and how to avoid them.
Thanks for sharing. 
Allan