Stockholm tar

Eamonn, Looking good, nice work. I tend though (well, you did say) not to put pins through the actual plank itself, which might split, but use pins that have a 'shoulder', positioning them directly into the bulkheads on the outside of the plank being glued. This ensures no damage to the plank and the pin's shoulder holds it tight against the frame. This might be a little slower, but I don't think this matters much if you are correctly planking both sides simultaneously, which you obviously are! However, if this works for you... I was a little surprised you used nails, as I'm not sure they're really necessary, provided you've enough bend in the plank, good glue, and bow blocks. The heads can also cause problems later when it comes to sanding. Just one other thing ('only one?' I hear you ask). With regard to those frame tops, I bet later on in the instructions it says something like, 'with a pair of pliers, twist off the frame tops, and then clean up the stumps with sandpaper...' I read that, when at this stage on Sherbourne, and thought 'no way, I'm not going to risk doing any damage'. I then decided to cut about halfway through the frames at deck level (but still leaving the frame top reasonably rigid). They later came away much easier, and there was also less to clean up. You might want to consider doing that, perhaps after you have finished the first planking. I don't know if you have a Dremel, but if you have, the round cutting attachment should do the job. Be very careful though, and cut just the frame tops! Dang! You've sussed me with regard to Amazon. Seriously though, they can be expensive, so its worth looking around for cheaper deals – although their Marketplace usually offers things at reduced prices. Finally, I do remember The Plank, a great piece of classic comedy. I bet that's on utube somewhere too! The one I always remember is, the Blood Donor – 'That's almost an armful!'

Eamonn, or is that Methusala?, I agree. I have Period Ship Handbooks 1/2, but yes, I would think they are all worth a look. As you've probably found out, the books are based on his building of various kits, not just from the box but with added touches and improvements to make them more interesting. He also gives many useful hints and tips, making the builds more logical than as given in the instructional manuals. Bit like MSW! I don't think the Ballahoo, unfortunately, is one he built, but for anyone building any of those that he did, his review of the model in question (often running to several pages) is certainly worth having. As Nigel said, they are worth getting anyway. Mind how you go now...

Eamonn, That looks good too, and it shouldn't be too shiny. Keith Julier normally has some good tips.

Eamonn, I think you mean the 'wale', perhaps? Sounds a good colour scheme, but I'm just wondering about the white stuff below the waterline, especially as the model is quite small. Perhaps an off-white? I actually used ivory on the Sherbourne, which apart from not being too glaring, gives it something of an 'old' look. You might try it on a test piece and see if it works. Just a thought.

Eamonn, Yes, I can see up in Time Square on that moving news strip (whatever its called) right now... mind you the people down below look rather confused! I take it this is the garboard plank, the awkward one? If so, did you cut a rabbit, sorry, rabbet? Looking forward to a picture of this momentous event.

Jan, That's the spirit. You can also add, we've also learnt something along the way too. When you come back to do the deck, do take your time over it. You'll be glad you did as, even though parts of it will be covered by deck fittings, it will still be visible in places. Also, many who see your model won't even notice your deck planking, and certainly won't know whether you've laid it correctly – the kick though, is that you will know! So read Ulises planking guide through first. I notice he doesn't go into joggling planks into the margin, or at least I didn't see anything, but it would probably be worth getting a good modelling book, such as Tony suggested, which covers it. I'm sure we can help too. Meanwhile, you're not laying a floor in your house are you?

Hi Jan, Ok. It sounds like a good idea to have a bit of a rest from it, and a rethink, rather than plodding on and perhaps worsening the situation. Believe me, I've been there too, as have most of us! Continuing when you're in this state of mind doesn't do either the model, or perhaps more importantly yourself, any good. Planking the deck from the centre out is the better way to go, and you'll probably find that things fall into place more logically. I was going to suggest looking at the database for suggestions as to the mysteries of deck planking, but I see Tony has already done so. The deck plan, on page seven of the instruction book, supposedly showing the planking pattern, doesn't really illustrate the joggling as it should be done – and you'll note that there are some planks coming to a point! Good luck!

Jan, Not bad. However, most decks are usually laid beginning from the aft end moving forward, and from the centre line outward to the margin plank. Since it doesn't look as though you've glued the planks you have laid, but just taped them, you might want to have a rethink. You'll probably then find it easier to gauge which planks need joggling at the bow and stern, and with the uncut margin plank in place, when you get to that point. I don't know if you intend having butts, or joints, between your planks, but you might also perhaps think about that. Typical planks are around 20'-25' long, although to get the right pattern, you should start off with a few shorter ones in places, at the stern. You could also put some caulking between the planks, or shade one edge. These are only suggestions and, of course, you can continue as you are. However, perhaps you might try planking from the middle on the other side, and see how it goes?

Doris, Your models are absolutely beautiful! Such attention to detail. I could spend ages looking at them, noting all the nice touches. I think if you had lived in the days of the craftsmen who built the dockyard models we so admire today, they would have asked you to be one of them – or perhaps their boss!

Well, I don't know, you leave a subject for five minutes, and... Honestly though, this is fantastic stuff, with several equally interesting and feasible suggestions – but none, as yet, definitive! I'm of the belief it will remain that way (that is it not being definitive) with no absolute proof one way or the other – at least not yet! There are many different computations to take into account, but certainly half port lids would seem to be more and more likely. However, we just can't be sure. I have a theory that there is some thing written down somewhere, perhaps in a log or letter, which would give us a clearer idea. I can see it now: 'Dearest mother, I have been kept awake for two nights this week, due to the captain having deciding to fit half lids to the gunports... in the middle of the night, too.' It may only be a mere mention, but it would be something. Jay, I like your idea of removable half ports, able to be quickly lifted off by one man. From the measurements you give, that certainly seems feasible. As to the lids lifting off the pintles, what if there was a fitting such as used on rudders, which would have prevented it. Tony, I think I agree with you, about there being only the room for half opening ports. I was also somewhat amused by the picture of the crew being 'irritated' by the ports flapping against the gun muzzles. I think, however they would be even more irritated when the ports flew into splinters at the first recoil!

Jan, I rather thought that was the case. Good luck, I'm sure you will make a good job of it.

Jan, I agree with what has already been said. On a ship under construction, the supply of deck planking would probably not have been all the same shade, since very likely it came from a variety of sources. What modellers normally do when laying the deck, is to mix the planking if it varies – so that there are slightly different shades across whole deck. I don't know whether you have done that, although I can see a few different shades in the deck you have already laid, but I wouldn't worry overmuch about the margin plank. As has been said this was often a different shade in any case. I think you should, however, fit one as this was normal practice. It will also give you practice at 'joggling' the planks into the margin plank. I don't know how much of your deck is actually glued down, but it would seem that you have begun the joggling on the starboard side, and there shouldn't of course be any gaps at the bow. I believe the rules for joggling are: 1) the plank should be joggled, if the intersection where it crosses the margin plank (down its length) is more than twice its width; 2) the cut at the 'hood' end of the plank, is never less than half its width. As said, a plank should never come to a point. When all is said and done, and when all the fittings are in place, you probably won't notice the deck in any case. However, it's good to know yourself that you've done it the right way! Hope this helps.

Eamonn, I'm certain it won't be as bad as that – and you do have to leave some filler for others. Looking forward, of course, to your beginning on Sherbourne.

'Call it a Build by Consensus!' Eamonn, Sounds better than a Build by Committee! Just catching up with your build, and I see your getting into the nitty gritty of it – and coming up with solutions. I'll be following this one too!

This is turning into a very good discussion – just as I thought it might. Tony, I am 'alarmed', and indeed did mean Alert – I must have had a mental 'blip'. Interesting picture of the Trial with, I think with those 'trial' sliding keels? Yes, she has sweep ports, but you'll note, no actual sweeps. Jay, Thanks for your thoughtful post. I have my doubts about the AOTS book myself, but you put it very eloquently. A lot there to think about. I hope you're feeling better. Eamonn, Good point about the water needing to escape the deck, being important. Gunport lids would obviously hinder that. So whether Sherbourne had ports, regular, side opening, or none at all, is obviously still open to question. On the face of if, and since I'm probably well past their fitting stage, I think I'll leave them off – unless, of course anything definitive crops up.

This has particularly to do with the Sherbourne which I, and several others, are working on but obviously includes other small vessels, up to about frigate size. The Sherbourne kit, as produced, has no gunport lids fitted and is provided with sweep ports, but I am wondering about both these points. Even though I have not (as yet) fitted lids to my Sherbourne, I am coming to the conclusion that they were generally in use – especially in connection with the bow ports, which I imagine would almost certainly have had them, for obvious reasons! The AOTS book of the cutter Alarm shows that she did not have them apart from those in the bow, presumably as the rail amidships was rather low, but photographs and paintings I have seen – including the ones in the book of the model of 1785, do not show them. Perhaps it was down to the design of the vessel concerned and perhaps the period. My other query has to do with the use of sweeps, or large oars, which were used on small vessels. The Sherbourne is pierced for four per side, but the AOTS book shows that the Alarm didn't have them, nor do any of the photographs of the other cutters depict them. Admittedly, the Alarm, and the model of the Hawke in the photographs, both had low rails so they might have been fitted above, perhaps in metal crutches. However my other point has to do with the practicality of their use. I had thought of fitting sweeps to my model, but collecting together just the four scale length shafts for one side, and attempting to fit them to one side the main hatch, was all but impossible. There was just nowhere to put them, where they did not get in the way of something else. Racks on the bulwarks also didn't appear to work. Apart from that, their practical operation must have been made very difficult, if not impossible, with all the deck fittings, mast, boom etc, in place. In the end I left them off, citing that their impracticability in use, and the fact that the English Channel where Sherbourne operated is rarely calm and without wind, as factors! I'd be interested in other's views.

Difficult one that Jan, erm, erm...

Ronald, The Admiralty paint sets are supposed to be the exact colours used on the original ship. Here's the Cornwall Model Boats page: http://www.cornwallmodelboats.co.uk/acatalog/admiralty_paint_sets.html You'll have to scroll down for the Victory. I don't know if you can get them in the US, but I think Cornwall's postage is reasonable. I also don't know if they're suitable for plastic.

Doug, Really good work. I like the slightly different shades in your deck planks.

Jan, Ok, thanks for the information. Different ships, different long splices, as they say...

Jan, I would think the ringbolt in the photograph is in rather an odd position to be for the running-in tackle – at least on English warships. The ringbolts were normally placed some feet away directly behind each gun, as shown in the Alert book drawing, and close to the centreline as far as hatches, etc., would have allowed. This would have enabled the gun to run fully in, normally under its own recoil. As Jan said, the breech rope is missing.

I built Billings Bluenose ll some years ago, during which I also bought the book 'Bluenose ll, Saga of the Great Fishing Schooners – measured drawings by LB Jenson.' It is a largish, soft-backed book, produced by Nimbus Publishing. As the title suggests, it contains various drawings of the hull and rig, plus other fittings, and gives a history of the schooners in general, besides that of the earlier Bluenose. I particularly found the drawings of the rigging useful when I was at that stage, which certainly made for a better rigged model. Regarding the model itself, I ditched the plastic parts and made replicas in wood, and made two prop shafts with propellors (something which is not included in the kit!). There is a guide to the paint scheme in the book, where I learnt that the hull colour is actually a near midnight blue, which I managed to approximately match. (Incidentally, I would go for a matt finish, since the model is quite small in scale.) I can certainly recommend the book if you are building this model, and it is also worth looking up their website: http://bluenose.novascotia.ca/ Their shop of course sells the book, but I purchased mine from the UK.

Er, yes, that's right - I see you're getting the hang of it! Ok, then...

Btw, since I've sailed a bit I tend to use the nautical terms, and sometimes forget others might be struggling to understand them. Would it be helpful to put it in more everyday language, perhaps in brackets, afterwards? I could try and remember to do that, if you think it would be useful.

Thanks guys, and you're right of course. My, perhaps rather badly-phrased, final sentence was really hinting at the workmanship Dirk has put into his version of the Sherbourne. Superb, I think you'll agree. Naturally, I'm only to happy for you to copy my ideas, such as the backstays, should they work for you. Gregor, I didn't actually notice the lead being visible in the deck box until afterwards, as I was intent on trying to get a good picture of the lieutenant. It does show to advantage though, I agree. By 'masthead', I take it you mean the lower masthead just below the doublings, where the upper parts of the shrouds are fitted, rather than the topgallant truck, at the very top? Either way, I can do probably that. An inquiring mind is a good thing to have, rather than just accepting things for what they are. Luckily most of us have that, although I think it can be developed. We want to know not only how a thing works, but why it does so in a particular fashion. Regarding ship modelling, I always try to envisage how an item would work on the real ship, so that the operation of that item won't impede the operation of something else. I suppose having sailed might make this easier, but it can be done by anyone, and I'm sure reading on the subject helps.