SJSoane

I still can't help myself. I spent a couple of days working on a jig to make the gun capsquares. I did manage to put something together, making left and right hand pieces (because of the angle of the carriage sides). It got complicated, working out how to get the male and female parts to line up when the holes were drilled at opposite angles: It worked: But the angle barely shows at this scale, not worth all of the extra work. Tomorrow, I will try simplifying this to a 90 degree angle used for both sides, then make the jigs for the other two gun sizes before I forget how I did all of this.... Mark

Hi Siggi, I am just catching up with your posts. I missed these for some time, after the scratch build entries were divided into decades. I forgot that your ship predates 1750! Apologies. The work is looking great, up to your usual very high standards. The gun deck photos make it feel like we are in the real ship. The pillars at the centerline look terrific and very consistent even though you turned each one by hand. Did you use a special shaped cutter, or just normal tools and a template to check measurements? I am facing this fun challenge soon myself. Best wishes, Mark

Thanks so much, Alex, that was a very interesting article, and Google translate worked very well. I am also currently working on a jig for the cannon capsquares, and the article gave me a few things to think about. Best wishes, Mark

Alex, Beautiful work, as usual from you! I continue to be inspired by your craftsmanship, and also your methodical ways of fabricating things. I have recently worked out a version of your jig for making eyebolts. It works well. You are very ingenious! Mark

Nice, druxey! By George, you are right! I wonder why my mind always seems to go to the more complex idea first.... Mark

Thanks so much, JR, it sounds like you have done a great deal of research. I look forward to hearing more as you are able to give the project more attention. I might start writing down all of the issues that I don't understand yet, particularly the belaying points. Now I have confirmed that I can indeed form and blacken the iron work, I am looking ahead to another piece of ironwork that I put off dealing with until now. That is the capsquares on the gun carriages. I am still considering the possibility of installing the carriages now, but leaving the barrels off until a few years later, when I have completed more of the upper works and decks, and will be less liable to accidentally knock a cannon out of place from the outside. But that means the capsquares would have to really hinge up, so I could insert the barrel through the gun port with epoxy on the trunnions, slip them under the capsquares, and press the capsquare down in place. I made a crude mockup of a cap square, just to see how small they are, and how well I could make them hinge. Not well, I found out. the flat plate is too long, doesn't allow pivoting around the eyebolt head. So more work to do here. To make these more efficiently, I am thinking about making a small die, which would press the right shape, and then align drilling for the bolts. I know the eyebolt and joint bolt are both rectangular in section, but I am thinking this will make it exceedingly difficult to manufacture and install at this small scale. I am interested if others have managed something like this at 3/16" scale. And these are the largest cannon. It will get progressively more difficult as the guns get smaller on upper decks! Best wishes, Mark

Greg, thanks so much for that tutorial online. Interestingly, I started using the Otto Frei version of Sparex called OttoTech Pickle, but abandoned it when I got the flakey first effort. I turned to Acetone and then to Isopropanol before I got a good result. But I later realized that I got a good result only when I diluted the JAX, not when I changed cleaners. So I will try your various cleaning steps and see if it turns out even better. How much baking soda do you put into the neutralizing bath? Marc, I appreciate your appreciation for making it look good even when eventually we will no longer see it. I am under pressure from my wife to abandon all of the eyebolts and rings on the gundeck, because they will never be seen. But I KNOW they should be there.... I think she is worried that I won't finish before I pass on, and then how will she put my ashes on the model and push it out into the lake, maybe on fire....🙃 Mark

Not to make too complicated for you, I have found over the years that the Byrnes thickness sander is great for getting pieces to the right thickness, and the Byrnes disk sander for very accurately shaping joints (like the butt end of planks, corners on hatch coamings, etc). Tools can be mounted on pieces of ply or MDF, and put on shelves when not needed if space is limited. I also agree with Tony about power scrolls saws. I finally gave up on my power scroll saw as too scary on small, thin pieces; it could grab and break a blade in a heartbeat. I always had to cut pieces out of much larger sheets to have something to hang onto, and this did not allow me to use up the endless small pieces that gradually accumulate. A good jeweler's saw and bench pin (I like the ones from Knew Concepts) and a little practice, and the hand tool is much more accurate, safer and quieter. The secret I finally discovered is to get good blades, and use the right size relative to the thickness of the piece you are cutting. I use Pegas skip tooth blades, often a #3 for the sizes I am cutting. I struggled in the past when I had too fine a blade for the thickness or vice versa. Around three teeth in the wood at any time is the useful rule. The mill and lathe are great for making complex parts like the capstans, grates, steering wheel, etc. but a lot of this can be done with an accurate table saw and clever jigs, and also hand tools like files. Ah, one of the great joys of life, tools... Mark

I was ready to install the gun deck standards, when I realized that I should probably put in the eyebolts and rings for the guns when I still have a little maneuvering room. I made up a few eyebolts and rings out of copper, and blackened them with JAX for copper following the instructions on the bottle. Looked great, until all the black came right off when I picked them up with needle nose pliers to push them into the holes in the quickwork. So, then I tried Ed Tosti's method in his book on the Naiad, using Liver of Sulphur which can be painted on even after the metalwork is installed in the wood. This worked, as can be seen in this sample: That means I could install the eyebolts, then blacken them in place. But then I realized that I would need to seize the breaching ropes around the rings off the model, which means that I can't then blacken the rings after installation without messing up the rope. So, I read David Antscherl's advice more carefully on blacking, in the Fully Framed Model series. He advised diluting blackening agents as much as 8:1 with water. It acts much more slowly--it took mine about 45 minutes instead of a few seconds--but it was beautifully black and stable. I tried it on a strap on the stern timbers, a beautiful sheen to the black, just like iron. So, the next test is to make up ring/eyebolts , blacken them with JAX, and assemble with a breaching rope and seizing. Then try installing and see if the black stays on. Much to learn about metal! Mark

Thanks so much, JR, for your kind comments, and druxey for your reminder of time scales. I wish there were as much detailed information for 1760 as there is in later books like Fincham. As I discovered in the earlier thread here on the standard at the stem, even a difference of 30 years--between 1750 and 1780--seems to make a difference. It is interesting to see trends towards bigger or smaller, and wood or iron, over these time periods. JR, I would be interested in hearing more from you about your studies on the Bellona rigging. I spent a fair amount of time years ago trying to understand this, and still do not have it completely clear in my mind. So far, I have relied primarily on the table of masts and yards lengths and diameters from a Plymouth dockyard document, 1754, in James Lees, Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War. For additional details on the masts and yards like hounds, caps, crosstrees, etc., I used Mungo Murray's Treatise on Masting, ca. 1765. I looked at data for an 80 gun ship based on the 1745 Establishment, which seemed in overall size to be about the same as a 74 gun ship ca. 1760, which is the Bellona. All other rigging information I have taken from Lees for various dates at which rigging details came into general use. I also looked to Steel for tables of rigging sizes. But Steel is a good half century later than the Bellona, and I am not sure how much changed in that period. But there are still some discrepancies and omissions in my own understanding. And while it might be a long time before I get to rigging, I have to be thinking about belaying points built into the hull somewhat sooner. I would be happy to exchange information with you about this. I have a spreadsheet linking all of my research together. Best wishes, Mark

Thanks so much, JR, for your kind comments and also the additional information from Fincham. I would be interested in hearing more from you about your studies on the Bellona rigging. I spent a fair amount of time years ago trying to understand this, and still do not have it completely clear in my mind. So far, I have relied primarily on the table of masts and yards lengths and diameters from a Plymouth dockyard document, 1754, in James Lees, Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War. For additional details on the masts and yards like hounds, caps, crosstrees, etc., I used Mungo Murray's Treatise on Masting, ca. 1765. I looked at his data for an 80 gun ship based on the 1745 Establishment, which seemed in overall size to be about the same as a 74 gun ship ca. 1760, which is the Bellona. All other rigging information I have taken from Lees for various dates at which rigging details came into general use. I also looked to Steel for tables of rigging sizes. But Steel is a good half century later than the Bellona, and I am not sure how much changed in that period. But there are still some discrepancies and omissions in my own understanding, which I will have to recall from my notes at this point. While it might be a long time before I get to rigging, I have to be thinking about belaying points built into the hull somewhat sooner. I would be happy to exchange information with you about this. I have a spreadsheet linking all of my research together. Best wishes, Mark

Lovely ovens, Gaetan. How did you make the orange colored bricks? Interesting that the French had more cooking facilities than the English for the same size ship. The distinguished French culinary tradition started a long time ago! Mark

I have been thinking about making a router table, and just came across this post. Nice solution! what size sanding sleeve hits the side of the Stewart/MacDonald mounting base? Could they be gripped further out of the chuck, getting to the other side of the mounting base plate altogether? Mark

I haven't tried softwood in the Byrnes machine, but I have worked out good results with hardwood. (I am left handed, so this might want to be reversed for right handers). The trick is to keep the wood moving constantly while holding down flat on the infeed and outfeed at all times. I start by pushing constantly with the thumb of my left hand while using my right hand to press down firmly on the infeed table, fingers very close to the opening. As the wood approaches the end of the infeed table, I reach back with the thumb of my right hand to keep the wood moving forward and still pressing down. My left hand is then free to move to the outfeed table, where I pick up the forward movement and downward pressure by placing my fingers under the table and my thumb on top of the wood, squeezing the wood to the table while also pushing forward with my thumb on the top surface. When my right hand can no longer push the wood, I move it to the outfeed table and do the same thing, squeezing the wood to the table while pressing forward. I alternate pushing with left and right thumbs, so I never have to pause the forward movement while moving a thumb back. Pausing the forward movement even for an instant will leave a ripple in the final surface. I can get sore thumbs doing this with a lot of sanding! With longer pieces, if I move the wood too quickly, or let up on the squeezing even by a tiny amount, I can get an harmonic vibration of the wood on the outfeed table, causing a very slight rippled surface on the wood. So press down for dear life, and slow down if you get this problem. Another option, if this doesn't work for you, is perhaps to make a long sled with a stop somewhere in the middle. As you push the sled and the wood through, the back of the sled will still be on the infeed table while the wood is already passed through the drum. It give a greater chance to keep things pressed down and moving constantly forward until the wood is further through. I haven't tried this with a long sled, but my short sled makes it very easy to pass shorter pieces through without problems. I hold the wood down onto the sled with double sided tape in the case of short pieces. Maybe this would help with longer ones as well. Just some thoughts! Mark

Thanks so much, druxey, and a better new year for all of us! I proceeded with the spline idea. A little jig for the mill made quick work of the slots in the standards themselves: For the slots in the deck beams, I made a little marking jig, ensuring the slots would be laid out parallel to the sides of the beam, on the center line, and also the correct distance from the end of the standard. Then a few holed drilled out to hog out the main waste, and then chisel work to clean up. I did discover a slight flaw in my plan. If I made the splines as long as I had expected, the standard could not fit over the spline and then slide under the upper deck clamp. So I had to shorten the splines and keep them as far out from the sides as possible. This allows me to fit the standard down on the spline, and then slide into position while completely flat on the beam. But still more than enough area for gluing. Three down, just 19 to go.... Mark

Gary, great looking shop, and fantastic library! Now I see where you are able to find so much of your research. Your models remind me that last year I built a plastic LCVP model for my father, who served on an attack cargo ship in the US Navy in WWII. It sure was fun to have all the parts already made, even though a good plastic model takes as much time in prep, fitting and painting as a scratch build. Nice change up, though. Do you ever work a bit on a plastic model as a break from HMS Montague/Alfred? Mark

Gary, nice idea. I started thinking it through, and realized that I can't get my drill into the right place on the deck and keep it vertical, so it would be difficult to line up holes in the standard and then the deck at the same angle. I also worried about being able to push the standard firmly against the bulwarks, if the pin were slightly off. But then that made me think of using a spline instead. With a little space at each end, it would let me slide the standard firmly up to the side, and also provide a lot of glue surface for the joint. And the spine would keep the standard centered in the beam. Maybe I will need to pin the top of the standard to the quickwork or upper deck clamp, but I could use a wooden dowel so it would not be too obvious. I could rout the slot in the bottom of the standard using the mill, and I will have to drill a few holes in the beam and then clean up with a chisel. This seems like a lot of work, but the fact that both gluing surfaces are already finished means I would have to scrape down to bare wood in every location, in an awkward spot given the tumblehome. It would be way more fun to build a really sturdy spline and not worry about gluing to the deck or spirketting at all! Thanks again for getting me thinking in this direction. I'll see how it goes... If this works, I will think about routing the slot in the upper deck beams for the upper deck standards, when I still have them off the ship. Mark

Thanks so much, druxey and Gary. druxey, I still have to chamfer the edges, at this scale a slight bevel with a sanding stick. Gary, I used the Amnesia black monofilament fishing line. For the required 1 1/4" diameter bolts, I used 25lb line which is pretty close to accurate size for 3/16"=1'-0". A #73 drill, and Locktite gel superglue. I am still working out ways to get these pinned in place. I am going to have to scrape finish away on the spirketting and quickwork, and also in some places on the deck which I finished many years ago before realizing it was premature for things like this still to come. So I am a little worried about glue alone keeping the standards from coming adrift, if I can't get reliably down to bare wood in these locations. One day to go before this year is over! Mark

Thanks so much, Mike, that is high praise indeed coming from you--you set a standard of craftsmanship on your project that I aspire to! Mark

A patient day of final shaping of the standards, and making bolts. Starboard done today, port tomorrow. then clear finish and final installation at last! The Foredom drill press converted to a sander worked very well for final shaping.

If you are starting with thick blanks of expensive wood (mine are 3/4" by 3" by 24"). and need to rip these down to more suitable thicknesses, I agree it is less wasteful to use a bandsaw, then use a thickness sander like the Byrnes to clean up. Use a broad blade used for resawing, like the 1/2" Wood Mizer. I gang up feather blocks pressing against a fence for the entire width of the blank; keeps things parallel. Using a table saw safely with these small pieces, in my experience, requires using a jointer to get a straight face to put against the fence, which is another source of waste. A bandsaw deals pretty well with a not perfect face against the fence, particularly if you are later thickness sanding. Mark

Thanks, Gary, that sounds as definite as I need to omit the standard. I guess there are a few compensations for building a ship in the early mid 18th century; more stuff appears later on, like the sweep for the tiller. It makes my project downright easy!😊 Best wishes, Mark

Hi Gary, Well spotted. So here is an example of an apron up to the upper deck, and also a standard on the gundeck. So the question is whether this was done around 1760, or came in later, by 1780. You have all found enough examples around 1780 to make it pretty clear this was normal by then. Might be a toss-up for the Bellona. Either it was normal practice, just not shown on the Bellona or Dorsetshire sections, or it came later, maybe as the gundeck lengths increased? I might rough one up, and see how it looks. At the rate I am going, the gundeck will still be open a long enough time that we will find clearer evidence for me to make a final decision. Maybe too late to make a split apart hull like the one at Annapolis! Best wishes, Mark

Thanks so much, Alex, Alan and Gary. This research is endlessly fascinating! The Bellona project is particularly challenging, because the original Admiralty drawings had very little detail, much less than I see in these later draughts. And as I read elsewhere on this website, the absence of something in the archeological record is not proof of its actual absence; so I cannot assume that if something is not drawn in the Bellona draughts, it does not exist. So it is particularly interesting to hear of the pattern Alex identified, and Gary confirmed, that there seem to be two different approaches to reinforcing the stem. One has the false stem or apron going all the way up to the upper deck breast hook, and no standard; and the other has the false stem stopping at the gundeck breast hook and then includes a standard on the gundeck. Two schools of thought. Based on that pattern, I see that the Bellona draught (below) has the false stem going up to the upper deck breasthook, and therefore would not have a standard. If a drawing ever shows up circa 1750-60 with a false stem up to the upper deck breast hook, and also a standard on the gundeck and a breasthook just under the hawse holes, then I will reconsider. but until then.... I am humbled at how sharp-eyed you all are, to see these issues and patterns. And I benefit from it; thank you so much. And by the way, Alex, your drawings of the Anson are as detailed and as beautifully drafted as any I have ever seen. You are a master, and you have inspired me to improve my own drawings of the Bellona. You set a very high standard! Best wishes, Mark

thanks so much Gary, I am wondering about the time issue as well. Although it sure would make sense to have a knee at the stem. I saw an episode of the rebuild of the Tally Ho, and his stem was slowly leaning forward until he got it anchored back to a breast hook. A standard would help even more. But if I can't find an example in my timeframe, I may skip it. As long as we are looking at the fore end of the gundeck, how about the stoppers for the anchor cable/messenger? I see these referred to, and even found the size of the stopper bolts, but where exactly were they, and how many? I saw a reference to "a couple behind the riding bitts", but nothing else. After that and scuppers, I THINK I have accounted for everything on the gundeck.....🙃 Best wishes, Mark