dvm27

Hello modelers,
 
with this post I continue the gallery with the latest pictures, but first some remarks:
Even if you build very carefully, for example the bow curve of the finished hull may differ from that of the prototype. Due to the bow curve of my model I had to make the shown adjustments with the cheeks to fit on the bow curve. The laser cut cheeks turned out to be too straight, so I hat to reshape them with a rounder curve to fit to the hull.
 
Regrettably the cast trailboards were not inversely equal. The starboard trailboard was a bit longer, thicker and wider than the port one. This is not what I would call high quality.
 
My next step will be the installation of the main head rails. Between them runs the so-called head beam, and sheet one shows two knees connecting this beam to the main head rails. These knees are not mentioned in the instructions, so I have to decide whether to omit them or not.
 
At the end of chapter 15 on page 134 it is suggested that the catheads are glued in place. I would suggest not to do so at this time. In the next chapter the main head rails are installed and for that purpose an appropriate angle has to be sanded at the corners of the beakhead bulkhead showing towards the stem. This is much easier without the catheads as an obstacle for the sanding tool.
See yourself, questions and remarks welcome.

Back on the model working on closing up the port side.

Continuing on with another small update. The aft seats have been added to the ship. This was tricky stuff and there were a few attempts needed. So, yeah, Nothing new. I used a tapered a dowel inserted into the hole as a helping hand when test fitting and gluing them in. Only a small amount of PVA at the notch surrounding the moulding and along the edge that sits against the false rail.

Mike

Thank you, Alex and Sjors. Here’s where I’m at now - deep into sails and rigging. The end is in sight, after a nearly year-long journey. It’s been (mostly) a lot of fun, and I’ve certainly learned a lot about ships and model building.
 

I am starting a new topic as the last one just got huge....over 2000 replies.
 
Its fitting that I would do so today actually.   Today marks ten years since I have started Syren.  Its been a long and interesting journey.  Ten years and miles and miles of rope made and thousands and thousands of blocks sold.   Here's to the next ten years.  Maybe not that long, LOL.
 
For a bit of news....I have finally received the parts to maintain my CNC Mill.  So blocks are on tap over the next few weeks.  In fact I have already started.   3/32" singles and doubles are now in stock.   More will follow. Although half of the 3/32" singles already sold out.  UGH!
 

 
Onward and upward as they say.
 
Chuck

That's a clever jig for scoring the rising wood to accept the frames. Part of the fun of using a mill is figuring out the setups. I would make sure the pattern is marked out on top of the rising wood and checked every few passes. Even with the spacer, cumulative error can creep in and the last few mortices could be off by an inch or so.
 
For those without a mill, you can accomplish the same result using a table saw with a .052 or larger blade set to the correct height. The pattern is affixed to the side of the rising wood with rubber cement (or your preference) and successive cuts made. Note - in the photo the sides are also scored.
 

 
 

@tlevine
 
Hi Toni,
thank you for your interest in my construction report and the appreciation of my work.
Many thanks also to the others for the many LIKES.
 
Continued: Equipment of the yards
As announced in the last part of my construction report, I equip the larger yards with real discs. As before, I make these discs out of brass and blue them. As far as I know, these discs were usually made of lignum vitae. The rather dark brown coloring of this wood can be easily imitated with a blue finish.
For the main yard and the fore yard, the sheaves have a diameter of 2.9 mm. The main topsail yard, fore topsail yard and mizzen yard are fitted with sheaves with a diameter of 2.0 mm.
With the following series of pictures I would like to illustrate how I make the sheaves. Since my turning skills are limited and with these small diameters, I made the circular groove with a jeweller's saw. The fine saw blade I use for this has a thickness of 0.15 mm. I can control the width of the groove. The more inclined I lead the saw blade, the wider the groove. As a rule, the groove has a width of around 0.2 mm.

 
After cutting the sheaves, I grind them to the required thickness according to the size of the protrusion for the sheaves, i. H. about ø 0.6 mm or 0.8 mm. For grinding, I made myself an aid, the tip of which engages in the axle hole and thus enables the sheaves to be guided more or less evenly for grinding.


 
 
The axle bores of the sheaves were made with ø 0.8 mm larger than the axle diameter ø 0.4 mm itself. This makes the installation of the sheaves much easier and also compensates for small inaccuracies.

 
The next pictures should give an impression of the installation of the sheaves. As can be seen in the second picture, the axle holes are not exactly opposite. This is due to the fact that I have to drill the ø 0.4 mm holes for the axles from each side. If you try to drill these holes in one go from one side, it can easily happen that the hole on the other side does not arrive in the middle due to the thin drill and other inaccuracies. This is then much more disturbing than the axis points that are not exactly opposite, which is no longer noticeable after the shortening anyway.


After shortening the axles, the ends are filed clean with a micro file and blued. The filing creates a small burr, which usually makes it no longer necessary to glue the axles.
The last picture shows the finished yardarms of the fore yard, main topsail yard and mizzen yard.

 
It then continues with the stunsail boom irons. There are still a few open points to be clarified, as always... 😊
Sequel follows …

Lower stays.

Well my Winnie is finished. As I have said before I took some liberties with Chuck’s awesome design. Mine is nowhere as crisp and beautiful as Stuntflyer Mike’s, I envy your talent, but I really like mine. I coppered the hull, added Trenails to hull and main deck, used ebony deadeyes, added gun crew and cook figures from Chris Watton and even found a figure I could sit on the head. I am currently in the stand planning stages and she currently rests on Pegasus. Thanks for a great time Chuck. Really, really, really looking forward to Speedwell.

I've pinned all of the chainplates to the hull on the starboard side. I'm now moving to the portside chainplates.
Once they are completed I'll start on the billboards, chesstrees, fenders and boarding ladders. 
 

I was quite a challenge to make carved elements. Hornbeck is quite difficult to cut,it's quite strong and fragile , and the scale is a bit to small for me.
The assembling is still to come and the fitting in place.

When I grow up, I hope to be only half as skilled as you are.  Your work is amazing.

Good Evening All;
 
This is an interesting thread, from its beginnings, which has now somewhat departed, most regrettably, from the higher standard of interchange of ideas normally prevailing on this forum; which I believe, from many years reading others' postings, is mostly courteous and considerate of varying or contrary opinions. It is also important for all contributors to remember that their ideas, opinions and postings are often of their own formulation, and based on a personal interpretation of what is known; what can be extrapolated; and what is hypothesised. In the end, though, some of what is posted in the field of research is personal opinion; and one person's opinion is as valid to them as is that of others to their own selves. If varying interpretations of what is known result in a discussion in detail, this is a good process for all concerned, and having to justify one's opinion or interpretation is a worthwhile endeavour, as it is in this way that we acquire an even more thorough understanding of the particular subject under consideration.
 
I once exchanged views with Martes on the likely origin of a draught, purportedly of a 17th century first rate; but the draughting of which had obviously been carried out in the nineteenth century. For this reason, I saw it as a later invention, with no historical validity. However, the late and much-missed Frank Fox gave it as his opinion that the draught, although much later, was genuinely based on a no-longer extant draught which was indeed from the 17th century. I was rather mortified to be found in error, but at the same time, pleased that the sum total of knowledge of those involved, including my self, had been increased. 
 
Right or wrong will always contain some degree of subjectivity; and as Mr Endsor states, we are all colleagues. We all share a mutual interest, in acquiring and disseminating knowledge; and this has the obvious corollary that there is a responsibility upon us all to either be absolutely sure of what we say, because it is based on firm evidence; or to be prepared to change our opinions when our interpretation is questioned. This is not a process of opposition, and should not be interpreted as competition; this is a process, by means of which knowledge is distilled and purified. 
 
Stereotypes exist to be challenged; as do opinions; and it is important not to take umbrage at a perceived slight, where none is intended. A difference of opinion should be discussed with respect for the other party's opinions, and restraint needs to be exercised, lest the debate degenerates into a situation where responses become based around comments on the character of a contributor, rather than dealing with the validity of any hypotheses or interpretations being expressed.
 
An important factor to consider here is that early draughts do not include body plans as we understand them from later periods. The use of rising and narrowing lines is symptomatic of the system of whole moulding. In this system of design and construction, there is no need to draw the frames at individual stations; all that is needed are the rising and narrowing lines; the midship frame; and perhaps the stern view. From these, any capable shipwright of the era could construct a ship, using the system of hauling up and down with the same basic template, with the degree of difference indicated by surmarks for each frame. There is therefore no need to construct a body plan, and the production of such is only ever going to be an exercise in drawing and analysis skills, unless it is intended for use to make a model. 
 
I know for certain that Frank Fox considered these drawings of the London with considerable suspicion, and believed that they were made more for decorative purposes than for any other reason. There are certainly inconsistencies in the section with regard to the pointers, which are described in various documents as having their upper end fixed to the gun-deck beams, not protruding above it. To my mind this, and knowing that there are other reasons for doubting the authenticity of at least some of what it purports to represent, is sufficient to conclude that any work based on these drawings cannot be taken as incontrovertible proof of anything. I can admire the skills and knowledge displayed in the drawings which Waldemar has constructed, and certainly my total knowledge has increased by reading this thread; however, it is my personal opinion that to use this draught as the basis of an argument that floor sweeps varied, when all other sources contemporary to English practice in the mid seventeenth century state that the floor sweep was of a constant radius, is to invite contradictory opinions; which, when they are expressed, need to be accepted as part of an open debate, and not as evidence of 'competition'. That is best left to those involved in politics and business, neither of which encourage the development of the better aspects of human nature.
 
All the best,
 
Mark P
 
 

The checkerboard pattern is now glued to the false deck 😬
 
Fingers crossed I don't mess it up during the build. I'll try to be as careful as I can. Also, I hope the stick glue I used to bond the card stock onto the thin basswood sheet would hold up over the years. So far it seems good, but let's see....
 
Anyways, below are some photos. I guess this marks the completion of Chapter 10!









For the next step, I am thinking to backtrack to finish up the stern. Hoping I can get better at the carvings this time around!
 
Harshil

Good morning.

Hello London enthusiasts. I reckon we can pursue our enquiries and come to a good conclusion Most importantly, we should always go back to original source material when pursuing a theory, not use what I or Brian may have dreamt up. Firstly to answer a question about Riff's dimensions, The keel length is given in Pepys Register of ships in Magdalen College, Cambridge as 123' 6" Breadth 41' 0" and Depth in hold 16' 6" while another list NMM CLU/9 gives the keel as 123' 0" and the same dimensions for the rest. As for the radii of the floor sweep, take a look at Brian Lavery's Ship of the Line II page 19 where he says in the caption for image 2 Body Plan that the floor sweeps are reduced in diameter(sic). Then take a ruler and measure the clearly marked floor sweeps of said illustration and I make them all to be the same at 13mm. Please check for yourselves as we need to agree our understanding of a floor sweep is the same. Be careful not to measure to a diagonal line on the aft side. Check all the other contemporary plans you can find. Then consider the way moulds were made in the method describes in Shipwright's Repository. Remember Brian wrote his book in the late 1970's when the understanding of such matters was largely forgotten and he blazed the trail for us. Seventeenth century plans do have what look like diagonals but they are in fact the heads and heels of futtocks and toptimbers. The first known evidence of checking lines with water lines appears about 1680 but the method of plotting them must have been well know way before that in order to plot the contours of the transoms. Waldemar may well be right in finding the floor sweep varies, in which case Frank Fox was correct in believing the plan is not authentic. Alternatively perhaps Waldemar could use the best fit floor sweep. I suggest the plan has so many anonmoles that to create the rising and narrowing lines is almost impossible. And why would you? the rising and narrowing lines were drawn first to create the sweeps and the sweeps are there already.

I have painted and distressed the corbels and the upper window tier.

I found myself swearing early and often, as I repeatedly broke off the doors from the window tier.  There isn’t much plastic connecting them, and until they’re glued into the model, they are exceptionally fragile.

I appreciate the tip, T_C, but presumably my bitumen is making its long journey across the Atlantic like the swarthy pilgrim it is.  As I wait, I continue to construct the stern.  I made up and fitted the next transom header, so that I can glue-in the window tier:

Although the winding out of square continues, it does so marginally and the eye really doesn’t see it:

With the header in-place, I could begin to focus on the design of the most challenging aspect of the decor:  as the French call it - the Couronnement.  It is somewhat hilarious to me that after all of this effort to make the hull wider, the tafferal ends up being only fractionally wider than the stock stern plate:

This development is the result of fashioning the internal gussets that support the aft bulwarks, at an angle that promoted a more realistic tumblehome for the after castle;  the stock kit is a little more vertically slab-sided in its approach to this detail.  Here, you can see the comparison between the tafferal width I thought I’d have (at the start of the project) and where I ended up:
 Despite this not un-satisfactory development, Tanneron and Heller (following suit) chose to represent the backboard (tafferal) as improbably tall for the refit of 1689.  So, in other words, I was going to have to re-fashion this area anyway.
 
Towards that end, much earlier in my modification of the upper bulwarks, I cut away the poop royal sheer-step (5/16”+), only to replace it by 1/2 that height of a more realistic, low, sheer rail that is more reflective of the times:

However, the more significant  shortening of the tafferal comes from lowering the side support for the outer lanterns, so that they are aligned with the sheer rail, as opposed to above it.
 
The first step was to re-draw the goose-neck cornice because I never liked Heller’s interpretation of this detail:

Next, I had to define the field for Apollo and his quadriga, which meant defining the height for the bar of astrological symbols along the top.  On the stock kit, these are a continuation of the side lantern supports which I will re-cycle for this build.  However, to follow the height of those boxes does not leave me with a large enough field for the main carving, below; see the dotted line proposed in the upper right.  So, I decided to cheat that line upward about a 1/16”.  It will necessitate hand-painting these astrologic symbols into these tiny paneled recesses, but that is okay.
 
The really good news is that I will be able to re-shape the swagging vestments of Europe and Asia to fit the new cornice shape:

This is really great because, as it is, I have to re-carve The Americas and Africa because the stock figures are too tall and Africa has the wrong posture.
 
The next task was to see whether my original drawing of Apollo could be reduced enough to reasonably fit my field.  Here is the full-size drawing:

I did a series of reductions, at 50, 60, and 70%.  Seventy percent was close:

As compared to the kit carving:

But, I felt it encroached too much on the upper and lower boundaries of the field.  I settled on 67%:

As compared with Berain’s drawing:

I’m not totally satisfied with the scrolled vollute.  It’s too big. I’ll have to re-work the clouds to conform more neatly with the lower moulding, but I am happy with the scale of Apollo and his horses.
 
It is not as wide as Berain drew it, but this will allow me to better create my gradient sky from light cerulean blue to dark azurite, up top. radiating outward in all directions, from behind Apollo will be fine needles of sun-light  in gold and silver gilt.  Apollo and his horses will be all gold and the clouds will be temperamentally white and grey.  Once I am satisfied with the scroll, I can photocopy the drawing and make a reverse copy, so that the port side can be matched to its mirror for a perfectly symmetrical pattern.
 
My motivation is to have the stern fully framed and perhaps even painted by the time of Joint Clubs on April 30th.  I think this would be a satisfying resolution to everything that came below:

In other news and notes, I have made satisfying in-roads into Dassie’s Architecture Navale.  I now have a pretty solid understanding of the proportional derivation of the principal elements of a ship, although there is still much translating to do.  This essentially amounts to re-typing all relevant passages into Google Translate because the photo capture feature never results in nearly as intelligible a translation as the more tedious path.  My French is improving though, as a result, and full transcriptions are becoming less necessary as I develop a vocabulary of French ship nomenclature.
 
I am simultaneously doing the same translation work on the 1685 Le Have du Grace dimensional survey of what is presumed to be the pre-refit Soleil Royal.  It is extremely helpful that this document (which I downloaded from Gallica) has a numbered drawing that details all of the principal parts of a ship and it’s framing.
 
What is fascinating is that the neither Le Havre du Grace nor Dassie’s prescriptive formulas correspond with what was supposed to be SR’s original length of keel:
 
As built: 142’
Le Havre du Grace: 140”
Dassie:  136’
 
I have been applying Dassie’s formulas to SR’s particulars, as I go, and ultimately I will have a more complete comparison with the Le Havre de Grace document.  This is all ground previously tread by Michel Saunier, and in-fact, I still have a copy of his exhaustive tabulation of all the dimensions of every aspect of the ship.  He emailed this to me years ago.  I still think this is a worthwhile exercise, though, to better understand how he arrived at where he did with his model.
 
Anyway, it keeps me occupied.  Thank you for your interest, your likes and your comments.  More to follow!

main topgallant yard and sail
 
This was supposed to be the easiest sail to set so far: No reef bands and only simple leech linings.
 
Well, I wasn't right.
 
The sail itself was rather quickly done and bent to the yard. But then I realized that the same amount of running rigging as for the other sails had to be set up and threaded to the maze of already installed lines. And having the yards braced made access from the starboard side more difficult. Sometimes I could work across the ship which however endangers what's already there. But the whole workforce finished the task accident-free, for once.
 
In one point I had to deviate from the kit's instructions. As confirmed by Lees, the buntlines should lead forward, through a sheave in the fore topmast aft trestletrees and down to the deck. I forgot to drill the necessary holes when setting up that top. After the near disaster with the crosstrees I didn't want to drill 0,5mm holes into a 1mm wide, flimsy plywood part. Fortunately Lees sais that earlier there were blocks lashed to the same trestletrees to carry the buntlines. A worried skipper and an old fashioned bosun then decided between themselves to set up the buntlines the old way.
 
Now, half of the sails are set and I'm quite positive that I shall indeed finish Bellerophon in this decade.
 

main topgallant sail set
 

main top with belayed topgallant sheets
 

the carpenter is also installing the missing lids to the portside gun ports
 
 


taking total view shots is becoming more difficult - Bellerophon is definitely outgrowing my work space
 

Thanks, Gaetan, someday when I get further along, I would be interested in studying French ships of the period. Always fun to see what is universal, and what is culturally different!
 
Further progress today. I finally got in the second layer of the hawse lining, ready for drilling the hawse holes:
 

And now on to that pesky support for the hair bracket. I tried letting a liner down into a rebate I cut today on top of the knee, but I may sleep on this. It seems flimsy, kind of cobbled together. I may consider making the entire core in one piece. A decision for tomorrow!
 
 

 

Beautiful symmetry and photography!

Visually it is the run of the sweep and port openings that make or break the hull and your template shows you are right on the money. I look forward to seeing how those difficult cant frames blend into your system.
 
Were you going to add fillers between the keel and bottom floor sweep? I found that expansion and contraction of the hull was constantly fighting me on this.

Visually it is the run of the sweep and port openings that make or break the hull and your template shows you are right on the money. I look forward to seeing how those difficult cant frames blend into your system.
 
Were you going to add fillers between the keel and bottom floor sweep? I found that expansion and contraction of the hull was constantly fighting me on this.

Visually it is the run of the sweep and port openings that make or break the hull and your template shows you are right on the money. I look forward to seeing how those difficult cant frames blend into your system.
 
Were you going to add fillers between the keel and bottom floor sweep? I found that expansion and contraction of the hull was constantly fighting me on this.

Visually it is the run of the sweep and port openings that make or break the hull and your template shows you are right on the money. I look forward to seeing how those difficult cant frames blend into your system.
 
Were you going to add fillers between the keel and bottom floor sweep? I found that expansion and contraction of the hull was constantly fighting me on this.