Roman

Here are some more pictures of the cant frames. These gave me a bit of trouble due to the multiple tapers on them and I ended up making several of each piece before getting some I was happy with.

Before continuing on it is worth mentioning that I was following Ed T's Naiad build on the old site. I copied some of the tools that he made in that log. 
 
The first is a marking guage that can be used to transfer dimensions of the drawings right to the model. The second piece is simply a right angle brace that I temp attached to the jig board at the bow to support that area during construction. The final piece is a right angle wall with a notch cut in the bottom to clear the keel and the cleats. This "Wall" helps ensure that the frames are installed vertically.

The next piece I chose to tackle is the the bow stem. This piece was the most difficult piece I had done at the time. I think it turned out quite well.

the stern frames continued

Thank you Guys
Here's some more pictures. These would be of the actual deadwood being fitted into the sternpost

Moving on to the lower keel and towards the bow. I treenailed the keel pieces even though these will be covered over by frames later on. They are still visible from the bottom should I be crazy enough to turn the model over later on.

That looks a bit better I think. Thinned down Baltic Pine wood stain applied with a brush :
 

 

 

 
  Danny

Hello,

and it goes on with the details of the metal fittings for gun carriages of the carronades.

 

 
The sorting box is filling up slowly but surely with the parts of the carronades.

Hello Ferit,
thank you for your nice comment.

So it goes on:

 

 

 

Hello,
here I show the continuation of the construction of the carriages of the carronades.
First, this is about the making of the recesses for the metal fittings.
 
 
Next is the production of a metal fitting for pivoting.

 

 

 

 

 

 
It also works outdoors under the sun sail on the terrace.
Because it's much more fun.

Well, when the site was down I was in the garage building some more homemade tools. I already built my Wood Lathe http://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/topic/126-my-homemade-wood-lathe/ . Here are some pictures of my homemade Table Saw (not mini) and my homemade Drum Sander and my homemade Thickness Sander. No plans or anything, just built them as I went along. I think I put good use of the time spent during the change over, and they work too. 
 
Ron 

Here are the photos of my 200mm sander. Built this about 2 years ago. The motor was from work and going to be thrown away, so this was rescued. It came with the switch already in place. A base was built from scrap timber, and a backing plate from mdf. The table was from a spare melamine shelf with a window bracket for the angle adjustment. I can fit up to a 230mm sanding disc but only use 200mm as that is what I have. The photos show different stages of the sander, with the yellow backing plate the final color. There is also a 90 and 45 degree angle scribed into the table that cannot be seen in the photos. I am slowly working on a dust collector for this as it goes everywhere at the moment.
 
 

 

 

 

Just thought I would re-post the pictures of my homemade wood lathe.

The pin rail that came with the kit

 
firs try to replace

 
The tool and the second try

 
The pin rails painted the some made by myself
 

 
Start to produce all of the pin rails
I painted one and it looks better

 
     

Hi Robin
Here's a pic of the companion and a couple of other pics.

More pics and updates; I have modified the transom shape slightly to take out the curve inward above the women's heads. I have also started making new gun carriages. I bought some better looking barrels from Chuck Passaro, I also bought some of Chuck's gun carriages but they are slightly large and the wrong shape for a 4 pounder British gun so I am scratch building them.

Today I finished off the collars for the forestays, bowsprit shrouds and bobstays.

Today I made the forecastle scuttle lid and the great cabin stove chimney.

I did the helm with the barrel aft of the wheel because thats how it appears on the draught plan of Endeavour made after her return from Cook's voyage. I looked at the helm for a while and realised the rope and blocks would make it hard to stand behind the wheel. So I removed it and turned it around, now it looks like a more workable arrangement.

Today I rigged the mechanism that connects the helm to the rudder tiller. I used copper wire to make the block strops/hooks. First I sanded the blocks and gave them a coat of varnish so that when I blackened the copper the blackening fluid wouldnt soak into the wood. If you blacken the wire before fitting there are usually shiny bits where the pliers leave scratches.

Here's another angle

I have been back to my build the last couple of weeks. I made the gallows that support the spare masts, notice how they are fitted inside the hatch opening. I spent the last couple of days making the pumps. I didn't use the pump barrels supplied because I reckon they are too big so I made some smaller ones by filing 5x5mm wood octagonal and making the tops from dowell, and the hand lever from walnut. I used the metal pieces supplied but modified them by drilling holes for the pins. I had made up 2 of them but wasn't quite happy. If you look at the pumps shown on the 1768 plans of the Endeavour before refit they are fairly different and decided to make pumps that look more like those in the plans. I then decided to use the two different styles of pump on my ship - my logic? Perhaps the two original ones on the Earl of Pembroke were left as they were and the two extra ones added at the refit were a slightly different design. Anyway the area where they are is so crowded now its hard to tell.

I have been building this since the start of 2011, here is a re-post of some of my progress pics. For those who didn't follow my log on the old website, this build is using wood from Eaglemoss partwork (same as the Occre kit), it has some nice fittings, such as the stern decorations but most of the parts and materials supplied are not accurate so a lot of this ship is being scratch built and I am using a lot of parts and materials bought separately. I have already built the Artesania Latina Endeavour a long time ago, and I wanted to build a 1:48 one. This kit was advertised as 1:48 but when you measure it up it is actually 1:51. I think this kit has used K.H Marquardt's Anatomy Of The Ship - Endeavour as a reference in its design. I am using the original 1768 draughts and quite a few other references instead of relying on just the AOTS as being "gospel" because I believe the AOTS is just one person's expert opinion on what the Endeavour could have looked like and it disagrees in some aspects with many of the other reference sources. There are two 1768 draughts, one dated April 1768 (3814) and one dated July 1768 (3814c) and they are different. The July one (which is the one most often referred to) looks like the date was added later, and could be a draught drawn when she was refitted AFTER Cook's voyage. If someone can clarify this point please do. The reason I am using the below draught (3814) is that the position and number of quarter deck rail stanchions match up with Sydney Parkinson's sketch showing the stern of Endeavour, whereas the other draught (3814c) does not.
Anyway here are some of the more recent pics plus some old ones


 



















 

Sunday, raining and cold outside so I lit the wood heater in my garage and went to work to finish making the gun carriages.

Roman,
I´m sorry perhaps I was a bit short or didn´t elaborate more the argument on Spanish naval architecture. You are right but what I meant to say is that naval architecture was not a French only matter and Spanish architects had also an important saying on the matter too. There were important contributions from Swedish, Dutch, Portuguese, Italian, German and Spanish constructors/scientists.
The book I recommended is an excellent source to Know who is who in XVIII century naval architecture, what they did and when they did it. Here is an excerpt from the book:
It is perhaps surprising that stability theory was not routinely used in the Spanish
navy until the 1780s, given that one of the most important figures in the history of
naval architecture, Jorge Juan y Santacilia, was both well acquainted with stability
theory and in charge of naval construction from 1752 to 1754. As described in the
prologue, Juan y Santacilia had traversed the Andes with Bouguer as a young lieutenant,
and may have learned about the metacenter directly from Bouguer even before
the latter had finished his manuscript. He had since kept abreast of developments in
ship theory, corresponding with the academies of Paris, Berlin, and Saint Petersburg,
and by 1752 was writing Examen marítimo (Maritime Examination), in which he
greatly expounded on stability theory and provided real-life examples of stability calculations.
Juan y Santacilia, as head of the Council of Constructors that established
construction standards, was in a position to institutionalize stability theory in the
design process; and as head of the Navy Guards, he had authority over the officers
who would oversee the dockyards. So why did the metacenter not appear on Spanish
ship plans until so late?
One possible answer may lie in the letter Juan y Santacilia wrote in 1766 to his colleague
José Romero Fernández de Landa, critical of theoretical naval architecture in
general (also discussed in chapters 1 and 3):
The calculation to find out the volume that the Ship occupies under the water is the only thing
that Bouguer and Duhamel have brought with certainty; but it is also older than their grandfathers;
all the rest are false . . . even the Metacenter which serves to determine the support for
the Sail, because [the calculations] lack the details that are needed
Jorge Juan saw, probably more clearly than his contemporaries, that the basic geometrical
calculations then in use provided only the height of the metacenter above
the center of buoyancy ( ), but that was effectively meaningless without also
knowing the height above the center of gravity ( ), and that calculation was too
laborious for almost any constructor.
Nonetheless, that calculation was part of the new French standardization that Jean-
François Gautier was tasked to bring to Spanish naval construction; as discussed in
chapter 1, Gautier was called to Spain in 1765 to oversee the alignment of the Spanish
navy with the French, and to begin the process of professionalization of constructors.
The Navy Ordinance of 1776, like Choiseul’s 1765 ordinance, established the technical
information required to be included on ship plans, including displacement and
stability calculations. In the pattern of other countries, as students became working
constructors, stability calculations began showing up on plans. Ironically, it was Juan
y Santacilia’s Examen marítimo, the standard textbook of the Spain’s Corps of Naval
Engineers, which would guide them through the process, despite the author’s own
cynicism about the utility of the theory.
 
If you like to Know more on the subject contact me via MP. By the way on this link you can download the Marquis of La Victoria Album. I forgot to post it on my previous message. The beautiful frigate is at page145:
http://www.um.es/catedranaval/docs/MDLV.pdf