EdT

Extras if needed.
 
Ed

Its good that you, and we, have these wonderful pictures, Gary.  It is easy to forget the detail and the beautiful workmanship after it is hidden by a few decks.   Your work on the magazine was certainly an inspiration for me.  Thanks.
 
Ed

Thanks again!! These comments are great for my ego and for keeping my nose to the grindstone in getting the reposts done. Very much appreciated.
 
Mitchell, the purpose of the horseshoe plate was to tie together the lower stem, the apron and the forward end of the keel. It was through bolted - one on each side. You will note the overlap of these three timbers in the pictures.
 
Now for a few reposts.
 
Ed

1:60 HMS Naiad 1797
Part 20 –Curved Upper Timbers
Posted 11/10/10
 
In the image below, taken from the CAD Frames drawing, a few of the timbers are curved in the fore and aft direction to provide support at the proper spacing for gun and sweep ports. As I mentioned earlier, all these timber spacings and offsets were taken from the original disposition of frames draft and I wanted to duplicate that as closely as possible.
 
 

 
The following series of pictures illustrate the steps I used to make the curved upper timbers.
 
The first step was to determine the width of timber (the siding) needed to cut out the curve. To determine this, a measurement was taken from the drawing of the total width of the final curved piece – the distance between its extreme verticals. A toptimber of this width, instead of the normal siding, was then cut out and assembled into the frame. The lower edge of this timber that would not require any cutting was set to the correct offset from the edge of the timber below.
 
After assembly, the upper timbers were marked as shown below.
 

 
Here, using a compass with the point leg extended as a guide and set to the normal 10.5 inch toptimber siding, two lines were drawn on the piece – one marking the lower part to be removed and the other marking the top part to be removed. The result is shown below.
 

 
The height of the top and bottom of the ports was marked on the frame and also two lines spanning the distance of the curved part. Lines were then sketched of the curve roughly as shown. I roughly accented these on the image because the pencil lines are not completely clear.
 

 
The next picture shows the top part being pared back in a smooth curve.
 
 

 
Note in this picture that the bottom side of the toptimer lies outside the edge of the timber below – for now. With one side of the curve formed, the other was traced in with the same compass setup.
 
 

 
The next picture shows the final line to be cut.
 
 

 
This part was then pared back to the new line. The picture below shows the result. Except for a few missing frames, this is exactly the area shown in the first image.
 

 
The next part of the narrative will cover the fairing and some finishing work on the lower hull.
 
 
Ed

1:60 HMS Naiad 1797
Part 17 – Some Backward Steps
Posted 11/6/10
 
The next phase, the installation of the square frames, took from mid July through to mid-October 2010, interrupted only by a week of vacation and a week of ugly rework, which I will describe before going to the more pleasant work on the frames.
 
Rework
 
This was by no means the first work to be redone. I keep a scrap box of rejected parts to remind me to be more careful and you will recall that two complete stern transom assemblies were made before getting one good one, but this was different because it involved a portion of the hull that I thought was complete – the bow timbers.
 
After erecting the first several square frames aft of the forward cants, I decided to do a waterline check on that part of the hull. Gauges were made for the 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 foot waterlines for the forward third of the hull. These were set up horizontally at their respective heights and brought into contact with the stem and the first square frame, which was correct from top to bottom. I was amazed and pleased at how accurately these gauges matched the hull on both sides – except for the same two timbers on each side of the stem – the bollard timbers and the first hawse pieces. These revealed a hollowness of about 1/64 inch between the 6 and 15 foot waterlines. Small perhaps, but it was clear that any planking or ribbands crossing this area in the curve from the rabbet to the second hawse timber would be off the frames by that amount. The four timbers clearly had to be replaced. Anything else would be a patch job.
 
Apart from the potential risk of removing and replacing these, this also meant scrapping all the work at the top of the bollards, the bowsprit chock and the shaped timberheads – not a happy prospect.
 
To remove the two timbers on each side, I first cut down the middle of the first hawse piece with a jeweler’s saw down the air space on both sides. This was then only held in place by the end grain glue joint with the first fashion piece, so this was easily popped out. The bollards were removed by sawing down vertically just outside the glue joint then paring the joint off with a chisel. I felt there was just too much joint and too many other joints in the picture to try and soften all this glue with ethanol. I did use this on the beveled joint with the apron at the base of the bollards. I did not want to damage that part of the apron. This was all done without damage to the surrounding timbers. New replacement parts were then made.
 
I hope you will understand that I was not in a mood to take a lot of pictures of this, but I did take a couple when I began to see my way out of the woods.
 

 
The above picture was taken after the new timbers were fit into place and glued. Not too bad. In the next picture the rough fairing to the correct profile has begun using a paring chisel. The layers of duct tape are there to protect the stem. This work was done very slowly with very light cuts.
 

 
The following picture shows the inside after rough fairing. The knightheads at the top have been neither sized nor squared yet.
 

 
The next pictures show the outside at this stage.
 

 

 
The silver lining here was that I now felt confident enough about this kind of surgery that I began to look for other areas of improvement. The picture below shows a cant frame in the process of being replaced and there were a few more of these that were redone where they had been over thinned by fairing, or where fairing had exposed chock joints.
 

 
At the end of these unpleasant tasks, I felt a lot better about the quality of the model and a lot more sensitive to making sure work was right the first time before moving on. This is an important lesson and a good reason for dragging out all this dirty linen.
 
In the next part we will get back on track and discuss the installation of the square framing.
 
Ed

1:60 HMS Naiad 1797
Part 11 – Frame Assembly
Posted MSW 10/27/10
 
Frame Assembly Jig
 
With eighty-three square frame sections and seventy-eighty cant frames to be made, some sort of assembly jig was certainly appropriate.  A picture of the basic jig developed for this is shown below.
 

 
The work surface is a piece of melamine-coated particleboard with the center area sized to fit a letter sized pattern sheet.  Slotted wood assemblies on the sides hold down clamping strips, which will hold frame segments in position on the assembly pattern sheet.  The side trays hold clamp parts.  Below is a picture of this jig in use on the glue up of a cant frame.
 

 
Hardwood cross members are drilled and tapped to take tightening screws at a variety of locations.  These tighten down onto hardwood strips below, which bear on the frame pieces.  The ends of the cross pieces are held down by the side slots.  Each clamp also has two screws, which fit loosely through the top members and screw into the bottom strips to hold the assembly together. 
 
Having described the assembly jig, we will pick up where we left off in Part 10.
 
Frame Assembly
 
After chocks have been glued to the heads of their segments and their backs leveled off on the disk sander, as described in the last part, the lower pieces are clamped down on the assembly pattern.  The adjoining segments are then fit up to it.  Usually some file dressing is needed to get a precise fit.  The clamps hold the timbers in place so any adjustments can be checked easily.  When the joint fits well and the parts match the pattern, they are glued together.  The hold-down clamps are applied first to assure the parts stay on pattern.  Then clamps are put over the joints.  This is shown in the picture below.
 

 
This picture also shows shims under the upper futtocks to provide the correct offsets in the fore and aft direction.  This particular frame has all the forward faces aligned, so progressively thicker shims are needed under the upper segments so all the top (fore) faces are aligned.
 
Finishing Assembled Frames
 
The picture below shows a square frame ready for the last finishing steps.
 

 
A this stage the frame has been removed from the jig, the inside of the chocks have been cut back to the inboard profile on the scroll saw.  The frame has been sanded down very close to the outboard and inboard profiles on a vertical drum sander, but no beveling is done at this stage. The notch to fit over the rising wood has been cut out and filed to fit.  In this picture the frame is being matched up to the assembly pattern for a last check.

The next step is to pare down the excess chock widths on the front face and to finish off these joints in preparation for erection of the frame.
 
The simple clamping device below was helpful in the paring process.  It also helps avoids chiseling into fingers.
 

 
To make this, a 1inch dowel has slices cut off, just less than the frame thickness.  Holes in these for screws are drilled off-center.  Sandpaper is glued around their perimeters to help grab the work.  They are then screwed loosely to a piece of plywood, which has a bench stop under its front side.  The curved frame can then be pushed between the off-center discs and the cam action of the disks will hold it in various positions for paring.
 
The next few pictures illustrate finishing off of joints to the smaller siding of the upper piece, and if necessary, for any other jogging called for.  This is done with a paring chisel and then dressed off with a small file.
.

.

.

 

.

.
As mentioned earlier, I leave the paper on until it absolutely has to be removed, to help in alignment and, on beveled frames, for rough faring of the inboard face after erection.  In the above picture, paper has been filed off at the joints in the finishing process.  When doing this, a file card is kept handy to remove paper residue from the file.
 
Floor Fillings
 
The picture below shows a final step for certain frames.
 


In this picture a filling piece of cherry has been cut which will be glued to this particular frame to match its floor.  In practice these fillers were inserted between floors after erection to provide a continuous surface to help prevent bilge water from filling the spaces between frames.  On the model these add authenticity and are very helpful in spacing floors correctly.  Since floors of main-frame bends are bolted tightly together, these are used only in spaces adjacent to intermediate frame floors.  There are three such spaces for each pair, one between intermediate frame sections and one each between these and their adjacent main-frame bends.
 

 
These fillers vary in thickness based on the disposition of frames drawing, averaging a little over 2 inches thick.  They were glued to the frame before erection and then sanded off as necessary to match the required spacing.  These fillers also add a lot of strength to the model in this area.

In the next part I will discuss how the preceding lofting and assembly process was modified to handle square frames with bevels.

Stay tuned…
 
Ed

 
 
2013 Copyright Edward J Tosti

Thanks for the comments and the useful input on waxes and solvents.
 
I do not know if the relative differences in these materials is significant to our purposes or not. However, to be prudent I would use microcrystalline (conservator's, Renaissance) wax on metal and rigging where color makes no difference. I would thin it with some high quality naptha-type solvent - see below. Some future generation may thank us for this caution. I see no reason why either material should not be used on wood and would let the desired appearance be the guide in this case. I expect to test these waxes - mainly to see what beeswax blends look like - on wood samples and will post some pictures later.
 
As far as solvents are concerned,I expect to continue to use turpentine to thin beeswax - perhaps from habit, perhaps because I prefer the aroma in the shop, or maybe I like the fanciful idea of an "all natural" finish. (Turpentine comes from trees.) All of these solvents work pretty much the same way.
 
Mineral spirits is essentialy naptha - a broad cut of distillates from petroleum refining. Odorless forms have had the aromatics (benzene, toluene, xylene, etc.) removed. Since these are the less healthful constituents, odorless is probably safer to use - and your shop will smell less like a refinery. I have often wondered if the product sold as "naptha" is much different from mineral spirits. There are light and heavy cuts of naptha so perhaps it is one of these variants. Lighter cuts would be more useful for cleaning. Ordinary "mineral spirits" may be the heavier - more oily - cheaper cuts - good to thin paints/varnishes and clean brushes. I don't really know the specific differences. Anything sold in small containers for artists is probably higher quality and always more expensive.
 
So, thanks again for the input.
 
Ed

Thanks for mentioning that, druxey.  I do use conservator's wax (Renaissance Wax) and should have mentioned it.  It is a petroleum product and as you say is water-white and pH neutral.  I believe it is also more stable and lasts longer.  I often use it on metal.  It adds no color to the wood and may provide more permanent protection than beeswax.  Beeswax does seem to last for decades however.
 
I use beeswax on wood as a personal preference because it deepens and warms the color of the wood somewhat.  It also penetrates when used in solution with turpentine - giving depth in appearance and additional protection.  I have not tried diluting conservator's wax, but I suspect it would be best to do that with a petroleum based solvent like mineral spirits.  I don't like the smell of that on the wood - although I have used ms with tung and other oils on furniture work. 
 
The acidity in beeswax could be a problem I suppose, perhaps on metal like blackened brass or copper, but I have not seen evidence of it on some very old work.  I think acidity is a non-issue on wood. 
 
I think the yellow color - and perhaps the acidity - in beeswax is from pollen.  White beeswax is processed to remove most of that.
 
I would probably not try to blend the two different types.
 
So, like most finishes - a heavy dose of personal preference in the decision.
 
Ed

1:60 HMS Naiad 1797
Part 71 – Stern Timbers 2
Posted 5/2/11
 
 
In Part 70 the side framing assemblies over the stern timbers were being installed. In the first picture these assemblies on both sides have been glued on and are waiting for bolts. The support fixture was removed so these could be more easily faired inside and out.
 

 
Before installing the inner stern timbers, I wanted to fit the upper transoms. The timbers would then be installed so further work on the transoms could proceed. Before beginning this work, however, I needed to do some research and rechecking of my drawings of this area and this resulted in some re-drafting and re-lofting of the patterns for the four upper transoms. I also took the occasion of these refinements to replace the plan that is attached to the building board. For these reasons it has taken a little time to get this installment posted.
 
In the next picture the upper deck and seat transoms have been cut out and fit between the side timber assemblies.
 

 
These round up and aft. The upper convex surfaces were cut out of thick stock from the patterns using the scroll saw and then sanding to the line on the disk sander. The thickness and the lower convex surface were done on the thickness sander in the way the bottoms of the lower deck beams were done.
 
The next picture shows the way these were located on the side framing before fitting.
 

 
The vertical pencil lines at the aft side of these were squared up from the corresponding line on the new plan on the board. The horizontal lines for the top surface were transferred from the framing elevation drawing, which also underwent some revision, and measured up from the base. The deck transom is of course at the height of the underside of the deck. The top of the seat ransom is on the line of the tops of the gun port sills and is actually the sill for the upper deck stern chase ports.
 
The next picture shows all four transoms fit up and pinned in place.
 

 
With this done the stern timbers could be installed permanently. This is being done in the next picture.
 

 
With glue applied, these were slid into their dovetails from the front.
 
The next picture shows these in place supported by the fixture, which has been re-mounted for the purpose and for the following steps.
 
The next steps involved some complicated layout and joinery, cutting the notches in the bottom of each transom so it could be let down on the stern timbers. With the transom held approximately in place the line of the joints is being marked.
 

 
The first of these, the upper deck transom, turned out to be the most troublesome. Because of the slants of the various faces and the curved top surfaces of the timbers it is difficult cut these to fit tightly. I will pass on describing all the gory details, but after some hours of work the first piece was not satisfactory. However, it was quite useful in laying out the lines on the second attempt. This is shown in the next picture from below, a much better result than the first one. Trust me.
 

 
The lower faces of the stern timbers still need to be faired in this picture. That will be done when all the transoms are installed with all their bolts.
 
The remaining three were done on one try and the next picture shows the lower three in place with the lower two pinned and clamped after gluing.
 

 
The holes for the pins holding all these pieces in place will be filled with the permanent bolts.
 
A corner of the nice clean new drawing on the board is also somewhat visible in this picture.
 
 
Ed

1:60 HMS Naiad 1797
Part 70 – Stern Timbers 1
Posted 4/26/11
 
 
I decided to install the stern timbers next, because they are needed for both the upper deck framing and also for the installation of the wale. First an alignment fixture for the top of the stern timbers was made from a strip of scrap pine using pieces extracted from the drawings. Being able to cut paste and print extra copies or fragments for patterns really comes in handy. The center section is curved up and aft to match the stern round up and round aft. Notches were then cut at the locations of the tops of the stern timbers so they would fit in place snuggly. The first picture shows this pattern held in place on the two clamped squares.
 

 
The pattern was located carefully, squaring up from the plan on the board and setting heights from the framing plan. The next picture shows the round aft on the pattern. The notches were cut to the line of the outside of the timbers.
 

 
The next picture shows all six full timbers in place. Except for the outer two they are dovetailed into the wing transom.
 

 
The outer timbers and the filling timbers in the space up to the aft fashion piece were made offsite as a prefabricated assembly. The next picture shows this fabrication in process.
 

 
Again, a drawing fragment was cut and pasted to form a template sheet, which was then printed, cut and used as a base for the assembly. The sidings of these timbers are oversized to allow some movement in fit up. They will then be faired back to the shape of the hull during and after assembly. The sills for the doors to the quarter galleries will be fitted later after all this is installed.
 
The next picture shows the starboard assembly clamped into place during the fit up process.
 

 
A fairing strip of pine is being used to align the assembly. It is clamped just above the strip put on earlier at the sheer line to align the upper timbers.
 
The next picture is a view of the same setup from the inside.
 

 
This picture shows pine spacers glued between the filling frames to give the assembly enough strength to withstand the heavy sanding in the fairing step. These will come out later. The picture also shows a temporary pine pattern piece crosswise at the height of the touch of the upper counter, right at the base of the upper staight sections of the timbers. This is to assure the correct spacing of the timbers at that level. If just held at the bottom and top they can end up twisted, throwing off the spacing at the center. A third constraint assures that they will be at the right spacing at the all-important level of the stern lights.
 
The next picture shows the foot of the outside timber on the wing transom, roughly faired and pinned to the aft fashion piece. Bolts will be put in between the filling timbers and the outer stern timber before overall assembly to give more strength to the assembly which now is just held with end grain glue joints..
 
 

 
All the stern timbers were made in one piece to simplify things. I will probably scribe the scarf joints on the outer ones to show how they were made in practice. There is still work to be done on the four inner timbers and their joints.
 
The last picture shows the current status from further back. The port filling frames assembly is still on the bench at this stage.
 
 

 
When both assemblies are fit up, the next step will be to clean up the inner timbers and then make the four “upper” transoms, the upper deck and quarter deck transoms and the seat transoms for those decks. I may then install the taffrail to give this structure more strength at the top. The basic structure of the hull framing will then be finished – a big milestone.
 
 
Ed

1:60 HMS Naiad 1797
Part 68 –Finishing/Lower Deck Ledges
Posted 4/21/11
 
I have mentioned finishing with beeswax dissolved in turpentine on a couple of occasions, so maybe some further discussion at this stage, when the finish is being applied to the lower hull, would be appropriate.
 
The first picture shows this solution being applied with a brush to the lower framing.
 

 
The idea behind this finish is to impregnate it into the wood without build-up on the surface, hence the thin turpentine solution. This is made by dissolving solid beeswax in warmed turpentine to a very thin mix. Both these are natural products and I am attracted to them at least partly for that reason. I much prefer the pine-derived turpentine to mineral spirits and other petroleum distillates - for this process at least. The turpentine penetrates the wood and takes the dissolved wax in with it. When it evaporates out, the wax is left. I have used penetrating polymerizing oils, like tung or linseed for many years in various furniture finishing applications, but I prefer the wax for this application. Excess wax left on the surface, especially in tight places where it is hard to rub out, is easier to remove than excess dried oils. A dry Q-tip, bristle artist’s brush or a bit of rag will do the job and if not a bit of turpentine will redissolve the wax and help remove it. This problem with oils can be mitigated by thinning them before application, but they still have a tendency to ooze out later and harden on the surface. Also, since they are cross-linked polymers, they are not easily removed with solvent. Oils also have a more yellow hue that on pear comes out a bit more orange than I prefer.
 
In the picture below a dry bristle brush is being used to buff the surface and the crevices and also to distribute any excess finish.
 
 

 
As the finish dries, it lightens to a shade in between the finished and unfinished colors in the above picture. Sometimes when first applying this, light spots show up where not all the glue was washed off, so while doing this, I keep a small bit of 400 wet-or-dry paper handy to sand these areas while applying finish. This removes the glue film and it becomes unnoticeable.
 
Of course once this stuff is put on glue will no longer adhere. The following pictures show the finished lower hull about an hour after application.
 
 

 

 
More finish at this stage will add sheen. Wiping with turpentine on a damp rag will reduce sheen.
 
With this work on the lower hull finished, it was time to return to the lower deck – and the ledges. At the time of this writing the lower deck ledges are about 50% complete. The next picture shows how far they have progressed from aft forward.
 
 

 
The inner tier of ledges on the starboard side will be left off and some others, to improve visibility into the lower decks. At least part of the starboard side will be decked, but generally ledges are being installed on that side anyway so I can decide on the decking later - except for the outer tier which will definitely be decked over.
 
The last picture is just the same area from aft.
 

 
Spring chores are starting to cut into modeling time. It will be a few more days, at least, before the ledges are finished.
 
Ed

1:60 HMS Naiad 1797
Part 86 – Lower Deck Binding Strakes 2
 
 
 
In the last part, the method I used to install the binding strakes - the second and third strakes outside the main hatch coamings - was not correct. I had scored down the beams to take the thicker planks. Most of us I believe, now agree that the planks themselves were more likely scored to fit over the beams. Since I had already scored all the beams on both sides, I decided to install the strakes their full length on both sides. This gives the installation the correct appearance. The full lengths of the binding strakes, installed on both sides of the lower deck are shown below.
 

 
I had not intended to install any planking on the starboard side, but could not leave the (probably) incorrect scores in the beams exposed. This picture shows the full extent of the lower deck planking that will be installed.
 
The next picture shows the planking in the area between the main and fore hatches.
 

 
In this picture the outside planks toward the bottom of the picture, the port side, have just been treenailed and the area is wet from washing off the glue. The central plank is 5 inches thick and the remaining 4 strakes inside the main hatch coamings are 4 inches thick. All these rest on the beams and ledges, so they step up twice toward the center. The first strake outside the main hatch is 3” thick as is the rest of the deck planking, except for the next two, which are the binding strakes. These are 4” thick and are “let-down” on the beams and ledges to be flush at the top with the 3 inch planking. These were thought to be important structurally, so they are fastened with two short bolts on each beam plus one treenail in each ledge. The boltse are simulated on the model with black monofilament and standout from the tree nails in the above picture. Although these bolts were probably counter bored and covered with wood or caulking on the real ship, I wanted to illustrate the different fasteners as I have generally done, so I made them show as iron.
 
In the next picture, treenails are being installed in the planking butt ends at the main hatch.
 
 

 
These are .025 inch bamboo. A slightly oversized hole is drilled, the end of the bamboo rod is dipped in dark glue, inserted in the hole, grabbed with the diagonal cutters, pushed all the way in, then clipped off. A slant cut on the end of the rod is then made with a razor blade and the process repeated – endlessly it seems. Every ten or so, the glue is washed off with clean water on a brush. When dry, the ends are pared off with a crank handled chisel. The deck is then filed flat and sanded.
 
The next picture shows this area after this was done.
 

 
This area and the open beams outside it toward the bottom of the picture have been given some finish. When this dries it will be somewhat lighter and duller. The binding strakes on the starboard side have only their bolts installed. They still require treenails in between over the non-existent ledges, which were left off to better see the area below.
 
The last picture just shows the current state toward the bow.
 

 
The waxed area shows quite a contrast with the sanded decking, but this will lighten up when the turpentine evaporates. Areas that still need work done, like the cabin partitions and the standard knees are left unfinished until that is done but I like to get some finish on areas that are complete to protect the wood from staining and also because it gets harder to reach areas later.
 
Thanks for all your input on this question. I wish I had not scored the starboard beams but adding the planks on that side to cover them is an acceptable solution.
 
 
Ed

1:60 HMS Naiad 1797
Part 84 – Lower Deck Hatchways
Posted 6/26/11
 
In the last episode the last of the clamps and spirketing was being installed at the bow. As shown in the first picture, this work was completed and the hook between the upper and lower decks has been installed.
 

 
This picture also shows the coamings and head ledges installed around the fore hatch and the ladder way to the fore platform. The next picture shows a closer view of the bow from above. Its getting harder to see down into the magazine.
 

 
The heavy 5 inch thick central plank has been installed between hatchways as they are installed. This plank was of heavier thickness to take the pillars, which would help support the upper deck beams.
 
The next picture shows the hatchways around the main mast partners – the main hatch and the aft hatch.
 
 

 
It took me some time to get the hang of the joinery on these coamings and head ledges. The coamings run fore and aft, rest on carlings and are rabbeted to take the grating ledges. Their ends are lapped over the ends of the head ledges, which have no rabbet and the lap joint is slanted down like a half dovetail. All four are beveled on the outside faces and will eventually get rounded off on their corners. I wasted some wood before getting these to come out right.
 
The next picture shows the ladderway to the stewards room and the after magazine and the hatchway over the fish room hatch.
 
 

 
As these were installed, the planking between them was installed. I mentioned the thick center plank above. The next strakes to the outside of the coamings are 1 inch less but still 1 inch thicker than the 3 inch plank outside the coamings. I still have to decide how to handle the binding strakes also 1 inch thicker but let down into the beams and ledges so they are flat with the rest of thee deck.
 
The next picture shows the center planking toward the stern and the hatch to the bread room.
 

 
This picture also shows the mizzen step.
 
The last two pictures show the work around the main mast partners, the pump shafts and the hatchways.
 

 
Once the heavier planking between hatches is installed (on the port side only) the next strake out, a 3 inch plank, will be installed, then some undecided treatment of the binding strake. That will pretty much conclude the decking at this level.
 
 

 
I also need to decide which of the hatches on this deck will get gratings.
 
All of the above work still needs treenailing and perhaps some bolts.
 
 
Ed

I am also trying to find some information on the rigging chain used.  The Rigging Warrant expresses the sizes as say 9/16" which is the correct way and is the 'wire' diameter (thickness of the metal not the link).  I have found some rules-of-thumb for determining the ship's anchor cable sizes, but not how to determine the overall size of each chain link.  In the following drawing I am trying to determine the opposite to what they are - i.e. I have the wire diameter but need a link length and width (the latter in particular).
 
Brady (The Kedge Anchor) 1852 - as shown in the table below - informs that chain used for rigging was called 'short link chain' in this period, but again gives it as 'diameter' - has anyone come across a 'rule-of-thumb for determining the chain link overall link size similar to that as shown for an anchor cable (third pic)? NB - this rule of thumb is for modern cable.  I need this to determine the sheave size which in turn drives the sheave slot size - wider but shallower sheave grooves were used with chain.
 
Any info/pointers would be greatly appreciated.  
 
Cheers
 
Pat


 

HMS Victory
1:96 Sratchbuild Project
Part 1 - Introduction
(Original post August 2010)
 
Hello everyone.  I am new to the forum and so far have been very impressed by its content and the work of so many modelers.  In this build log I want to make some contribution to the great work everyone is doing in this forum.  This hobby has given me many happy hours and I hope others may benefit from some of what I have learned along the way. 
 

This picture of the finished Victory model has a backdrop reminiscent of the Portsmouth sky as I remember it on my first visit back in 1970 – gray, cold and bleak.
 
In this series I intend to retrace the progress of constructing Victory at a scale of 1:96 from scratch, a project that began in 1976 and reached completion at the end of 2009.  The very long time to complete this project had many periods of inactivity, some measured in years.  Family and career priorities came first.  About half the work on the model was completed after my retirement in 2002, but even that stretch had breaks.  This was my first “real” ship-modeling project and I knew when I started that I was biting off a lot.  The learning curve was steep.  For me the learning process and the need to solve the many problems that arise in a project like this are primary factors in maintaining my interest, and I am glad I started with something this challenging.  The work started on the drafting board and ended last year with the building of the case.  All of it has been enjoyable.
 

Victory from astern, flying the huge white ensign.
 
This will not be a step by step “how to build Victory” practicum.  I will try to walk through the steps in the process that I followed, glossing over a lot of very well traveled ground.  I will try to cover in detail processes that I developed and/or used to do specific challenging tasks, for example, building the 1:96 plank on frame ships boats, constructing the tiny ships wheel assembly to scale, making gun port door hinges, etc.  I hope this approach will attract the interest of a range from novice to expert.  I consider myself to be somewhere well in between these two extremes.
 

This picture shows the beauty of Victory’s lines, the complexity of her forward rigging, her graceful bow structure and her formidable armament.
 
Several years ago, friends and relatives began to express interest in the Victory project and I began to circulate regular progress reports to them.  These included pictures, descriptions of the work and often background information that would be appropriate to a group on interested non-modelers.  I will use some of this material in this series, but the readers of this forum will, I hope, be interested in a lot more depth.  I will do my best to meet these needs.  In this first post I have interspersed pictures of the finished model with text covering introductory material and background.  I will start in on the actual work in subsequent posts.  Questions and comments are of course encouraged.  If more detail on something is required let me know and I will try to respond.
 

The complexity of Victory’s rigging even without staysail and studdingsail rigging is amazing.
 
History
 
Victory was commissioned by Parliament in 1758.  Her keel was laid at Chatham in 1759 and she was launched after some delay in her construction, in 1765.  She was designed by Sir Thomas Slade, Surveyor of the Navy from 1755 to 1771 and is considered the masterpiece of his many designs.  She was the fourth English ship of the line to bear this name.  Her 100 guns on three decks designates her a “First Rate” ship of the line.  She had a length of 186 feet on the lower gun deck, a breadth of 51 feet and had a displacement of 2142 tons.  As a “ship of the line” her purpose was to bring maximum gunnery to bear against enemy ships in fleet action.  The guns at the time were measured by the weight of projectile – usually iron round shot.  Victory’s guns ranged from 12 to 32 pounds, plus two 68 pound, short range carronades, mounted on the forecastle.  Her normal crew of over 800 men was needed to serve these guns – and of course, to sail the ship.
 

Under the foretop during the build.
 
HMS Victory is perhaps the most famous warship in British History.  She was the flagship of Lord Horatio Nelson at the battle off Cape Trafalgar in 1805, which was the decisive battle of the Napoleonic Wars.  Following the French Revolution, these wars raged across Europe as the hereditary monarchies (Britain, Russia, Austria, Prussia) fought the French to restore the Bourbon throne.  They also feared the spread of liberalism ushered in by the French Revolution and the ambitions of its heir, Napoleon Bonaparte.  Although Trafalgar ended the threat to Britain of a French invasion by confining Napoleon to the continent and putting a stranglehold his trade, ten more years would pass before he would be finally defeated at Waterloo in 1815.  Throughout 20 years of war, the Royal Navy maintained a constant blockade of Napoleon’s Continental Ports, a demanding task for men and ships.  Victory was one of these ships.
 
Fleet actions were rare, so most of the life of seamen consisted of make-work drudgery and boredom, except for those who actually sailed the ship.  Blockade service demanded that men be constantly aloft or on deck in all weather to adjust sails and maneuver the ship against the Atlantic or Mediterranean tides and winds.  The least inattention could lose the ship against the coastline.  Victory engaged in a few major fleet actions during her career including the action off Ushant in 1778, the Siege of Toulon in 1793, the action off Hyeres in 1795, the Battle of Cape St Vincent in 1797 and Trafalgar in 1805.   The most famous of all British seamen, Lord Nelson, was struck down on her quarterdeck during Trafalgar and died below decks with the knowledge that he had defeated the French and Spanish fleets.  Nelson lies in St Paul’s Cathedral in London.  Victory stands in dry-dock today at the Portsmouth Navy Yard on the south coast of England.
 

The head structure showing the figurehead, main rails and the port boomkin, which carried the fore course tack.
 
Background to the Model Project

As a young child of 8 or 9, my interest in ship models was ignited by a model of the whaling bark Wanderer, which was built by my uncle, Emidio Tosti.  This was one of several ships he had built by that time and throughout his long life he built many, all with consummate skill and meticulous attention to detail.  He loved building these ships and was devoted to this work for more than 75 years.  He finished his 1:48 scale model of the Victory at the age of 96 and completed another model before retirement from the hobby at 98.  He passed away in 2008 approaching the age of 102.
 
Although I had built some small crude models as a child, my interest lay mostly dormant.  In the late 60’s I started a model of USS Constitution, but lacking skills, tools, time, and good historical data, abandoned the project.   On a cold day in 1970, while living in England, my wife Dottie and I visited the Victory at Portsmouth, the first of a number of such visits I would make in later years.  Then, in 1975, I came across a book entitled Anatomy of Nelson’s Ships by Dr C. Nepean Longridge.  Dr. Longridge had been a physician in the British merchant marine until his retirement around 1929, at which time he began construction of his now famous model of HMS Victory.  He worked diligently on this 1:48 scale model until 1940, when the beginning of World War II caused him to return to sea.  In 1945 he resumed work on the model and completed it in the early 1950’s.  His book, written at that time, describes the construction of actual ships of this period and the detailed process of building his beautiful model.  This model is on permanent exhibit at the Science Museum in London.  I have been fortunate enough to visit this model many times over the years – with my little notebook.
 

Dottie at Portsmouth 1970
 
The work of Dr. Longridge was beyond anything I had seen before in ship modeling.  The attention to detail and the authenticity of every aspect of the model was impressive and inspiring.  I immediately began planning my own model.  I decided to work at a smaller scale, 1/8 inch to 1 foot or 1:96.  This would yield a model of manageable size with overall dimensions of about 40 inches long by 16 inches wide by 32 inches high.  Based on the information in the book and some other limited sources I began to prepare drawings for the model in early 1976 and began work on the hull later that year.  The structure of the hull and below waterline planking was finished by the late 1970’s.  During the 1980’s work progressed only intermittently on the topside planking and the stern of the ship.  Starting in 1995, I began to work intensively on the model during Christmas Vacation breaks.  It became an annual ritual.  By the time of my retirement in 2002, the model was about 50% complete.  In late 2005, work to finish the model began in earnest - an effort averaging about 10 to15 hours per week. 
 

The waist, boats, belfry, spare anchors, etc.
 
My goals for the model were historical accuracy, precision in details and clear representation of the ships beautiful lines.  I am not a perfectionist by nature, but on this project I tried, not always successfully, to follow the rule:  Good enough, isn’t.
 
The model is constructed from scratch of various hardwoods, brass and copper sheet and wire and thread of Irish linen and cotton polyester.  Aside from two or three small brass screws and a number of brass belaying pins and cannon balls, there are no purchased parts, fastenings or commercially cut wood in the model.
 

The area around the main mast.
 
The framing material of the model consists of luaun, maple and cherry, fastened by hundreds of small wooden pegs or “tree nails” and Titebond aliphatic resin wood Glue.  Exterior planking below the waterline is cherry, fastened with glue and nails made from copper wire.  The underwater hull is sheathed with 3700 embossed copper plates fastened with contact cement.  Upper planking is of cherry and European Boxwood, fastened with glue and small diameter boxwood pegs.  Lower decks are of maple planks and visible decks are of European Boxwood.  Masts are of boxwood and Yards are of Gabon Ebony.  Rigging lines down to about 4 inches actual circumference were spun into the correct size using Linen thread on a specially made rope machine.  Smaller lines are mostly mercerized cotton polyester thread in various sizes.  Wooden rigging parts like blocks and deadeyes are made from boxwood.  Deadeyes and standing rigging lines are blackened using acrylic ink.  In the interest of showing off the sheer lines and graceful woodwork, there is (almost) no paint on the model.
 

The foot of the mizzen mast on the poop deck with flemished lines.
 
Tools and Resources
 
Machinery and tools are required to build a model of this type.  Normal woodworking tools (table saw, bandsaw, planes, etc.) are needed to reduce large sized wood slabs to small-scale shipyard timber.  A scroll saw is essential to cut shapes.  A small table saw (2”diameter) was used to cut parts and planks to size.  Small-scale machine tools included an old Unimat SL Lathe/Milling Machine and a Sherline Vertical Milling Machine.  Specially built machines include the rope machine and a machine to “serve”, that is, to wrap lines with fine thread.  Many small hand tools are needed – too numerous to mention.
 

 Another view of the foretop.
 
Good modeling information for Victory was scarce in 1976 but since then a lot more reference material has become available, which I used to supplement Longridge book.  A book by John McKay called The 100 Gun Ship Victory features many excellent detailed drawings of all parts of the ship and it’s rigging.  In addition, I have acquired and used a number of contemporary books, which became available in reprint, which give actual Admiralty Specifications of the time.  These include The Shipbuilders Repository, 1788, Steel’s Mastmaking, Sailmaking and Rigging, 1794, and The Young Sea Officers Sheet Anchor, 1819.   Other key references include James Lee’s Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War, Peter Goodwin’s Construction and Fitting of English Ships of War 1650-1850, and Brian Lavery’s Arming and Fitting of English Ships of War 1600-1815.
 

Below the main channel.
 
In the next post I will describe the drafting of plans from the Longridge book drawings and focus in detail on a few drafting techniques that may be of interest. Please stay tuned.

Ed Tosti

 
 

 
 

 
2013 Copyright Edward J Tosti

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 28 – "Pin-Indexing"
 
Next on the agenda is a long slog of repetitive work – making and setting the 29 full frames of the afterbody.  This will be followed by 13 pairs of half frames and 6 pairs of cants – then the eagerly anticipated circular stern
 
Essentially, this framing will be a repeat of the installation in the forebody.  I previously showed pictures and described the frame assembly using pin-indexed pieces.  This has greatly improved efficiency and accuracy in assembling the 13 pieces of each full frame pair.  This process can only be used if indexed bolt/pin holes are provided on the pattern sheets.  I thought it might be interesting to give a short overview of how that step in the lofting process was done.
 
I put this post together a few days ago thinking I might post it.  The discussion on pre-beveling of frames prompted me to do so, since the lofting described is one of the enablers for that. 
 
This is an overview only of the pin/bolt hole placement on the patterns. I will not describe the entire frame lofting process here, except to say that profiles for the true fore and aft faces of each frame must added to the normal body plan and used for lofting beveled frames.  Using profiles from the next frame forward and aft does not provide sufficient accuracy for bolt placement in beveled frames. 
 
The first image shows the fore and aft half-pattern objects for forward frame R, created from the enhanced body plan. 
 
In each pattern green is used to show the forward profiles and red for the aft profiles.
 

 
Every frame “bend” on Young America is constructed with offset, sistered fore and aft timber segments. The segments are delineated by the cut lines on each pattern.  In this image no pin holes have yet been placed on either pattern, but the objects for the hole marks are scattered to the left of the forward pattern.
 
 
The two patterns are then aligned to their final relative positions as shown below.
 

 
This is a highly beveled frame pair, as can be seen in this image.
 
With the patterns aligned, the pin/bolt hole objects are placed on the combined patterns between the line for the forward outboard profile and the aft inboard profile.  This assures that they will not break through either the inboard or outboard faces – hence the need for accurate profiles.  The placement of some of these near the top of the frame is shown below.
 

 
In this highly beveled frame, these hole objects just fit between the lines.  The actual pin/bolt holes will be smaller than these objects.  Note that the top of the forward frame is higher since it includes the stanchion for the main rail.
 
With the holes placed, the aft frame pattern object is selected along with all of the hole objects.  This combination is then copied and pasted to the right in the next image.  The aft pattern is then deleted from its position atop the forward pattern leaving just the forward frame and the original hole objects in place.  The two pattern halves now have precisely indexed pin/bolt hole marks.
 

 
The two objects in this image are then mirrored and combined to form the full frame patterns shown below.  This same basic process is also used for the half and cant frames.
 

 
After cutting out the timber segments, the patterns can then be used to drill indexing pin holes to locate the timbers on a pattern sheet for assembly and later for insertion of model bolts.  This was described in previous posts.
 
Assembly accuracy is very dependent on accurate drilling, but that is another topic.  Besides the advantages in assembly time, the final frame emerges with patterns on both fore and aft faces – one of the important enablers for pre-beveling before erection.
 
I believe this process has reduced the frame assembly time to half of what I expected so far.  The above description is, of course, simply an overview, hardly a tutorial.
 
The jury is still out on whether this and the other process features will enable frames to be completely beveled before erection.
 
Sorry, no photos.  Next time.
 
Ed
 

Perhaps you are right, Druxey.  I may be overly optimistic about this.  As with most of this work, my attittude is: With the right process, even I can do it.

Thank you all for your comments.
Ben, it is never good to generalize, but I believe that it was not common on American clippers to fill the gaps between frames below the floor heads as was done in 18C RN ships like Naiad.  Because the clippers used suction pumps that could reach to the inboard face of the garboard strake at the bottom outboard face of the frames, the spaces between frames along the keel could be drained.  This could not be done with the chain type pumps used earlier so there would always be stagnant water between frames.  On the clippers a roughly 3-4" limber channel was cut on the bottom of every frame near the keel to allow water to flow to the pump under the frames.  These were normally fitted with chains so the debris could be cleared out as necessary.  So-called "hogging chocks" were used on some ships between frames but these did not extend to the keel.  These were wedged between the frames to put the  hull structure into compression that would help resist hogging.  Evidently these were used all the way up the frame, but I cannot see how any but those at the bottom would be useful.  So, simple answer: no.
 
Druxey, interesting point.  You are quite right that the long sleek hull form would apparently reduce frame bevels.  Your observation perked my interest because I have been struck by how few cant frames were used on YA as opposed to Naiad.  YA has only six pair forward and the same number aft (19% of hull length).  Naiad had the equivalent of 11 and 9 pair fore and aft respectively (34% of hull length).  So, on YA the square frames  (full or half) were taken much closer to the ends of the hull.  On older ships much more of the hull curvature was taken up by cant frames - at least on Naiad, which I beleive is representative. 
 
Recognizing that ships differed, I looked at Naiad's most beveled frame, which turned out to be 24a, the last square frame aft.  The maximum bevel on that frame was just under 20 degrees.  On YA the most beveled frame is forward (surprisingly), frame Zf.  The maximum bevel angle on this frame  is just over 23 degrees.  So, in fact, the frame beveling on YA is comparable, at least, perhaps slightly more and due entirely to using fewer cant frames.
 
I really do not like the idea of beveling the frames by sanding the final hull shape.  I did some pre-beveling of frames on Naiad, but it had to be limited because after frame assembly there was a pattern on only one side.  With the assembly method used on YA, patterns remain on both sides and they are more accurately placed. This should permit beveling to be completed before frame erection - at least theoretically.  I have been working up to that slowly - gaining confifence in the method.  I have just started frames aft of 0 and I am beveling those right to the line.  We'll see how that works out. 
 
Thanks for raising this interesting point.
 
Ed

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 27 – Forward Hull Sanding/Bolting
 
 
First, thanks everyone for the recent comments.  I hope all those who celebrate Thanksgiving Day had a good holiday.
 
The view from directly forward in the last post seemed popular so here is another from a slight angle.
 

 
All those unsightly wood spacers between frames are temporary and will be coming out at some point.
 
After this picture was taken the model was inverted for fairing and sanding.  There is not much to say about this, since it turned out to be less work than anticipated.  Below is a picture of part of the bottom after sanding.
 

 
Not much fairing was needed – nothing like the work I had to do on Naiad, where very little pre-beveling of frames was done.  On this model almost all of the beveling was done before the frames were set, so the sanding was mostly for cleanup and finishing.
 
The next picture shows an area slightly forward.
 

 
This picture shows some of the bolts – inserted after sanding – to secure the half frames to the keelson/deadwood.  These are copper wire, epoxied deep into the holes to give strength to the model joints.  These frames are end-grain glued to the keelson/deadwood, so the joints are not strong.  These bolts were iron so they will be blackened before the lower hull is finished.
 
I am considering installing the garboard strakes – at least – later on both sides.  On these ships the garboards had an important structural role.  They were quite thick (7”) and were edge bolted through the keel and face bolted to the frames.   This reinforced the attachment of the frames to the keel and will serve that purpose on the model as well.  You will recall that the frame floors are merely glued and pinned to the top of the keel – not notched to fit over a rising wood as in 18C ships – and some clippers.  This is not a strong joint.
 
While the model was inverted the remaining forward bolts were installed.  The bolts through the stem can be seen in the next picture.  These were long copper bolts.
 

 
Eventually, the forward side of the stem – actually the false stem – will be tapered down to about 4 or 6 inches in `breadth.
 
The last picture shows the iron bolts securing the hawse timbers to the stem/apron.  Like the cant frame bolts, these are black monofilament.  All these bolts were riveted flush.
 

 
The model has now been re-aligned on the shipway so the afterbody framing can begin.
 
 
Ed
 
 
 

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 26 – Forward Half Frames/Ribbands
 
To provide space for work on the forward cant frames, I deferred setting of the remaining half frames.  In the first picture that work is proceeding.
 

 
The next picture shows all of the forward frames installed.
 

 
The sleek forward hull shape is really visible at this stage.  The next picture shows a different perspective.
 

 
And another view.
 

 
At this stage the alignment and spacing of the frames are set by the softwood spacers between each frame about midway between the keel and topside.  More strength is needed for final fairing of the lower hull.  Also, as the above photo shows, there is some irregularity in the line of the toptimbers that needs to be corrected before final fairing.
 
I decided to fair the forward hull before proceeding to the aft frames.  To provide additional strength and align the frame tops I installed temporary “ribbands” on both sides at the height of the planksheer.  I found this a very useful device in constructing Naiad.
 
The next picture shows the starboard ribband being fitted.
 

 
These were made from single 3/16” strips of clear white pine.  One end was boiled to set the curvature and in the above picture is being clamped for drying.  In the next picture installation is proceeding.
 

 
The strips are secured to every frame by short pins through drilled holes.  These are bent over on the inside to pull every frame tightly into the fair line of the ribband.  I cut off the points of the pins before bending to avoid all the scratches I got from these while working inside Naiad.  The holes in the frames will later be used for sheer strake bolts.  The tops of the strips are set at the height of the bottom of the planksheer rail, so these can be used to trim off the tops of the aft upper futtocks.
 
The next picture was taken from above after the strips were installed.
 

 
The center marks on the cross-spales cannot be seen under the thread line.  This is a good thing.  In addition to this centering check, the outside of the ribband was also checked by squaring up from the base drawing.
 
In the next picture I cleared all the clutter from the shipway to focus on the lines of the very sharp forward entry.
 

 
At this stage the frames have only been given the bevel described earlier before they were set.  Some additional sanding to refine the fairness is needed.
 
The model can now be removed from the base and upended for sanding and also for installation of quite a few bolts, especially those holding the half-frames to the deadwood.  These joints are quite weak so the model bolts will have to provide strength.  I will cover this in the next post.
 
Happy Thanksgiving everyone.
 
 
Ed

Frank, I neglected to respond to your comment on the string line.  This, combined with centermarks on the upper cross-spales may be the single most important tool in maintaining alignment in models built upright.  I had previously used thin wire wrapped taut between two pins, but found it always in the way and a pain to move and replace.  Thread held taut with a hanging weight is a simple and easy to apply solution that can be moved without bother when necessary.  These features help assure that it will be used.  Highly recommended. 
 
Ed

Thank you all for these kind words.
 
The lines are indeed sweet, Druxey, a fact that I can take little credit for.  The beauty of the full forward hull shape will become more apparent in the next post as the remaining forward frames are placed.
 
I really appreciate the comments on the bolt pattern.  This is one case where the bolts actually compliment some of the attractive structural lines.  The top row parallels the cutting down line and the lower row the bearding line.  This is structurally correct and aesthetic at the same time.  Unfortunately this is not always the case as many authentic bolt patterns appear quite random - and often, on models, sloppy.  I am sure there will be plenty of such cases on this model.  On Naiad I learned that while this effect of realism cannot be eliminated, with care it can be moderated.  There is always something to learn.
 
Thanks again.
 
Ed

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 25 – Forward Cant Frames 2
 
 
American Clipper Note:  William Webb foresaw the end of the extreme clipper craze.  He came down to the dock to see Young America off on her first voyage in 1853 and remarked to the mate, “Take good care of her Mister, because after she’s gone there will be no more like her.” (Dunbaugh)  Webb turned his yard to the future.  Young America was his last extreme.  Within the next few years  there was a glut in clipper capacity and the premium freight rates they had enjoyed dropped off, ending demand for the type.  Some were slow to see the change, but Webb’s yard continued to prosper building medium clippers, steamships and even a huge ironclad, finished too late to enter the Civil War. 
 
This part will bring the forward cant framing to completion.
 
All of these frames were almost completely beveled before installation, as I became more comfortable with accuracy of the pin-indexed assembly.  With patterns left on both faces of the assembled frames, each could be cut back to the green lines on the forward face and the red lines on the aft face using disk and spindle sanders.  The sides were then shaved flat to those lines as shown below, using a carver's rasp. 
 

 
This tool leaves a very smooth surface requiring little or no sanding.  The work can be held by hand and/or with the aid of a vise.
 
The next picture shows the clamping of the second frame on the port side.
 
 
 
The clamping of these can be awkward, requiring long-reach clamps and gripping of angled surfaces.  A starboard side frame is being installed below.
 

 
In the next picture the last frame is being installed – with simpler clamping.  The position of each frame was checked with the square from the base drawing when glued in place.
 

 
Although the bevel angles of the joint faces were put on each pattern during lofting, there was still need for some refinement to get the proper installed angle.  Each mortise also required some trimming for a good final fit.
 
With all the frames installed, fair lines for the bolt holes were drawn and the simulated iron bolts installed.  In the next picture a black monofilament bolt is being cut off at the surface after gluing.
 

 
The excess CA glue was washed off with acetone and the bolts leveled off with a file.  The next picture shows the finished bolting on the port side.
 

 
The last two pictures show the finished bolting - six 1 1/8" iron blunts per pair driven flush..
 

 
The thread line seen in these pictures was used to center the half frame pairs.  It is hung by a weight off the center of the sternpost so it can be pushed out of the way or removed when required.
 

 
In the next part the remaining half-frames will be installed, completing the frame setting of the forward hull.
 
Work is progressing much more rapidly than I expected.  I think this is mainly due to the pin-indexed frame assembly and the improved beveling method.
 
 
Ed
 
 
 

Rob,

As I have said, there is clear documented evidence - for example 20 years of American Lloyds Registry listings - that YA was iron strapped - not at issue and not a guess. By the way, if you look at Table 12.1, p. 198, in Crothers, you will see that McKay used iron bracing as well.

My statement(s) about Webb using lighter structures is based on the many diagrams and tables in Crothers book as well as drawings and other sources that list timber sizes and layouts. Have a look. I do not believe that Webb was "fond" of less wood, but rather that he was confident in the sizes and designs he used and that confidence was justified by the performance and longevity of ships like YA - 30 years, 50 trips around Cape Horn - pretty good. I call this good engineering. I admire it and the courage it takes to pactice it. This attracted me to Webb. No criticism of McKay or any other builder is intended.

As to the question of whether sufficient information is available to build an authentic structural model of Young America, the answer is yes. If this were not the case, I would not be building this model.  I am usually pretty up front in the postings on sources and where any discretion has to be applied.

For the configuration and details of iron strapping, I would refer you to Crothers, p, 197. I will discuss the strapping on the model when we get to it.

I think we have beaten this subject to death on this log. Perhaps this would be a good topic in the Research section.  With your permission, lets move on.

Ed
 

Rob,
 
Forgive me if my comments on cross-bracing were confusing or unclear.  I do not believe I have ever disputed that wood cross-bracing was used on American clippers or that Donald McKay employed it in his designs.  In fact, when I was initially researching clippers in search of a subject,  I found it on the drawings for Lightning made by Bill Crothers based on McKay's extensive papers.  Also, Crothers book on American clippers, Figure 12.4, pp 210-211, also shows it, if you have the book.  The unamed ship in this drawing is in fact Lightning.  Crothers book and other sources make it fairly clear, I believe, that Webb and McKay took some different approaches in strengthening their hulls.  The differences and similarities between the two builders are of interest to me, of course, but I am mainly focused on Young America - a Webb ship.
 
Ed