piratepete007

Ken, A great outcome which surely must have tested your patience. Pete

All looking good Ken and amazed at your rapid progress. As I am always searching for something new, your comment about blackening prompted me to do some 'sniffing' around on MSW and I found a very comprehensive article which might appeal to some other builders. The article presents a wide variety of commercially available products. Pete MetalBlackeningnew.pdf

Mark, you have received many well-deserved comments and Ken is right about your detailed work. There are easier ways to do the ratting BUT your method (i.e. your knots) is producing work that draws the observer's eyes straight to the rigging. So, its a well done from me as well ! Its a tricky one but the idealistic way of doing ratting is to have the ratlines perfectly straight but in reality, the lines would be far from being a straight line. So on that point also, well done. Two questions ... 1. What method are you using to ensure uniform spacing between the ratlines ? 2. Are you fixing the knots with glue to hold them in place ? Pete

Ken - those wales are never easy to do. Seeing your great effort there stirs up some thoughts of mine that I keep repressing .... historically, wales were a combination of lengths of timber all scarphed/ scarfed together and one day I still intend to try my hand at creating that jointed wale instead of the one continuous strip. With those wale timbers curving in both a vertical and longitudinal fashion, especially near and around the bow, maybe that would make the process more simple. I just keep putting it off... maybe it's just a dream. Great to see you still forging ahead after that nasty incident. Pete

Well done Ken - you deserve that grin on your face. There is no doubt that that stern is a very impressive merging of so many pieces. Once you understand what is needed, the stern construction is not difficult and the outcome is just magnificent. Pete

Good appreciation of the drawings Ken - why didn't I think about that bar removal in the top piece! Pete

Ken - you mention that the middle balustrade is too long. Check that one again because I reckon you need to transpose the bottom one with the middle one. Then the lengths will look better ! Pete

Ken, those three narrow strips, particularly the upper two will be totally hidden by the ornamentation and need to remain to help support the metal pieces. It seems that the Iower one is exposed but the infill pieces that go under the lower balustrade will totally hide that as well. I agree with the consistency of preparing the window openings in the metal. Cutting out the plywood behind those windows could add to the realism ... but given that there would be very little light behind these windows, the effort involved may be of little benefit ? Congrats on all the careful effort going into this project. Each and every one of your photos are full of information. Pete

Mark, soldering so close to the deadeye and no charring ? Well done on that. Are you using a very fine soldering tool ? Pete

Hi Keith, I have taken time to re-re-read your work and have come to the conclusion that what you have done is so meticulous in its detail. The ornamentation around the supporting columns underneath the transom decks, the colouring of the gallery windows, your detailed analysis of what could be improved in the kit, the doors in the row of the gallery windows (yes, they are there in the plans) ... and the list just goes on. Your work deserves to be re-examined by others as well ! Pete

Thanks Ken. Colour combo is impressive. Pete

Ken, in the last photo showing the various metal parts forming the top window gallery, there are six 'oval' pieces with a marked relief. Their darker colour suggests you may have done some work on them ? If I am correct, what did you do and why ? Pete

Mark - I quite agree with you but nevertheless thought I would include that comment. My main goal was to establish the term 'harpin' and I am happy to have done that. Thanks for replying. Pete

After starting this topic on harpins, I decided to do some further research and came across what I believe is a fascinating essay by Trevor Kenchington. The following text represents an extract of ideas from his work titled 'The Structures of English Wooden Ships: William Sutherland's Ship, Circa 1710'. I just found the whole article so exciting and felt moved to reproduce some of it here on MSW. After some introductory comments – which are a distillation of what Kenchington has written - this post then looks at wales, harpins (harpings) and tapering. Introduction Early in the sixteenth century, plank-on-frame techniques were introduced into English shipbuilding replacing the strake-overlapping (clinker) method. The next fundamental change occurred three and one half centuries later when iron replaced timber as the primary building material in ship construction. There was an assumption in literature that this was a period of great stability in ship structures but that was not the case. It is suggested that during this time there was a general disinterest in technical detail and indeed the many paintings and drawings that exist today show a bias towards the ship as a finished object and not with the means by which the ships were built. Shipwrights were either illiterate or prone to keep their skills secret. There were some senior shipwrights who produced private manuscripts showing the methods used to lay down the lines of their ships without detailing complex structural accounts. Historians of this post-Medieval period have therefore largely limited themselves to such aspects as hull shape, general external appearance and rigging. Hull structure and internal details have had to be extrapolated from construction contracts and unfortunately many assumptions about structures became accepted 'facts'. Even examination of some post 1600 wrecks by naval archaeologists saw attention given to smaller artifacts with which they were more familiar rather than a close examination of ship timbers where there were very few authoratative historical records that could serve as a basis for comparisons. The first published work on ship structure appeared in 1644 but it was not until 1711 that a truely authoritative book was published on the structure of English ships. The book, The Ship-Builder’s Assistant; or Marine Architecture by William Sutherland was produced after a career in the Royal Dockyards at Potsmouth and Deptford. Comprehensive in nature, it is a very useful basis for any re-examination of ship structures [the book is available as a reprint on eBay and from a number of book sellers]. Wales & Harpings (or Harpins) These were the thick strakes that extended the full length of the ship contributing to its longitudinal strength. In his description, Sutherland referred to the lower wales, consisting of two major strakes each being 14 x 8.5 inches in cross-section with a thinner strake in-between but of similar width (he also clouded the issue by referring to the same two thicker strakes as the ‘upper’ and ‘lower main wales). The after ends of these lower wales were bolted to the knees supporting the wing transom. At the bows where the curvature prevented the bending of such thick timber, the wales were made from compass timbers (naturally or artificially curved trees) or of fire-bent pieces, both of which were called ‘harpings’ or ‘harpins’... confirmation of my original question. The thick wale strakes were made up of a number of shorter pieces scarphed/ scarfed end to end with horizontal inclined joints whilst the thinner strake in-between used butt joints or perhaps vertical scarph joints. Kenchington (p. 20) makes the following comment ... ‘The horizontal joint orientation suggests that the builder expected the wales to resist primarily lateral, rather than vertical, stresses; that is, his concern apopears to have been with the sides of the ship bulging outwards (perhaps when rolling) rather than with the bow and stern drooping or “hogging’. This is rather surprising, given the obsession that most shipwrights had with the latter problem’. There is further comment made in this article regarding this point that can be followed up. Tapering Whilst not referring directly to the wale strakes themselves, Sutherland does point out the obvious difficulty of straight pieces of uniform width and thickness around the bow curvature and making reference to ‘snying’ (or shaping pieces from thicker timber) where each piece curved across its width. They could then be fire-bent across their thickness to fit the frames. He saw this as a wasteful use of compass timber (quite rightly so !) and recommended that it be avoided by the use of tapering of the strakes as they passed around the bow. The full essay is easily found on the internet and is well worth a good read.

Bravo Ken - most have tried using substitute wooden stanchions in place of the supplied metal sections. Your decision to use these small metal stanchions has created a fantastic result. In fact, everything looking fantastic. Pete

Some serious work going on here Vince. Great to see and well done. Pete

Mark - that all makes good sense to me. This obviously is not a common subject for discussion but for me with a limited depth of knowledge, I just totally appreciate your above comments. I had a fixation on the wale being a continuous form of planking along the ship but of course it would/ should taper like the rest of the normal planking above and below. Your last remark - to me - says it all ... "The only other explanation I can think of is that the planking in this area, being harder to fit/make, was distinguished from the other planking by giving it a name; and that the name adopted was derived from the timbers, the temporary harpins, which the wale planking replaced." Thanks, Pete

Druxey - your comment re the cross-grain and end-grain makes admirable sense. Thanks for that. As the tapering in wale width around the bow also makes sense but is something I have not come across before. Any references or examples on that point ? Pete

Sounds so easy Ken ! Thanks for the rapid and informative answer and I am sure others will appreciate reading about this method. Pete

Ken - gallery windows look great. Good choice of colour and glazing looks convincing. Like to know how you did that glazing though. Pete

Mark - so many thanks for your reply. Your speculation is sensible so if I take that one step further, the work put into creating the sawn harpins (as a temporary measure to hold the cant frames in position during construction) meant that they would logically then be retained in a permanent position forming the forward part of the wales. Being sawn, they would then tend to be rather thick to maintain the integrity and strength of the curved timber (and most likely thicker than the remainder of the wales. As you say, speculation ... but my comment would then tend to make sense in seeing the dual purpose for the curved harpins. Pete

Druxey - thanks for your comment. Yes, the ribband and harpin were certainly used during the construction of ships to support frames and that point I was well aware of when posting this query. What has intrigued me was the very old reference (above) to the forward section of the wales wrapping around the bows also being referred to as 'harpins', not so much in the name itself but the fact that here is a reference to the wales around the bow (i.e. the harpins) being thicker than the wales along the side of the hull. I am looking for some comment regarding this thickening since in all of our builds I have seen on MSW, the wales are of the same thickness all the way. So the term 'harpin' seems to have two different meanings - one for the temporary holding of frames and the other for giving permanent greater strength to the bow region. Pete

Brave push there Mark. Most people avoid this not well understood catharpin rigging. Pre-1680 and there was not good evidence of them being used and you have done well to only use a continuous line collected into bundles and frapped in the centers. Post 1733 (according to Anderson) and they were a set of individual lines running between opposite shrouds and were fully frapped. So you have nailed the correct time frame. Well done. Pete

Ken - and another point regarding the stern. There is a mass of metal pieces to fit and certainly some of their edges will need to be beveled to make them fit against the various surfaces. However, they are generally cast with the curvatures approximating what is needed so if you find that some massive change to any particular curve seems necessary, check and check again to see how well a piece might fit with some extra 'tweeking' to the surface(s) around it. Mark may like to add to this comment ? Pete

Whow Mark - that IS fiddly work as you say. Looks really fantastic in its workmanship and detail. The addition of catharpins would be a very interesting touch. What is the stave CS dimension ? Pete