Jump to content

druxey

NRG Member
  • Posts

    12,499
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by druxey

  1. Kits are simplified, but you can modify things to make them more like the 'real thing' as little or as much as you wish. Allan has shown you how it was done in the mid to late 18th century on British ships.
  2. Planking is both a science and an art. The 'scientific' part is mathematical: dividing the vertical distance to be covered in an appropriate number of strakes. The art is to adjust the run of these until they look right to the eye from all angles. Sometimes the adjustment needed is very small, in other hulls there needs to be larger tweaks. There is no one way of doing this. However, the strakes should appear to taper or widen evenly.
  3. Yes, agreed, gentlemen! The motifs 'flow' beautifully over the surface.
  4. There is another thing to consider: The list of guns carried was a theoretical one (at least in British ships). What was actually on board at any time was often different and usually a smaller number! This might also be true of L'ambitieux and Fulminant. So, before you provide a Procrustean solution....
  5. Part of the problem of ships' draughts is that the people that drew them were not artists. Usually the carved work (if shown) was rather crudely drawn. Even Boudriot (who was an excellent draughtsman) was not a particularly talented artist.
  6. From guns I've seen, the touchhole is not more than ½" in diameter - perhaps 3/8" or even less.
  7. Was the original the work of more than one carver, showing different styles? You are doing a lovely job of re-creating the Vasa lion.
  8. Chuck: This was the correct terminology in the 18th century. The meaning of words changed over time. Camber only applied to a deliberate droop of a deck at the bow, otherwise the longitudinal curve, concave up, is sheer, as you wrote. Hope this clarifies things!
  9. Skid beams. There were fore and aft holes through the 'U' portion of the iron supports with a retaining pin on each end of the beam.
  10. Those look very neatly done. Just repeat after me; "I'm glad this isn't a 74 gun ship." There, isn't that better?
  11. So, in the last example, the upper quarter light is a dummy and the lower one partially so!
  12. As you may recall, the slightest contaminant, such as skin oil, will make a silver solder joint fail. There is more concern with making a joint 'stick' than fail! Even the slightest trace of oil or grease on the mandrel for your hoop should work.
  13. The lower and upper tier of Fulminant look deliberately shown at different angles. Odd, I agree, but deliberate!
  14. Try jewelers' supply houses for small chain in silver, which may easily be blackened. One example: https://www.firemountaingems.com/itemdetails/h204496ch
  15. The differences between the 'as built' and actual vessel probably reflect changes made between launch and sinking. If one wished to make a model showing a later configuration, the only evidence might be some clue mentioned in the ship's log or Admiralty papers - if they still exist.
  16. I symapthize with your limitations. Certainly a larger scale and perhaps models that either do not require rigging or leaving a model unrigged will help. Good lighting is crucial as well. Best wishes as you find your way forward.
  17. Beams were 'let down' into the clamps not to stop rolling(!), but to help lock them in place. If your clamps are at the correct height on both sides and you have the beam tops and bottoms beveled to the deck sheer, you need not let them down in a model unless you want the extra work!
×
×
  • Create New...