druxey

Without seeing what your model actually looks like, i can only offer a general suggestion. Measure and mark out the hole first. Now check it again!  Drill an undersized hole slowly, backing up with a pad of scrap wood. Holding the pad tightly against the inside of the hull will prevent tearing out when the drill bit breaks through. Slowly enlarge the hole to the size and shape you want using Swiss files. That way you maintain good control over the operation.

By the late 1790's decoration was heavily restricted. The full length figure was ditched for a bust or half-length. You'd be safe to go with that.

If it's quality ply you need, you have to go to a serious wood supplier and ask for Baltic Birch ply. It's not cheap, but it is good quality!

Framing is difficult enough: introducing the extra level of difficulty with a hogged keel is fiendishly hard! It looks as if you've worked out how to manage the problem nicely. Well done, Ersin!

I agree with Dan. Most of the stresses on the capstan spindle would be in a forward direction. This is where the 'meat' of the wood is. It saves weight and is less of a foot hazard than the rectangular style partners. It also demonstrates the variations that are present in different ships of the same class 'as built'.

Some black markers will fade to a brownish hue over time and with exposure to light. 'Archival' quality will not.

Worth the time to re-do, Maury! Those look much better.

Interesting theory about shippable port half-lids. In other draughts that show lid hinges, the pintles always oppose each other, so the lid could not accidentally unship. I see no reason to unship the half-lid, as long as it could open far enough to clear the muzzle of the cannon. 

Hmm… looks more like Davy Jones' locker than a companionway to anywhere at present! Nice working hinges, Dan.

Thanks for your clarification, Tony! Sorry if I misunderstood you.

You will find that the point of your knife will wander less working in one direction that the other, depending on the grain pattern. Go in the direction that works. Also, a really, really sharp blade, light pressure and several passes work better than trying to cut through in one.

Tony: the 'single' port lid is, as mentioned by Jay, a 'one stands for all' convention. On other ships' plans I've seen similar 'shorthand'. In the instance of the fireship I'm currently building, there is only one port lid detailed. This is because it hinges downward, not upward. However, all the ports were fitted in the same manner.

Thank you, Jay for your well reasoned arguments and conclusions. There are many time-hallowed 'facts' that are repeated as gospel truth in this, as in other fields of endeavour.

As for side opening ports, top opening ones are not feasible as there is insufficient ship's fabric to support and bolt them to. There is only a sheer rail above the ports.

Fascinating constuction at the stern with those angled planks Thanks for posting the pics, Colin.

Dirk: that is from an original draught in your first example. The lids would be useful in heavy weather, as the ship could roll quite a bit and freeboard was limited.

No, but I have access to a set of her plans, Tony. One half-lid on each side of the channel would only be able to open to a right-angle, but would be sufficient to clear the cannon.

Mark: after your investment of time and money, that is a brave decision you'll not regret.

My first serious scratch build, many years ago, ran into many of exactly the same problems as you describe. I, too, decided to junk her. On my next model I was able to avoid all the pitfalls I'd fallen into the first time around. I ended up - some years later - with an award-winning model. May this be your experience also!

The original draughts of the Sherbourne (CHN1012 or CHN0224), unfortunately not available on the NMM 'Collections' site, show a sweep port between each gun port and aft of the aftermost one. Also indicated are port lids. These are two-part lids, hinged at the sides.

If you are interested in extreme detail, you might wish to invest in one of those two drawings (the other is a copy of the same drawing). Both plans also include all the spar dimensions. The deck plans for Sherbourne are on sheet ZAZ6382.

Perhaps a cut splice?

I suspect that either a plain blue or black sheer strake would be appropriate.

Fancy rail? More like fancy framing, Ed! Lovely work.

5 years? That sounds about right. We'll keep cheering you on, Toni.

Interesting build and beginning. However, I'm curious as to how the rudder will turn: the pintles appear to be well out of line with each other.

They look good. Swivels I've seen have the cascabel or 'button' still on them, with the end of the tiller wrapped around the neck of the cascabel.

See: 500 × 329 - uri.edu  and 410 × 253 - paulfrasercollectibles.com

'Hard fact' evidence for rigging is pretty well non-existent before about 1650. That's about as early as I've come across. "The Complete Modeler" ('modeller' meaning designer back then), of about 1655 has tables for rigging sizes. Before that, it's pictures, other than fragmentary evidence for blocks, etc, from Mary Rose. We need a Time Machine….