rlb

That makes it sound easy, but I know there is skill involved!
Ron

Michael,
 
Photos can be inaccurate, but that color seems to be developing very well, and I applaud your patience in having to be careful with so many coats!
 
Ron

Bob,
I completely agree with Kurt on the display!   
Ron

Thank you, Andreas.  
 
I have a few things going at once, having finished the bow work.
 
I'm still sanding the Channel pieces into form, and also cutting out 20 Chainplate Preventer Plates from a strip of brass.  I did one, to test, and will now mark and drill the holes for all twenty, and try to do them more or less all at once--

 
I am also beginning preparations for making the anchors.   Oneida was to carry five: 1500lbs, 1300lbs, 1200lbs, 800 lbs, and 400 lbs.  I think I will be making 4, though not sure which ones yet.  As this was a transitional period for wooden stock vs. iron stock, and angled arm vs. round arm, I am thinking of two of the larger ones as traditional angle arm, wooden stock anchors, and the two small ones as round arm, iron stock.   It seems there is some evidence that the smaller anchors were more likely to introduce the iron stocks.  I'm going to try and cast them, which is something I have never done before, so we'll see how that goes.  Since I'll have the wooden forms for the casting, if the casting doesn't pan out I can paint the forms and use those.
 
Here is a page from Petrejus's book Modelling the Brig of War "Irene" showing both traditional and iron stock anchors, and Charles G. Davis' book The Built-Up Ship Model showing a round arm anchor (though with a wood stock), and my notebook with calculations for the sizes.  I used the formula Charles G. Davis gives in his book.  I calculated just the shank size, and will  Xerox copy the illustrations to multiple sizes so that the shanks match my calculations.  That will give me scaled  paper patterns to cut out the wood forms with--


 
I also adjusted Davis' formula to check it against a table of anchor sizes in Lavery's The Arming and Fitting of English Ships of War, and got results that corresponded reasonably well to that table, so I am somewhat confident that my anchors will be close to the right size.
 
Ron 

Thank you, Andreas.  
 
I have a few things going at once, having finished the bow work.
 
I'm still sanding the Channel pieces into form, and also cutting out 20 Chainplate Preventer Plates from a strip of brass.  I did one, to test, and will now mark and drill the holes for all twenty, and try to do them more or less all at once--

 
I am also beginning preparations for making the anchors.   Oneida was to carry five: 1500lbs, 1300lbs, 1200lbs, 800 lbs, and 400 lbs.  I think I will be making 4, though not sure which ones yet.  As this was a transitional period for wooden stock vs. iron stock, and angled arm vs. round arm, I am thinking of two of the larger ones as traditional angle arm, wooden stock anchors, and the two small ones as round arm, iron stock.   It seems there is some evidence that the smaller anchors were more likely to introduce the iron stocks.  I'm going to try and cast them, which is something I have never done before, so we'll see how that goes.  Since I'll have the wooden forms for the casting, if the casting doesn't pan out I can paint the forms and use those.
 
Here is a page from Petrejus's book Modelling the Brig of War "Irene" showing both traditional and iron stock anchors, and Charles G. Davis' book The Built-Up Ship Model showing a round arm anchor (though with a wood stock), and my notebook with calculations for the sizes.  I used the formula Charles G. Davis gives in his book.  I calculated just the shank size, and will  Xerox copy the illustrations to multiple sizes so that the shanks match my calculations.  That will give me scaled  paper patterns to cut out the wood forms with--


 
I also adjusted Davis' formula to check it against a table of anchor sizes in Lavery's The Arming and Fitting of English Ships of War, and got results that corresponded reasonably well to that table, so I am somewhat confident that my anchors will be close to the right size.
 
Ron 

Greetings All,
   I got a lot of work done on the base. It's time consuming, as I'm using water based stuff and things need to dry out good between steps. Luckily, the Florida sun is assisting nicely, not only for bake-out but also for some more outdoor pics. I love "real" lighting! 
 
Here's some of the ideas I use to improve dioramas.
 
   First, scenic compression. Most of the real world is pretty spread out and featureless, with interesting stuff scattered few and far between. This means "real scale" distances and dimensions are too great to model effectively. To overcome this, I try to "squish" my interesting sections together more so than they would be in the real world. This trick gets rid of "dead spots" and allows the viewer to focus on the interesting stuff. It also tightens up the display and saves on work and materials.
 
   Second, vertical exaggeration. Like scenic compression, this helps overcome nature's boring tendency to make gentle grades. Rapid changes in elevation seem to add more "space" and give more of a dynamic effect. My base (from the second picture onward) has an elevation change of three and a half inches from the lake bottom to the highest part of the frame in a span of only four inches. In scale, this would be about seven feet, much higher than what nature would usually do but effective. 
 
   Third, use the rule of thirds (bad pun intended). Painters, photographers and other artists divide the work into nine rectangles, and put the focus around the intersection of the four points in the center. Try not to orient either the model or scenery square, this can constrict the overall appearance and pull the user's eye off the display. I like to use a lot of diagonals, they seem to draw the viewer's eye into the display better.
   
   Fourth, KISS (not the band...). Keep it simple... reduce the overall size, eliminate anything that doesn't add to the model's presentation and try not to have abrupt transitions. Remember, THE MODEL is the primary focus. The base is just the stage.
 
I'll continue to describe my progress and methods as I go along.
 
Here's the base after the first glue-up.

   Here's the base after I decided to add a feeder stream and some more elevation. I also contoured the frame and and lowered the part around the water (I'll build a temporary resin dam when I pour the water).

Here's the base with some minor changes. I put some reference coats of different colored paint to both seal the work done so far and get an idea of the evolving appearance. The board in the center is to elevate the boat to it's proper distance above the bottom (approx. 1/2") and make the boat appear to be "floating". After all this stuff dries, I'm going to start on the riverbed grade, rock casting and terrain buildup.

Here's some outdoor shots with the boat oriented about where it's going to end up. I also scattered some deck ornaments that I've finished in random locations to start planning the deck build-out.
Gotta love the Florida sun!🌞

Thanks Dan.  Ah, more tools to buy!  Does it ever end?
 
The head timbers have all been cut out, and shaped.  A handful that didn't make it are on the right.  I still have to carve the decorative panels on the lower faces.  That has been done on the smallest one, but you can't see it from this angle--

These have all been dry fit individually, and I would like to dry fit the whole assembly before I glue it all up, but I have no idea how to keep them all in place.  I may have to lightly glue, and then take them off and re-glue permanently when it's good to go.
 
Ron
 
 

Hi Martin,
 
Pins seem to be the preferred/recommended way to hold pieces, but when I have tried, as you said, the pieces slip and spin, or the pins fall out.  I do pin the aft end of the headrail in place quite often when I'm testing the fit of the timbers.   I have trouble getting the pin to stay in place without pushing it so hard that I'm afraid of breaking something.  I'm going to try small bits of PA glue on the timbers, that seems to work okay for me.
 
I made the difficult decision to remove the gammoning and bowsprit.  It really gets in the way.  I have also been thinking that my gammoning rope should have been just a little smaller diameter.  It was close to what I had researched it should be, maybe just a bit on the heavy side.  The next size I have is just a bit on the light side, but I think it will look more correct, and will also not crowd the head timbers as much.  My plan is to get the head timbers and rail to fit right, take them back off, reinstall the bowsprit and gammoning, and then permanently glue the rails and timbers.  We'll see how that goes.
 
So off comes the gammoning--

 
I optimistically carved the second timber with the decorative panels--

 
Glued the first two timbers, and the starboard half of the third--


 
And test fit the rail--

 
As you can see, I've got some problems.  It looks clear that the notch in the second timber is too low.  This may or not be so--it could be that the notch in the third is too high.  It had seemed that way when I was trying to do this before taking the gammoning and bowsprit off.   At this point I am not sure if it's worth using any of these timber pieces, or if they should all be redone.  More testing is in order.
 
Ron 
 

Work continues on the head timbers.
 
I've made the decision (at least for now) to omit the most forward tiny timber.  The second timber, which is one piece and straddles the stem is now my starting point.  Surprisingly, making some trims to the port headrail made the two headrails join more symmetrically than they had before, and there was no modification needed to that second (now the first) timber--

 
I worked on the remaining starboard timbers, and with some adjustments, I was able to keep them.  This is so much easier without the bowsprit in the way--

 
The port side is another matter entirely--
 
 
The last timber is way off, and the second may be close, but I'm going to redo it to have it close that gap between it and the starboard one.  The join won't be on the centerline, but it will be better than the current gap.  Another view showing the terrible unevenness of the port side timbers.  Here it looks like the second one is the worst offender, but the problems are pretty much shared between the second and third--

 
The second and third were redone, and it's getting close now--

 
Ron
 

Thanks Dan.  I appreciate you checking in and supplying help and information!  I'm sure I made the head rails and timbers harder to make than they should have been.  I did as you suggested, cut the timbers to match the rails.  Making the angled and sloped notches in the ends of the timbers was the hard part.  Getting those angles correct, at the right height to meet the headrail, and still making sure the other end of the timber was square and the right height on the stem was a challenge.  I think the version of timbers you posted would have been easier (except for the multiple rail aspect!)  I don't think I found the best technique in making mine this first time around.  Maybe I should have made card patterns, though being only two dimensional, they wouldn't have helped with all the devilish angles.  Or maybe I just need more practice at it.  As far as straddling the stem (or as I probably should be calling it, the knee of the head), It looks like some did and some didn't, depending on the various configurations, size of ships, time periods, etc.  David's FFM shows timbers that straddle for the Swan class, which are the ones I more or less tried to follow.
 
In any event, I have stuck a fork in them, and they are done.  Here they are removed, in order to reinstall the bowsprit--

 
They are in two pieces, with the timbers glued to the headrails, reminding me of chicken bones--

 
Here the bowsprit and gammoning have been re-attached, and the headrail assemblies glued.  I've scratched the finish under the cathead, for a support that needs to go there--

 
Fitting a card pattern--

 
The horizontal leg needed to be shortened, the pattern didn't account for the cat rope that threads through a hole inboard of the sheaves in the cathead--

 
Here it is installed.   What a relief to work on something not as frustrating as the head timbers!--

 
Here's a straight on bow shot--

 
Next order of business will be the channels and deadeyes, though at some point I should buckle down and work on the installation of the carronades.  The one I have done you see askew on the deck.
 
Ron

Dear fellow modelers,
 
again I have stolen 2 hours for myself. I was working on waterways.
First I needed to trim them to required form. I used my electric tool. It was super ease and super fast. Everything was then smoothed by sanding paper. Also bulkhead tops were sanded to minimum.
Here are some pictures.

I had to bevel the back side of waterway for better fit. From the pictures you can also see I have new clamps. They are great for this type of work.

 
Here you can see the fit also with inside Spirketing (botton :D) plank. Nothing was glued yet.


 
There are no visible gaps between waterway and false deck. What do you think about the gap in red circle? Should I fill there some walnut filler or let it be like it is? I do not think it will be visible in final view.
 
Here is fit with cannon.

 
 And here is happy doggo after 10 km run. Zara is saying hi to all members.  (for her it was maybe 15 KM)

 
Till next time.
 
Thanks for comments and help.
 

I too, missed your build log until seeing your gallery photos.
 
Superb job, she looks great!
 
Ron

That will look pretty similar to the photos on Dave's website.  Nice!
 
Ron

That will look pretty similar to the photos on Dave's website.  Nice!
 
Ron

Yipes - I must've had Pear on my mind when I wrote that.
 
With that, here's the wood list from this shipment:
 
LumberYardMaterials.pdf

Well, more work done and I found a real prize buried in my RR cache: a pile driver barge. Could become the follow on to this little scow. On to the current work.
 
The framework is pretty basic: floor, five bulkheads, some stringers and 2 end braces.
Thanks to the laser cutting this craft has sheer and camber built in.

The ends are identical, with buffer wood added in. Have to go back and add some creosote stain to these buffer boards. And this shows the camber, too.

The stringers are added to support the deck and everything is left with the glue drying.
 

I need to go back and touch up a few spots and fill in some gaps in the side strakes.
 
Thanks for reading.
 
 
 
 
 

Beautiful work, CRI-CRI.  From your scale figure, La Niña, is actually larger than I thought her to be!  I'm looking forward to watching your model develop.
Stay safe,
Ron 

Yes, David Antscherl carved them all with micro chisels, a steady hand and fine eyes. Keep in mind they are much smaller in person. Ironically, I have not seen my model since David added the carvings. We were supposed to meet at the April NW Ship Modelers meeting but that is no longer the case. I have been working on the masts and spars and shall post some photos of them in a day or so.
 
Capt. Hook - she's a lovely little model even without the carvings. We were going to cast them and offer for sale but they're just too delicate with numerous undercuts.

Bob,
I completely agree with Kurt on the display!   
Ron

Steve,
 
Yes, you won't need the detail from the Chapelle plans for a while.  Hopefully by then we'll all be back to normal!
 
My frames are actually Cherry, as are the deck beams and knees.  The keel, stem, sternpost, and hull planking are Pear.  The decks are Maple, and there is Castello Boxwood here and there.
 
I think your Maple frames will be nice!  What other woods did you get?  I love that all the Oneida's are different.   
 
Ron

OC,
The monstrous alligator clip in the previous post was a shocking reminder of the scale of this.  Nice work.
Ron

Bob,
I completely agree with Kurt on the display!   
Ron

The display method is just as important as the model itself.  No need to skip details of the display.  It will help many who have not done it and want to try.
I for one would appreciate you providing details.
Kurt

OC,
The monstrous alligator clip in the previous post was a shocking reminder of the scale of this.  Nice work.
Ron

OC,
The monstrous alligator clip in the previous post was a shocking reminder of the scale of this.  Nice work.
Ron