rybakov

Today, my son is home, sick, and so I stayed home with him.  This will afford me a few hours to assemble guns, while otherwise enjoying a lazy afternoon.
 
Painting of the barrels came out well.  The Citadel ver-de-gris wash is a little tricky to use.  Unless you are depicting the centuries-old guns currently on display at the Palais des Invalides, then you are going to want to dilute the wash-coat.  I like to use a medicine dropper to do this because it is easier to keep track of ratios that are repeatable.  I think I ended up at a 50/50 mix, cut with common tap water.
 
Despite thinning, the wash coat does dry almost immediately, and it is almost impossible to avoid lap lines with a brush.  I do think a bristle brush is the best applicator - as opposed to an airbrush - because you can draw color into and out of crevasses, thus modulating the effect.
 
After everything has dried, I use a Q-tip, covered with a t-shirt scrap to burnish each barrel, and minimize the lap-lines.  Particularly stubborn laps can be further softened with a well-worn SOFT toothbrush.

In the light of day, this degree of oxidation looks about right to my eye:

As for assembling, I have a small, round needle file that I use to clear paint from the trunnion blocks.  I scrape paint away from the undersurface of the trunnions, as well as the quoin and the cascabel rim, where these two surfaces meet.
 
I will add cap-squares, at least to the fully visible carriages.  If the process is not too tedious, I will do so for the rest of the main deck guns; it’s just a little extra bond-insurance to safeguard against guns breaking free of their carriages.
 
So, little by little.  Catch as catch can.  We are getting there!  Thank you for stopping by.

Finally... the port side is almost caught up with the starboard side (getting 3 hours of work every morning this week by waking at 5AM!).
 

 
I had to finish the scarf joint through bolts and then the wale "bolts" on the port hull (tiny little round head nails that I found online).
 
 

 
Then it was on the putting the timberheads on the sheer rails. Honestly, when I first saw how Marc (Hubac's Historian) did this several years ago and how he had to patiently account for the sheer step at every timberhead... I dreaded reaching that point in my build. However, I can honestly say it was so much easier to do than I thought. I would have absolutely no problem adding this detail again. Part of it may be the "Chopper"... it makes very nice, consistent cuts in the polystyrene.  I made the initial timberheads 7mm in length before gradually cutting/sanding them down to 2.5mm in height; starting with 7mm made it very easy to use my laser level to ensure the timberheads were always plumb.
 

 
Then I used 0.5mm thick stock to make the framing on each timberhead.

 
So I simply have to finish the framing on the timberheads and drill out the fighting holes in the waist; so in 1-2 days, I will be finally in a position to glue in the bulwarks as GuyM has done. Of course, the hull is NOT glued together yet... the bulwarks need to be on to create the upper wales and also to see the area on the rear bulwqrk that I have available to festoon with fluer de lis.
 

 
 

Ferrus, this is an issue I'm very aware of, and in fact I've been arguing the point for over 10 years. See .
 
Regarding the museum model, I'm not taking any notice of it at all. It's wrong in so many ways - I don't like to criticise , but the guy who built it had no idea of the configuration of a carrack.
 
I've been reading through the latest paper on the shape of Lomellina's hull (see link in post #17 above). Here's what is known from the archaeological results (with a bit of tweaking of frame shapes to allow for the fact that the shape would have been deformed by the weight of the overburden of silt). They recorded 12 cross-sections, 8 of the "surviving" frames - that reached all the way to the keel (CS 6 to CS 12 also referred to as S6 to S12), 4 of partially existing frames (CS 2 to CS 5). Here are the results.
  


Though I'm prepared to accept their research data I do have reservations about their conclusions as to the lines of the hull. If you're interested you can see them in the paper linked in post #17 above.
 
So I'll 'go off on my own' and see if I can't work out a set of lines I'm happier with, that fit in better with what I know of the shapes of carracks from contemporary representations, particularly those of Carpaccio and Botticelli (see pics in earlier posts).
 
Steven
 

You're quite right, and I hadn't been figuring the height of the gun pedestals into the equation. Thanks. And in fact, zooming in on the Zumia picture the guns do seem to be up off the gunwale (OTOH, the first of the Beauchamp Pageant pics shows the barrels resting directly on it).
 
And I've found another pic with 2 normal sized people up against the gunwale. "1486 Pilgrim Book by Breidenbach. Ship building in Venice"

The guy on the right seems to have it coming up only to his hips, while the other has it up to his chest. The second guy seems to be painting the side of the hull, though, and I believe he might be kneeling down to do it without overbalancing. 
 
All of this inclines me to accept a lower gunwale height - possibly even less than 1.2 metres. The legal requirement for balustrades on balconies (at least here in Oz) is 1.0 metres - to stop people tipping over the edge and falling. I'd say that would be my absolute minimum height for the gunwale. Getting there . . .
 
Steven

Thanks everybody for the likes and comments. Early stage at the moment.
 
I'm currently thinking about the height of the gunwales to the weather deck. As well as the 'theoretical' height in the cross-sectional view in my first post, there are a few contemporary pictures which I'm hoping will help. There's this image from the so-called Beauchamp Pageant (Cotton MS Julius E IV),

but that's not a lot of help, as the human figures are obviously over sized (as was usual at the time). There are VERY few contemporary pictures that accurately show human figures at the correct scale. This one from the same source is not high resolution, but I believe the scale of the figures is probably about right - 

The picture of the Battle of Zonchio (1499) shows the gunwale as being almost shoulder height

But there's a detail from Carpaccio's Ursula Legend that seems to show the gunwale coming up to about people's waists.
 
Then there's this one from 1493 that seems to show the same.

This one of Columbus' ship from the 1502 Libre de Consolat dels fets maritims Barcelona  shows it about middle of the chest - 

Then there's this one from Zeiriksee in the Netherlands of 1506, showing it nearer the waists of the human figures.

And from  Jonah by Bellano Basilica of San Antonio, Padua, 1514 - chest height.

As Lomellina was Genoese, I'd be inclined to follow Italian images for preference.
 
And it needs to be borne in mind that the gunwales are just that - wales that were the base for (swivel) guns. So they should be somewhere above waist level for the gunner but below shoulder level. So, assuming an average height for this time and place of perhaps 5'6"  (1.68 metres), I'd be looking at between 1.2 metres (about 4 feet) and 1.3 metres (approx 4'3").
 
Returning to the issue of masts, there could possibly be one or two mizzens.
 
A votive table of 1475 of the parish of San Pedro de Zumaia in Spain, commemorating a battle between Spanish and Portuguese forces, shows the largest ship with a mizzen, and a bonaventure mizzen behind it.
 
And a detail of a panorama of Venice of 1500 by Barbari shows a similar thing on a merchant ship.

However, the great majority have only a single mizzen. Is the Lomellina big enough to warrant two? She was certainly pretty big for the time, bit I'll have to think about it.
 
Steven
 
 

Still figuring out the plans. I've now got a pretty good idea of the lines of the main and lower decks and the orlop, the configuration and position of the stempost (awaiting confirmation from France!), and the location of the mainmast, the halyard knight and the capstan, plus where on the keel the 12 cross-section views were taken. Still a bit up in the air, but I believe I'm on the right track. And she's starting to look rather pretty!

Though there's no archaeological evidence of a foremast or mizzen - they would both have been relatively small and it's unlikely they'd have been stepped on the keel -  I am completely certain a ship of this size at this time would have had both.
 
Now I'm thinking about the height of the bulwarks above the main (weather) deck, and the height, angle and configuration of the forecastle. The Botticelli painting The Judgment of Paris contains a carrack which can be seen, unusually, from above, and it looks like it has a poop deck.

Perhaps I'll give the Lomellina one as well.
 
Steven

Perzackerly (that's a combination of precisely and exactly). But often the word stands alone and I have to work out the meaning by context, if I can (sigh).
 
I think the Lomellina's bow will also be surprisingly pointed. There's this idea people have that they were tubby, but it seems not to be true, but instead influenced by contemporary artists having trouble accurately showing a ship's bow seen from forrard.
 
And apparently this particular vessel had proportions more like a galleon than a carrack - overall length 46 metres, beam about 12.5. Slim and fast. See https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10572414.2023.2186748#d1e2365 - However, that bow shape in the latest iteration is pretty speculative - if you look at the cross sections in this document, you can see that the surviving remains are very thin and a very slight difference in angle of orientation compared to vertical could make a huge difference to the shape of the hull.
 
I'm still investigating all of this - I'd like to make up my own mind about it all, rather than just copy what others have decided - but definitely making progress. I've now drawn the full length of the keel, got the deck heights and drawn the stempost. Not sure about the last - one of my sources seems to suggest that the stempost was found, but that's not backed up by any of the archaeological reports I have in my possession. I'm just going to have to write and ask.
 
Steven

Thanks for all the comments and likes. News is that I've been in touch with Max Guérot, and he's sent me the latest reconstruction info, and with that plus having tied down reference points even more firmly (I have the locations of the 12 cross-sections relative to the keel now, AND to the grid lines, for example, plus levels for the decks), I've been able do more work on laying out the side view.

Steven
 

For the next level, I prepared the top mast shrouds. Even if Steel doesn't mention it explicitly, in most modern sources the foremost shroud is also dressed here, so that's what I decided to do. The sisterblock is also integrated between the two forward shrouds.

But first come the hangers / burton tackles ...



... then the sister blocks ...



... and everything in place.





Here you can see again the difference between the dressed and undressed shrouds. Unfortunately, in contrast to my self-made ropes, the purchased ropes do fluff a little, but this is not visible to the naked eye.



To continue working, I tensioned the shrouds down with clamps and gravity.



And dark ropes in front of a dark background are somewhat annoying even with good lighting, so I made a white cardboard template for this spot.





Here you can see again the difference between the dressed and undressed shrouds. Unfortunately, in contrast to my self-made ropes, the purchased ropes do fluff a little, but this is not visible to the naked eye.



To continue working, I tensioned the shrouds down again with clamps and gravity.



And dark ropes in front of a dark background are a bit annoying even with good lighting, so I made a white cardboard template for this spot.



Then the dead eyes were bound in as the lower ones. To compensate for the lack of a third hand, I then tied the shroud to be worked on with a thread to the yardarm, see green arrows, helps immensely.



XXXDAn

@wefalck
Hello Eberhard,
I think it would not be a good idea to introduce the French (French publisher) to the rigging practices of the French Navy at the beginning of the 19th century for model making.
 
@Erik W
Hello Erik,
I'm pleased that my pictures, especially of the rigging work, are helping you with your model building.
As I also benefit a lot from pictures and construction reports from other model builders for my project, I want to give something back. It's a give and take that benefits model building as a whole and allows it to develop further. Ultimately, we all have great joy in the results that we have created with our own hands and can look at.
 
@dvm27

Hello Greg,
I'm happy to comply with your request.
Here is a picture with a ruler:

I used two methods to make the thimbles, although I actually only work with the simpler one.
I also make the thimbles in different diameters, depending on the requirements of the rigging.
Here are two places in my construction report where I report on the production of the thimbles:
LINK
LINK

After the fighting top had found its place, it was finally time to fit the futtock shrouds.

The work preparation was the blackening of the etched parts and the painting of the dead eyes. Then the irons of the dead eyes were bent open, the dead eyes inserted and everything squeezed shut and secured with some glue.



The upper hooks were then tied into the shrouds. This shroud was fully dressed, again using my technique with white glue as for my scale.



First test of the dead eyes in the holes of the fighting top and the shrouds hooked in.





Now you can see where the holes in the fighting top need to be reworked so that the irons don't sit at an angle. The lower shrouds have also been marked with a thread to hold the futtock shrouds.



Next, the dressing of the lower shrouds was completed and brought to the same height.



Finally the futtock shrouds could be hooked in, wrapped once around the futtock stave and tied to the shroud.

After trimming, this is what came out http://www.shipmodels.info/mws_forum/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif







XXXDAn  

In response to reading through my travails of researching and learning basic rigging techniques, Dan Pariser offered to give me a first-hand tech session of the various tools, materials and techniques that he employs in his own professional work.  As is always the case, this was time well-spent.
 
Immediate takeaways:
 
- The helping hands vise with a retro-fitted hardware store spring for tension is an absolute game changer.  Intuitively, this is common-sense, but actually using the device makes it crystal-clear how medieval my previous efforts really were.  Welcome to the enlightenment!
 
- Speaking of which, a simple magnifying visor really helps to ease eye-strain - particularly for fools like me who are still stubbornly resisting the very real need for transition lenses.
 
- Buying a box of small CA gel tubes is a wise investment.
 
- Along those lines - small disposable paper cups, like the ones you would use to stock a water cooler, are the perfect elevated platform for you to place a dollop of your gel CA.  I had been using small squares of tin foil, but it’s easy to lose sight of the glue spot and/or stick the foil to your hand when you aren’t paying strict attention.

- One really should accustom themselves to using bent-nose tweezers for their rigging processes.  Self-evident, I know, but I have a tendency to make due with whatever I have laying about.  I am usually working way too hard.
 
- Common, round tooth picks are the perfect CA applicators.
 
So, Dan showed me a variety of approaches to stropping a block, either with or without hooks.  What was especially fascinating was the interplay between polished line (free of whiskers) and either embroidery thread or fly-tying line for seizings.
 
Embroidery thread, because it has a lay, will grab onto the polished line, while fly-tying line is more prone to slipping.  This can make it difficult to advance the seizing.  To counteract this, when using fly-tying line, one might begin the seizing with a Lark’s Head knot, and then reversing both leads in the counter-direction, in order to cinch the knot tight:
 
https://howdidyoumakethis.com/larks-head-knot/
 
Another important take-away was to begin the seizing at the distance away from the block that you wish the seizing’s length to be.  With each successive wrap, the seizing grows tighter as it nears the block.
 
Lastly, a perfectly serviceable and long-lived serving machine can be made for a mere hardware store pittance:


As soon as I got home, I now found it incredibly easy to make hook strops for my 2mm double blocks:

Right now, I’m in the process of painting all of the main deck guns. Their bores have been blacked-out.  I have learned from my earlier experience with the lower main deck guns to always keep the gun barrels separate from each other during the painting process.  This is especially true for the next step, which is the Citadel ver-de-gris wash.  I’ll have a bit of a tedious touch-up process for those lower deck guns, much later in the build.

The cascabels are still white, here, because I am using that end to hold the barrel while I brush on the Citadel dark bronze.  I haven’t tried to airbrush this paint, but I suspect that the metallic flake would make it a poor candidate for air-brushing.  Once painted, I’ll join the barrels to their carriages.  I’ll add cap-squares with CA and strips of black construction paper.  Then, I’ll glue the guns down and attach the breaching ropes and tackles.
 
Dan showed me quite a bit more about knotting techniques and other rigging tips, but I will discuss those things as the build necessitates them.  Thank you so much, Dan!
 
And thank you all for looking-in!

Next, I took care of the cleats for the hangers of the jeer blocks. In Portsmouth they are in the form of a bracket. All other literature that does not base on the restored ship show a shoulder piece.
So the brackets from my printed parts go into the bin. Its up to the shoulder



I took the opportunity to determine the length of the hangers, as I don't know how they will be accessible later.



But more on the jeers later.

And then it's finally its turn, the top mast.



Placed in front of the mast, it is threaded through the trestle trees of the fighting top and pulled upwards using 2 pulleys in the foot.



Here are some older pictures. The top gallant mast was also raised in this way, it is basically a very simple telescopic lift.







XXXDAn

@Thukydides
@davyboy
@jdbondy
@Mike Y
Your praise and your kind words encourage me in my work.
Thank you for that and thank you to the others for the LIKES.
 
Continuation: Additional accessories for the topsail halyards - swivel hooks
In the meantime, I have made all 6 swivel hooks for the topsail halyards. The length for the main topsail yards and fore topsail yards is 8.2 mm. The swivel hooks for the mizzen topsail yards were proportionally made a little smaller (L = 6.9 mm).
I tried to make these hooks based on a drawing in the Atlas du Génie Maritime.

Source: Excerpt from Atlas du Génie Maritime annexe N.1, Pl. 2

Here, with this photo montage, I would like to illustrate the individual production steps.

 
To conclude this short update, the finished, blackened hooks.

 
See you soon...

And the next stage was already on the agenda, I had just glued the fightig top onto the trestle trees when I remembered all the blocks that were needed underneath ...

... so I quickly tore the fightig top off and removed the glue residue. Well, that's the way it always goes with me.

At least 4 small single blocks for the leech line and two double blocks for the buntlines have to go under there. But as I can't say for sure that that's all there is - as always, there are very many different sources - I have also fitted the other suspension points with blocks. But cutting them off is always easier than retrofitting them once all other things are installed.

Based on the tests I had already presented some time ago, the first block still took just as long as the other eleven. But I had to develop a good strategy for them.

First, I pressed the block onto a needle as usual and stropped it in. I secured the strop well with glue and only cut off the short end of the strop, but not the seizing ends.



Then tie the remaining long leg with the seizing as a loop. The seizing has a double knot, but is not glued so that the loop can move.



A thin thread with slip-through protection is passed through the hole from above ...



... and threads the loop of the block on the underside and ...



... pulls the loop onto the top and secure it temporarily with a wire hook.



Then pull the long leg on the underside to bring the block to the correct length.



Then carefully pull out the wire on the upper side, insert the toggle and tighten it again from below.



Now a drop of glue on the through hole and knot and neaten everything up. Done.



A little hint in between: And always take documentary photos of the rope thicknesses http://www.shipmodels.info/mws_forum/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif



And the result looks like this.







And the exciting moment, the fightig top can finally really be glued in http://www.shipmodels.info/mws_forum/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif









And then finally: another milestone reached! Even my little Midshipman is happy.



XXXDAn

Once the shrouds are tightened, the futtock staves could be fixed for good. Fortunately, I had only tacked them on so far, as the position was visibly out of line after the shrouds had been tensioned.

The last status was this:



To align the futtock staves, I placed crosspieces on the protrusions of the two staves and was thus able to adjust them well.



Then the futtock staves and the shrouds were knotted together and the overhang cut off.



It is amazing how much these futtock staves contribute to the stability of the shrouds, even in a model.

XXXDAn  

Continuation: Further accessories for the topsail halyards, including leader (guide bar) - Gouvernail de drisse
The leaders are another accessory required for the topsail halyards. This is a detail that is not always visible on all models, but is an important part of the rigging.
Under the considerable force required to set a topsail, the halyard tends to twist and become unclear. To prevent this, the upper halyard block was guided to the topmast backstay with a guide bar and a swivel hook was used at the channel.
In the following, I have compiled a list of different types of guide bars that were used towards the end of the 18th century and in the 19th century. However, they all served the same purpose.

For my model of La Créole, I naturally used the original Parisian model and the Manuel du Gabier. Compared to the original model, however, I added the swivel hook and made a longer strop, which made it possible to keep the lower block free of the bulwark and the tackles of the backstays.
I then executed this rigging arrangement according to the following drawing.

 
I made all the elements in advance to see how it would look overall. If the “prototype” fits, all the other necessary parts for all the topsail halyards will be made.
Provisionally arranged, it then looks like this:


I had already made the swivel hooks in connection with the stay tackles, so that went quickly. Making the guide bar was also not a big job. For the sake of strength, I hard-soldered all the connections of these components.
It was a little more difficult to attach the guide bar to the topsail halyard. It would be unsightly if over-dimensional knots were to impair the filigree structure. 
I have already considered how I can then attach the halyard to the model. In this respect, I have to finish one side completely as shown and then serve the appropriate places in advance, such as the passage through the tye blocks and the other end of the halyard. Then the rope of the topsail halyard is pulled through the tye blocks, then the eye with thimble is completed, taking the upper block into account. Finally, I have to dress a short remaining section freehand and attach the guide bar.
 
Certainly not an easy task on the model, but people also need certain challenges ...😊 
 
To be continued ...
 
PS: I don't know if the term "guide bar" is correct?
I would be grateful if someone could tell me the correct term.

Thanks so much, Yves, Scrubby and Mike, for your kind comments.
 
I have not posted in a while, because I was having to work out a few new challenges as I  begin to work my way up from the lower finishing.
 
First challenge: how to frame and plank the quarter gallery surface above the lower finishing? This is the blue band between the lower stool rail and the lower gallery rim, below:

 
It curves, twists, and fays to the side of the hull with a shape I could not determine in advance. Also, how would I plank the inner surface once the framing was in place? I remember seeing a model of the Superb, with its stern in pieces. With the quarter gallery lying on its side, it is possible to see that this piece appeared to be cut out of a single block. So I decided to do that. This way, I could fair each edge to a known surface, and thereby discover the actual form. Then I could scribe the planking on the outer surface later.
 
First, I drew the top and bottom profiles as best I could determine from my drawings. I pasted one on top and bottom of a blank, then shaped the outer surface to match each edge. After refining while checking against the actual model, I came up with the shape and how it fit against the hull:
 

Here you can see the wicked twist in the shape.

And here you can see it pinned temporarily in place (this is a trial blank I made out of basswood, to quickly see if this would work):
 


Next, I had to work out the shapes of the mouldings on its lower edge, which is the knuckle between the lower and upper counters. It took a long time to realize that the moulding here is the not the same profile along the counter as it is along the side of the quarter gallery. These have to miter cleanly at the corner, but they are very different profiles.
 
Looking carefully at the sections below (cut through the quarter gallery on the left, and through the knuckle of the lower and upper counters on the right), you can see that the face of the quarter gallery is almost vertical, whereas the face of the upper counter slopes back quite substantially. I finally realized that in order for these to miter together, the important thing is the thickness of the moulding in both locations has to be the same at the top and the bottom.
 
Also, the top edge of the moulding on the quarter gallery has to align with the roundup of the moulding along the counter, whereas the top edge of the moulding on the counter has to align with the sheer of the external hull planking.
 
A little geometry worked out the profile for each, so they would fair to their own surfaces while mitering cleanly at the corner.
 
 
 

 
Next challenge: how to cut the profiles with a scraper? All of my earlier mouldings were just straight blanks cut on a flat surface and later gently bent to the sheer of the hull. But these mouldings are on sharply curved surfaces. I decided for reasons of accuracy in the overall construction to shape the blanks of the mouldings to their final curves, rather than making flat mouldings and bending them to the shape later. I saw too many places for things to get out of alignment if I did not make accurate blanks to start with.
 
So how to scrape a shape on a curved blank, which also has top and bottom edges not at right angles to the face of the moulding? I decided to make formers, to which I could temporarily glue the blank, and use the former to guide a fence on my cutter holder.
 
 
Here you can see the cutter for the moulding on the quarter gallery. The face of the fence is at an angle to the cutter, corresponding to the angle of the top of the moulding. You can see the necessity of the angle, because if the fence were at right angles, the cutter would tear up the shape as it progressively works its way down.
 

Here is the scraper at work:


And here is the moulding temporarily spot glued in place, to check its fit and final size. This is also the final faux planked piece, cut out of boxwood after the basswood trial worked:
 

The flat piece faintly labeled STAR BD eventually goes away. This was a temporary former for getting all of the railings in their proper location and shape. The rabbeted rail is the base of the window frames still to come.

I have frankly struggled with making scraper profiles, until Chuck suggested I just make them out of brass rather than fussing with tool steel, softening to file and hardening to use. Each profile here is only going to be used for one or two parts, and then can be thrown away. So I worked out profiles based on the two semi-circles, and accurately drilled these in the brass blank on a mill:

Then I carefully filed the remainder of the profile using a needle barrette file and a jewelers clamp to ensure right angles to each side. This is important for the cutter to work the same in both directions.
 

At last, I got accurate profiles with no heat treating challenges. Thanks, Chuck!
 
Now on the port side, and the big moulding along the knuckle here.
 
Best wishes,
 
Mark
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Work has continued over the last month, albeit at a snails pace (coaching college soccer consumes some time in the Fall!).
 
However, I have enough time this AM to complete the rabbets for the port side gun ports.... that leaves only the fighting holes at the waist... and then I get to install the timber heads and cap rails.
 
It is interesting to me to look at the "before/after" appearance of the bulwarks.
 

 
And soon enough, they will be glued in place...
 

 

Thank you scrubyj427, the black wood is blackhornbeam, not ebony. Black hornbeam is a bit easier to work with than ebony .
Installation of wales completed.

Thank you all for your likes and kind comments.  As was the case with the chains, I’ve been experimenting and taking my first baby steps with rigging techniques.
 
Specifically, I’ve been learning to strop 2mm single blocks for my main deck haul-out tackles.  As I mentioned in an earlier post, I will not use scale rope for these, as the line gauge is fine enough to get away with much cheaper thread, of which I have an abundant supply.
 
Abundance is what I have needed, here, because I have tried a number of different approaches to both minimize any space between the hook and block, while also stropping the block in a neat and tidy fashion.
 
I was really struggling on that front.  And, that’s when I decided to consult with two of my favorite plastics builders: Michael D and Daniel Fischer.  Both are outstanding at creating very correct looking rig, using ingenious technique in relatively small scales.
 
I need 24 of these single block tackles for the visible guns that will be rigged.  I had made 9 that were variously unsatisfactory.  Dan’s Victory log is particularly illustrative of small things I could do to achieve better results.
 
Initially, I was using two overhand knots (alternating from one side to the other), with the finest linen thread I posses, in order to strop the hooks.  With a spot of CA, and the help of a simple pin jig to hold the block, I’d center the hook on the block and smooth the line into the groove until the CA set.  Then, I’d use the same linen thread and an alternating overhand knot technique to seize below the block.  A spot of CA seals the seizing and I nip the excess clean.  This was my best result using this technique:

It’s okay, but I wasn’t really happy with it.  From Daniel, I realized I could secure the hook with one overhand knot and then secure at the top of the block, as before.  Now, while Dan often employs the alternating knot technique for simple seizings, he often uses fly-tying thread which, I am given to understand, flattens out as you wrap it.  Dan’s simple seizings look great, and I think the flattening aspect of this type of line is the key.
 
So with those tips in mind, I tried again.  Using a binder clip to keep the strop ends taught, I found that I could do a single overhand knot close to the block, followed by six conventional wraps to get a seizing that looked proportional:

Now, I will be buying a set of alligator hands, as Dan Pariser previously suggested.  I will also pick up some fly-tying line to experiment with.  For the time being, though, this is both manageable and repeatable.  Here is a side by side comparison:


Now that I have an approach that I like, I dipped all of the previous tackles in acetone, so that I could salvage my blocks and hooks:

Any remaining glue residue brushes away with an old tooth brush.
 
Well, it isn’t much, but it is progress of a sort and I feel good about it.  Thank you all for looking in!

Objection your honor! Not Ship-Shape! Not Bristol Fashion!

Somehow I remembered that the free ends of the deadeye lanyards were tied up that high. I searched for a while to see what reference I had for the high-tie - but I couldn't find anything that had got me there. The old section model didn't look like that either. That's why I got protest elsewhere, which I had nothing to counter except for: Demolition!



Fortunately, I only use very little glue thanks to my fine glue nozzles 🙂

It was still a fiddle to get the stuff out of the rope. But now it actually looks much neater.

XXXDAn

@davyboy
Hello Dave,
Thank you very much for the hint, but unfortunately I couldn't find anything about it in my German version.
 
I have finally found something on the subject of attaching the standing parts of braces to stays.
First of all, I will show you a historical example of a knot:

Source: Atlas du Génie Maritime
 
It is not clear what type of knot it is.
On the other hand, you can see a possible way of doing this on the mainstay of the replica of the L'Hermione:

Source: Internet (excerpt)
 
If I am not completely mistaken, this is a stopper's hitch or rolling hitch (formerly also called a magnus hitch), in French Noued coulant or Amarrage a' fouet.
I know from the official website for the L'Hermione that the riggers use the following when rigging the L'Hermione: also based my work on the book "The Ashley Book of Knots", which also shows this type of knot. But they are also mentioned in the Biddlecomb, Lever or Steel, as well as in F. A. Coste (French technical literature from 1829). However, I cannot find any clear assignments for a specific purpose here. It is always kept rather general.

But ultimately it does seem plausible to me to attach these standing parts of the braces in this way.

Continuation: Making more blocks - topsail halyards
As already mentioned, there are still a few blocks to be made, including for the topsail halyards.

Source: Monograph on La Créole by Jean Boudriot
 
I made these single and double blocks again using the method shown so far. This method is not the most effective and has little to do with series production, but I am quite happy with the result.


 
In the next step I will complete the tackles of the topsail halyards (strops, ropes, hooks, eyebolts, spacers, etc.).
See you soon...

Another small update.
 
Although there seems to be little change on the model I've actually done quite a lot. I've done a lot of work on the pin rails, getting them more in scale and making new ones for the fore end  of the poop to match the ones that were actually on the ship. I've also starting fitting the wooden cap railing around the poop (only the easy bits so far); made and fitted the new railing for the fore end of the poop - yes, I have the photos to show that that's what it was like on the final voyage and I've also got the basic bowsprit rigging and the jib stays rigged.
 
Sorry for the especially poor quality of the bowsprit image, but I was in a bit of a rush, having remembered to take a couple of photos just as I was about to put the model away! 😑