rybakov

Indeed you are correct. The head needs to be slightly elevated to accommodate the curve of the hood.   
 
I finished guilding the Staghound.  
what ya think?

Good work everyone.  
 
We’ll I began making chips,…….we’ll small chips. I carved the Staghound figurehead.  Here are some pics

Als o, I try to compare the lines of the several references, pls forgive my poor use of digital tools. The lines are those of the Monthly Nautical Magazine, Chapelle,  & Crotters. More or less the lines somehow coincide.


 

Finally, an Staghound:

@rwiederrich
as promised earlier, here's my 1:48th scale, in-process conceptual illustration of a one foot smaller square house portico. Details to be added are faux pillars as seen on the front fascia on Glory of the Seas. I added just enough roof molding to match the structure evenly with a 32" high safety rail on turned stanchions. That makes dimensions 7' wide square by 7' 32" high. The same rail surrounds the roof, since falls from five or seven feet could cause severe injuries. Illustrations show starboard side view and this time a fore view too. There would be 3 equally-sized curved arch windows in front, with twin smaller ones in back. I think we've now found our correctly sized portico!

@rwiederrich
@Vladimir_Wairoa
@Luis Felipe
 
I rechecked Stag Hound mizzenmast diameter and realized that a 30 inch diameter I was working with was incorrect. It's actually 26 inches. That mere 4 inches gives more clearance to the rear portico conceptual rail. Here's my revised sketch, done at 1:48th scale. At least I believe that's the correct scale for 1/4th inch =:1 foot. I used a door design taken directly from one removed from Glory of the Seas.

Also, in the Crothers book there is a midship section, in this picture is overlapped on the hull lines:

Hi Rob:
 
Congratulations for this new exiting project. I have been also looking at it, but no ready yet to start the woodworking. Adding some pictures and my initial drawings..

Iron stanchions on the quarters:
 

some progress:
 




 

@rwiederrich
@Vladimir_Wairoa
Here's a 1:96th scale conceptual sketch of the rear portico on Stag Hound. Tolerances are tight but it all works. Dimensions: 8 ft square x 8 ft high, with 6 inch fore and aft overhangs and 1 ft port and Starboard overhangs, with 32 inch high surrounding rail and dual ladders. Portico is recessed 4 ft with port and starboard rearward sliding doors. It's located 7 feet away from the center of the 30 inch wide mizzenmast, which has a 1&1/2 inch per foot rake. 
An alternative would be a flush mounted portico with single front opening door. Let me know if you like this or do you think flush mount makes more sense?

Topmast shrouds now complete.  Ratlines are next.  I’m considering using the Heller shroud loom for just the horizontal lines to create the ratlines without having to tie hundreds of tiny knots.  If it works, I’ll CA glue the hardened horizontal lines to the shrouds.

So, the rain has taken a breather, and I am able to sit in the garden. All the bulkheads are reunited in order and pressed together, I have sanded of the most obvious errors. They are beginning to reveal the more elegant shape of the hull. I will still need to fair the fore and aft bulkheads once in place on the keel and that is my next piece.

Simon 

That is frustrating to say the least.  I'm not sure why the first layer (the scanned print) would disappear.   I'm using CorelDraw and my scan is the first layer and then I open a second on top of it.  When done, I close/delete the first layer.  I should add that I'm not using "bitmap" for the new layer bur "vector".
 
Try this... pull in the scan print.  Make sure you're using "vector" and not "bitmap" for settings.  I assume that in your testing you were.   Draw on top of it directly.  Use a different color pen so you can see what you've done.  Then try to delete the scan print.  That might work.  If it does, then you can enlarge the drawing you did.   

Thanks Roger, I have been looking for a French curve and a long time ago, back in the dark ages, I had a flexible ruler, darned if I can find one now though. Good stationers are hard to find these days.
 
I have looked at the inventory of the drawings held by the SS Great Britain people and there are quite a few. Some show the measurements of the size of the plans but not all. It was not obvious how you purchase copies but prints were very expensive. 
 
As I have just been made redundant I am back to counting the pennies again. 
 
I have cut out the rest of the bulkheads and yes, there are errors, but this will show me the difference in the hull shape between  CS and T both forward and aft, I can see that from the bulkheads on their own but it should be much more obvious. 

i have drafted a keel and lower deck, hopefully these are a bit more accurate.

I suspect that the lower deck will require shaping and the main deck will have to wait until the mast mounts are in place.
 
Simon
 
 
 

Simon,
 
You do have a drawing board,  the plywood sheet that you are using to cut the bulkheads.  I would suggest that you visit an office supply store (Stationer?) to buy an inexpensive French curve.  You can use this to draw your bulkheads without “jiggles.”
 
On a broader note, you are trying to transform a 2D drawing into a 3D object.  250+- years ago shipbuilders developed the system of “Lofting,” to solve this problem.  Lofting involved redrawing the ship’s entire lines drawing full sized on a large flat floor.  The purpose was to check all views to ensure that everything matched.  This would ensure a fair hull; one with smoothly flowing lines.  Full sized patterns for the various structural elements could then be developed from  the lines drawn on the floor.  Note that every time that the lines drawing is redrawn, including the lofting process, subtle changes in the hull’s shape occur, as the draftsman or loftsman adjusts things to ensure that the 3D hull will be fair. There is, therefore, no “definitive” model of an old wooden ship as each draftsman’s interpretation will be slightly different.  CAD does not eliminate this issue.  It just means that the computer is making these adjustments.  In your case, you are making bulkheads without doing the lofting.  This will likely cause problems throughout your build.
 
So, what to do?  First of all, start with a good set of drawings that you are not trying to expand with a computer printer.  A set of lofted drawings exists in the MacGregor archives.  I believe that they can be bought from the SS Great Britain People.  If CAD is your thing, get the drawing scanned and lift and print the bulkhead shapes.  If like me, you are not interested in using CAD trace the bulkheads directly from the drawing using your French curve.  Tracing half a bulkhead and folding it to cut it is fine.  An architectural printing house that makes contact prints, not photographic prints can make copies and even change the scale.  Making smaller scale copies from large scale drawings is preferable to going the other way as minor drawing errors are reduced rather than expanded.
 
Roger

So, this morning I copied my sheet of bulkheads and proceeded to cut these out and immediately noticed how inaccurate they were. 
there was barely a single image that was a mirror image. However, i had included a centre line on every image so i cut out the image in a general block and folded it down the centre line, decided on the best profile and cut through both sides. So once unfolded, whether the cut was on the line or not, the stencil was a mirror image.

i glued these to a sheet of 2mm Lite Ply.


I am now in the process of cutting these out but am again, after only three, 17-19, noticing what a bad job I did on drawing these up. No 19 is not even full height.

Rather disappointed with this, technical drawing was one of my best subjects at school.  OK, I had proper drawing boards and all the right equipment and I did this on a A4 cutting board on my coffee side table, but I was only tracing a few lines for goodness sake.
Going to have to see how the next few go before deciding if this is worthwhile continuing. 
 
Simon

Thanks for you suggestions Roger, I had come to the same conclusion as part of this rather steep learning curve. However, as the keel is only 3/32inch thick I was not sure how much of a rabbit I cut cut without compromising the structural strength of the keel. 
I did contemplate adding a carved block to the stern, but as this was a practice piece, I wanted to explore what would occur without it. I did add additional shaped parts below the rear of the stern as I knew that I would not be able to bend the plank without it.
I am not totally disappointed with the natural twist of the plank achieved and I am not convinced I would have carved the same shape in a balsa block.
The practice hull I have been working on is from plans for Cutty Sark.  The images above are drawings I am drafting based on David MacGregors drawings above. Whilst those posted by Bruce are three separate images, they are still only small images and when you try to print them to larger papers, they become pixilated and you lose detail.  Naturally, the line drawing prints out a hull measuring just under 7 inches. I have managed to enlarge these to just under 10 inches. So a boat about 65 metres would be 25 cm or 1:260 or there abouts. 
Before anyone mentions CAD, I tried Autodesk360, FreeCAD and GIMP before resorting to pencil and tracing paper.
I made enough mistakes on my last attempt for me to contemplate a second practice, this time using my own plans.
 
Simon
 

Continuing with my practice hull I now have at least 4 strakes on each side. These are cut 3mm strips of 1/32 basswood so there is some variation in sizes and unfortunately my source blank is not long enough to provide full length planks.
 
I chose to proceed without any infill pieces and have bent the plank without wetting or heating the plank. This has allowed the natural resistance of the plank to shape the twist and has only required  the slightest of pressure from a clamp will the glue set to give this result.
 
I only have .78mm of timber so there is a limit to the amount of sanding. So to create an acceptable finish, some filler would be necessary, but I think I am getting the hang of this.
 
You might notice the special adaptation to the stem, this is Kobi's contribution, every time I get up and leave the room, I find him biting the front end.

Hope this helps.
 
After opening the link choose 'RELATED DOCUMENTS'
Thermopylae | Ships | Archive & Library | Heritage & Education Centre (lrfoundation.org.uk)
 
Also these:

I am still in practice mode as I have not made a hull before and don't want my T to be my first. I have made several small boats, life boats etc, and results have varied. So, just to get my hand back in, I started out on a lifeboat. As mentioned before, the parts were cut out a bit hurried in 1/32 basswood which was to fragile so I strengthened the parts by laminating the basswood alternating the direction of the grain. Not everywhere, but at the crucial junctions it is either 1/16 or 3/32 ply.
There is some work to do on the inside as tit does not bare scrutiny at present but this is the outside.

The plans called for the planks to be in .5mm x 3mm planks but I tried this on another attempt and the scale just looked wrong plus the curvature meant that each plank had to be shaped. 
1/32 basswood is .78mm or there abouts so I guessed at cutting stripes about 1mm . The curvature of the planks started to get extreme on the bottom of the boat so I then restarted from the keel and met my planks in the middle. It might look a little messy close up, but after a coat of stain or paint, I doubt anyone would call me out on it.

As you can see, I have put together a CS hull in 1/200 scale. This is never going to be a finished model, it's for practice only. I still have some fairing to do, which I found out after starting planking. It has also shown me that I need to add some frames below the aft deck above the transition. As the plans do not provide these, a little improvisation is required.  These are the things you only learn on a practice run. I believe I have seen people fill these areas with balsa block.
 
Simon

Thank you guys for all likes and nice comments.
It's time for inside planking. The spirketting, which is made of two thicker planks, was installed first. These planks are slightly recessed below the level of the frames.

The starboard "fighting port holes" (no idea of the proper nautical terminology) at the waist have been added. I don't know if it would be appropriate, as per the Zeven Provincien 1665 drawings that Chapman has in post #131, to have some kind of ring around the holes inside and out? I looked at additional Zeven Provincien drawings (and pictures of a model)... very interesting and informative. The Zeven Provincien had no gangway decks at the waist; is it possible that Soleil Royal #1 also lacked gangways, and simply had a wooden wall at the waist? That would be an interesting take, but unless there is compelling evidence... I am adding the kit gangways.
 
Also... I would love to move the ladder aft one gun port, but it would just interfere with the wooden strip between the wales (name?) that will serve as the anchor point for the eye bolts at the bottom of the main mast shroud lines. Unless I cut off the decorative tab that I added (but I also have a scarf joint at the top middle wale at that spot). Guess I will just leave the ladder steps as is.
 

While we're discussing the current, somewhat confusing keel depth, I will make a case, both for using the Cornelius McKay model as our premiere resource and for using his specific recommendations of additional feature dimensions to realize full accuracy of Donald McKay's inaugural extreme clipper. 
Here's the excerpt of the letter McKay's son gave to Captain Arthur H Clark upon presenting him with his precious artifact. Besides his over 4 foot model, he mentioned that there was a drawing too. Anybody out for sleuthing?
To complete her full 'rotundity' as Cornelius refers to it, he recommends adding 4 inches to bottom planking and 5 inches to her wales. To which, he also mentions add 30 inches to her keel which is built in two depths. My interpretation for these instructions is that Mr. McKay was describing exact dimensions to realize the full aspects for the basic hull of Stag Hound. So I would set exterior keel depth at 30 inches, believing the two depths he mentions are the shoe (false keel) and keel outside her hull. 
Second reason why I put full faith in the McKay model is our most authentic source to replicate Stag Hound is the force of his own words describing actions he took. Here we have a precise replica of a ship as she was in the process of construction. Not only that, lines were all literally taken off those on the moulding loft floor. Add in this was professionally crafted (referred to as an only correct "builder's model" in existence) by the builder's own son! To me, this is a gift from the past.