Small Stuff

"Moderation is the order of the day!" otherwise you're going to build a catamaran...     
 
Here te latest news:
 
Here you see the inner part placed on the beech plywood strip and below the Stern & Stem - but the keel!!! 
Is it possible that a nearly 60ft long keel is made from one single pice of tree???
And the plank under it is also from one pice???
Due to the Mondleld's rule "No plank was longer than 35ft" I ask my question.
 
Looking foreward toward your answers,
 

Christian

Hello forum,
 
I've been able to buy the wood for the innen parts of the hull for less than 20€ - it's cuttonwood and beech plywood. Beech for the moulds and the backbone... cuttonwod as filling softwood. I found some dignified substitute for a magnifying glass.    
 
Here today's results for you  - hopingyou've got fun with this fist steps:
 
 
 

Hello forum,
 
I've been able to buy the wood for the innen parts of the hull for less than 20€ - it's cuttonwood and beech plywood. Beech for the moulds and the backbone... cuttonwod as filling softwood. I found some dignified substitute for a magnifying glass.    
 
Here today's results for you  - hopingyou've got fun with this fist steps:
 
 
 

And the hole sideview for the 4x600x100mm board for the backbone: 

Hy to all of you, and before disappearing to the diy-shop here the check of the most outside moulds: 

Thanks a lot - the block of softwood will make it easyer than I thought.
So I'm still on track.
I figured out that the bulkheads are drawn without planking. And by this I could saw them out directly and use them as moulds.
The backbone is also 4mm thick - so I can use for the moulds and the backbone the same pice of plywood.  
But what kind of plywood I should buy tomorrow? 
Yours,
Christian

And the hole sideview for the 4x600x100mm board for the backbone: 

Hy to all of you, and before disappearing to the diy-shop here the check of the most outside moulds: 

Here the next step - the moulds/bulkheads: cut out to square and put together - it fits!

Hy Frank,
 
no I think the just facelifted the box, that may be the point.
 
Oh now there are no gunports, they just shot "through" the bulwalk. It was simple a rope running through the eyes on the top of iron poles.
And the gun is also not in a "swivel"gun  - a swivel gun is a big/heavy rifle on a fork later with an axis - usually swivel guns were fixed on special posts added to the bulwalk. This carronade is on a middle pivot gliding cariage - yes she swivels at all but the termici technici seperate two kinds of guns small and heavy clearly. And to keep the text clear&easy to read - so I would like to show it to you to avoid a confusion about this two types of guns and their carriages.
 
On the one hand we deal with a small weapon in a fork - coming trom the musketiers of the XVI. century (found on the Marie-Rose for example) a kind of add to aim with a heavy gun's barrel she is only used a gainst soft targerts;
 
and on the other hand one coming from the earliest gun boats (-> Alf Chapman ) - giving the boats a 360° arc of fire usefull in the battels against ships with boardside artillery to keep them selve out of the arc of enmy's fire - by still being able to attack them under all circumstances - able to fire any kind of ammo against hull, rigging and the enemy's crew.
 
 a good example of a row of heavy swivelguns is to find here along the boardside
and
between the catheads there are two middle pivot carriages:
 
http://www.sjohistoriska.se/ImageVaultFiles/id_3070/cf_1781/40.JPG
 
I don't want to sound sententious - but it keeps my mind clear when I know what do you mean, and it makes conversation a lot easier.
 
Yours
Chris
 
Source of picture:
http://warof1812archaeology.blogspot.de/

Hi, found this topic and as I am also the "happy" owner of this kit, I would like to share some thoughts. First of all,I am really keen on history of the real vessels. I spent literally months comunicating with various people and institutions including historical department of US coast guard (former US revenue service). Once upon a time I published my research on already dead drydockmodel forum, may be some of you remember it. So, just a very very short summary, if interested, I may provide more details on request:
 
- let's distinguish once for all between the BRITISH cutter Alert on 18ct (described in ship's Anatomy book in the first post of this thread- this was one mast vessel of french-origin cutter design)  and here discussed US revenue cutter based on Doughty's plans- this is an example of two masted topsail schooner, extreme type of so called Baltimore clipper.
- Italian plans used by Krick (and alas, more other kit manufacturers) are very old, innacurate and contains many errors in (not only!) rigging, hull lines etc
- W. Doughty created three designs of plans upon request as correctly mentioned here. The plans are preserved. But beware of the two facts:1. The list of vessels built on these plans is not known. Although we do have some evidence that particular ship was built on the plan, the list is not fully complete and because of fact two: in turbulent years after the War of Independance, the plans, although given and ordered to follow, were not followed strictly. This can give us "advantage" : nobody shall blame you when your model does not represent the exact Doughty's design, although it should have been built upon it.
- Nevertheless, the italian plan of Alert contains many factografical errors in rigging and other stuff, that you can hardly excuse it just by this explanation.
- Italian plan of your "Alert" (and also mine ) is based on the smallest 31 ton Doughty's design. I will skip now my research regarding the fact if ANY real ship was built on this smallest design and will focus on Alert:
- Although you may find some POSSIBLE references to USRS cutter Alert in older resources (e.g. Chapelle's American sailing ships), this is wrong and corrected by later literature (Caney)
- As you correctly observed, Alert of 1818 does not match your plans (75 tons, 4 ports per side...), nor Alert of 1829 matches (sorry, but that is the fact, can provide you with resources, if tyou wish)
 
Summary:
1. Krick's Alert is based on very old and full of errors italian resemblance of W. Doughty's plan
2. Due to the fact we have no exact vessel naming list, if you study carefully the literature and various guides (again, may offer some good resources), you can build up a good representation of 31 ton Doughty's revenue cutter out of this kit. It is marvellous!
3. If you care about historical accuracy, do not try to connect your kit and built with any particular vessel (and by no way with any "Alert" ) of USRS
4. By no means do I want to discourage you, I own the same kit, unassembled, and spent too much time searching informations from various sources, I am just sharing my knowledge, nothing more. Will be interested in your build log and will gladly help with any info I can provide.

I took the wrong set of plans to the copyshop! 
IT was the 30 tons Cutter of 1829 instead of the 31 3/95 ton ner as I wanted to do.
 
And how happy and sattisfied I am - not to be forced to enlage the plans for the 1829 cutter from Wm. Doughty once again...
 
So let's redo it,

And the proof of scale:

"We are not amused!"
 
 
Only the distance between the masts seem to be right. 
So what was to do? 
I called Mr. Krick... he was only able to tell me that his father  construced the kit based on italian plans of a Revenue Cutter named "Alert".
This is a product of pure phantasy - she is based on the Doughty's drawings - but the letters for the name on the transom have never been used in this way in the XIX. century. The gun is quite well done and the pivot's construction.
So I think I'll evaluate the correctness of the masts, yards and rigging by the data given by Chapelle and in Pettersons book "RIGGING period ship modells":
Do you thnk it makes any sence to replace the hull under a well proprtionated rigging?
 
Yours 

...feel comfortable and please take a seat.
 
Yours,
Small Stuff
 
P.S.: It's till now her personal cup. 

I took the wrong set of plans to the copyshop! 
IT was the 30 tons Cutter of 1829 instead of the 31 3/95 ton ner as I wanted to do.
 
And how happy and sattisfied I am - not to be forced to enlage the plans for the 1829 cutter from Wm. Doughty once again...
 
So let's redo it,

...feel comfortable and please take a seat.
 
Yours,
Small Stuff
 
P.S.: It's till now her personal cup. 

...feel comfortable and please take a seat.
 
Yours,
Small Stuff
 
P.S.: It's till now her personal cup. 

Hy Augie, sorry for writing in here but it might be a very old but important question - helpful to a plenty of members confused by diffent length(e?)s used to definite a ships proportions.
These diffrent length(e?)s are not too confusing if you look onto this drawing - source wikipedia:
Hth,
Chris

Hy Augie, sorry for writing in here but it might be a very old but important question - helpful to a plenty of members confused by diffent length(e?)s used to definite a ships proportions.
These diffrent length(e?)s are not too confusing if you look onto this drawing - source wikipedia:
Hth,
Chris

Hy Augie, sorry for writing in here but it might be a very old but important question - helpful to a plenty of members confused by diffent length(e?)s used to definite a ships proportions.
These diffrent length(e?)s are not too confusing if you look onto this drawing - source wikipedia:
Hth,
Chris

Hy Augie, sorry for writing in here but it might be a very old but important question - helpful to a plenty of members confused by diffent length(e?)s used to definite a ships proportions.
These diffrent length(e?)s are not too confusing if you look onto this drawing - source wikipedia:
Hth,
Chris

Wayne,
during the next days I've to help my wife (she fall on the iced pavement with her backbone muscel right on the stone edge  ) so I can help to put your Ranger out of the shelf by doing further worknext week - so I hope!
 
Don't give uop the ship!

DigiCam2USB-wire was found some seconds ago!!! So after the weekend&party here,
And there 'll be some new pictures..
The cat played with it
untill it was gone unter the cupboard
and left there for the vacuumcleaner's snorkel

Thank you! OK...nearly at the end of the rigging now. WHEW! All of the sails ( at least all it's getting...) are up now. There's a bit of fettling left and the main mast shrouds need rattling down... I think a couple of days off and then start on her boat and anchors. Now, before anyone says anything, I know that there are undoubtedly errors and omissions in my rigging. It's been a bit of a struggle finding out what where and when. Since this is my first scratchbuilt sailing ship, I'm reasonably pleased with how it's going.