robdurant

Hi Rob,
I experienced the same thing with the QG door framing, in the end I landed somewhere between the framing drawing and the Portland outboard profile. Looking at my 3D model with the QG in place, it would be extremely difficult to spot an error or discrepancy through the window frame and QG structure. 
 

I mentioned earlier in this thread that the framing plan for Portland didn't quite match up with the profile plan for Bristol, and @scrubbyj427 and @allanyed and @AnobiumPunctatum, you've been kind enough to continue the discussion prompting me to think about this whole task in ways I hadn't before. My horizons are broadening!
 
Looking back at the plans, and doing some measuring (the CAD I'm drawing is at 1:1 scale for the original) I now realise that the door is only 3" out of place, so what seemed like a gaping difference when I looked at it, is pretty close all things considered.  Here's a picture of a small section of ZAZ1749 (Bristol profile) and ZAZ1719 (Portland framing plan) overlaid to show the difference. The green square marks the quartergallery door as per the Bristol profile.

Just an afterthought, but, this may be a good time to check how the channels and chain plates will line up just to be safe.
David.

It feels like a couple of weeks since my last update, but, I think I have finally figured out the positioning of the gunports. For the last few weeks I knew the maximum distance between gunports 1 and 14 and was trying to position the rest equaly spaced apart from 7 and 8 which, as was pointed out previously, should be further apart. I was also triying to fit everything between frames.  I tried everything I could including scaling up photos and measuring sizes and distances of the ports to match. Everything I tried resulted in at least one or more frames being behind where I thought the gunports should sit. Last night I realised that I may have to compromise and lose one of the frames. The distance from port 1 to 7 and 8 to 14 should be equal. The steps up the hull are about the same width as the gunports but about a gunports width from 7. I also guessed that none of the gunports should be level with the masts. I laid another strip of tape, marked out the centre line and worked my way in each direction, with 15mm wide ports and 30mm wide spaces. This also didn't work but was closer than I had managed previously. I changed the measurements to 31mm apart but kept the 15mm wide ports and starting at frame 3 worked my way along the hull. This was my Eureka moment. Everything lined up perfectly apart from frame 9 which was 5mm too far astern. I checked the measurements again and eveything still matched. I triple checked again tonight and I'm certain, this time I have got it right. I now need to cut away the previous planking to where the gunports should be. Where frame 9 was needs to be filed flush. The next task will be to lay 2 X 5mm strips parrallel to the frams and add 2mm thick and 13mm high balsa strips inside the hull to line up with the ports and also mark the line of the tops of the ports. Once this is completed I will lay strips of 2mm balsa along the top of the gunports level with the the line of the top deck. The entire inner bulwarks will have 1mm strips added to fill out the planking flush with the frames. These in turn will have 0.5mm planking to avoid the hull looking too thick, I hope. Coincidently, the linings of the ports will now be 0.5mm thick which seems to be more accurate. I still have lots to do but at least I think I'm winning.       

On the actual ships there were usually one and more often two frames that were in line with a gun port so there is nothing wrong with a frame crossing a port.   The frames were cut and ledges put in place then the linings/stops on the bottom ledge and sides of the frames forming the fore and aft sides of the port.
Allan

 
 

I mentioned earlier in this thread that the framing plan for Portland didn't quite match up with the profile plan for Bristol, and @scrubbyj427 and @allanyed and @AnobiumPunctatum, you've been kind enough to continue the discussion prompting me to think about this whole task in ways I hadn't before. My horizons are broadening!
 
Looking back at the plans, and doing some measuring (the CAD I'm drawing is at 1:1 scale for the original) I now realise that the door is only 3" out of place, so what seemed like a gaping difference when I looked at it, is pretty close all things considered.  Here's a picture of a small section of ZAZ1749 (Bristol profile) and ZAZ1719 (Portland framing plan) overlaid to show the difference. The green square marks the quartergallery door as per the Bristol profile.

I mentioned earlier in this thread that the framing plan for Portland didn't quite match up with the profile plan for Bristol, and @scrubbyj427 and @allanyed and @AnobiumPunctatum, you've been kind enough to continue the discussion prompting me to think about this whole task in ways I hadn't before. My horizons are broadening!
 
Looking back at the plans, and doing some measuring (the CAD I'm drawing is at 1:1 scale for the original) I now realise that the door is only 3" out of place, so what seemed like a gaping difference when I looked at it, is pretty close all things considered.  Here's a picture of a small section of ZAZ1749 (Bristol profile) and ZAZ1719 (Portland framing plan) overlaid to show the difference. The green square marks the quartergallery door as per the Bristol profile.

Interesting. I'm using ZAZ1719 for the framing and ZAZ1749 for the profile of Bristol... this is the plan with the decoration on it. It hadn't occurred to me that the framing might have changed so drastically between Portland and Bristol. Without evidence to the contrary I would feel inclined to follow the framing plans for Portland as closely as possible, I think?

I mentioned earlier in this thread that the framing plan for Portland didn't quite match up with the profile plan for Bristol, and @scrubbyj427 and @allanyed and @AnobiumPunctatum, you've been kind enough to continue the discussion prompting me to think about this whole task in ways I hadn't before. My horizons are broadening!
 
Looking back at the plans, and doing some measuring (the CAD I'm drawing is at 1:1 scale for the original) I now realise that the door is only 3" out of place, so what seemed like a gaping difference when I looked at it, is pretty close all things considered.  Here's a picture of a small section of ZAZ1749 (Bristol profile) and ZAZ1719 (Portland framing plan) overlaid to show the difference. The green square marks the quartergallery door as per the Bristol profile.

I mentioned earlier in this thread that the framing plan for Portland didn't quite match up with the profile plan for Bristol, and @scrubbyj427 and @allanyed and @AnobiumPunctatum, you've been kind enough to continue the discussion prompting me to think about this whole task in ways I hadn't before. My horizons are broadening!
 
Looking back at the plans, and doing some measuring (the CAD I'm drawing is at 1:1 scale for the original) I now realise that the door is only 3" out of place, so what seemed like a gaping difference when I looked at it, is pretty close all things considered.  Here's a picture of a small section of ZAZ1749 (Bristol profile) and ZAZ1719 (Portland framing plan) overlaid to show the difference. The green square marks the quartergallery door as per the Bristol profile.

I mentioned earlier in this thread that the framing plan for Portland didn't quite match up with the profile plan for Bristol, and @scrubbyj427 and @allanyed and @AnobiumPunctatum, you've been kind enough to continue the discussion prompting me to think about this whole task in ways I hadn't before. My horizons are broadening!
 
Looking back at the plans, and doing some measuring (the CAD I'm drawing is at 1:1 scale for the original) I now realise that the door is only 3" out of place, so what seemed like a gaping difference when I looked at it, is pretty close all things considered.  Here's a picture of a small section of ZAZ1749 (Bristol profile) and ZAZ1719 (Portland framing plan) overlaid to show the difference. The green square marks the quartergallery door as per the Bristol profile.

Interesting. I'm using ZAZ1719 for the framing and ZAZ1749 for the profile of Bristol... this is the plan with the decoration on it. It hadn't occurred to me that the framing might have changed so drastically between Portland and Bristol. Without evidence to the contrary I would feel inclined to follow the framing plans for Portland as closely as possible, I think?

I mentioned earlier in this thread that the framing plan for Portland didn't quite match up with the profile plan for Bristol, and @scrubbyj427 and @allanyed and @AnobiumPunctatum, you've been kind enough to continue the discussion prompting me to think about this whole task in ways I hadn't before. My horizons are broadening!
 
Looking back at the plans, and doing some measuring (the CAD I'm drawing is at 1:1 scale for the original) I now realise that the door is only 3" out of place, so what seemed like a gaping difference when I looked at it, is pretty close all things considered.  Here's a picture of a small section of ZAZ1749 (Bristol profile) and ZAZ1719 (Portland framing plan) overlaid to show the difference. The green square marks the quartergallery door as per the Bristol profile.

Perhaps something like this? 1mm half round styrene. Only .1mm over scale... a brush with some sandpaper, or drawing it through a .9mm gap would make that difference.. and being HIPS you could warm it and it may go round the corners? You could laser cut a wood jig to shape it on inside and outside while gluing, perhaps? I used crayon as a release layer to stop the plastic glue sticking the melted plastic to the wood.
 
https://www.scalemodelshop.co.uk/1-0mm-half-round-evergreen-240-p11588/?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAiA9ourBhAVEiwA3L5RFqOc_8N-nCzcjOCucuzaV3MVNrqOCPTypKI8P3kbAJKTe01YS3INgBoC7GMQAvD_BwE

Ten more days have given me time to mix up some blue paint for the hull - I've used whole bottles of vallejo paint so that I can re-make this colour if I need to... it's four bottles of blue, four bottles of blue-green, and one bottle of light green-blue. 
 

I've did a test on the planking (which is left over from Barque Stefano), to make sure that Admiralty (Caldercraft) Matt Varnish didn't make the sharpie I used to add caulking, run... it didn't. I also painted the insides of the bulwarks light green-blue, and the top of the superstructure will be this colour too.
 
The planking was stuck in place with carpenter's glue. Once varnished, it should be fine for fairweather sailing. The edging of the planking was achieved by adding a margin plank, which was glued just inside of the bulwark posts. I'm pretty pleased with how it's turned out. Here are some pictures of progress so far. (There are still a few lines of planking to be added on each side to finish the job.)


 
 

In my opinion the framing design changed in 1775 - 1776. You will find similiary changes also in other classes, for example the Swan class sloops.
I think that Portland has the conventional framing pattern with double and single frames. For Bristol I don't know but had the same thoughts as you.

Ten more days have given me time to mix up some blue paint for the hull - I've used whole bottles of vallejo paint so that I can re-make this colour if I need to... it's four bottles of blue, four bottles of blue-green, and one bottle of light green-blue. 
 

I've did a test on the planking (which is left over from Barque Stefano), to make sure that Admiralty (Caldercraft) Matt Varnish didn't make the sharpie I used to add caulking, run... it didn't. I also painted the insides of the bulwarks light green-blue, and the top of the superstructure will be this colour too.
 
The planking was stuck in place with carpenter's glue. Once varnished, it should be fine for fairweather sailing. The edging of the planking was achieved by adding a margin plank, which was glued just inside of the bulwark posts. I'm pretty pleased with how it's turned out. Here are some pictures of progress so far. (There are still a few lines of planking to be added on each side to finish the job.)


 
 

I've reached a milestone - the hull is closed up. I've also cut out the beams where the deck opening is to give space to access the motor, rudder servo, battery, etc... 
 
 



Thanks for looking in, for the likes, and the encouragement
 
Rob

Thank you for the words of encouragement, @Ian_Grant. Yes, the prop-shaft and prop are from George Sitek - I've always been really impressed with their product, and that's no less true on this occasion.
 
The rudder servo tray is constructed, with the servo mounted and fitted... I've also installed the motor on its own tray and mounted that between two bulkheads. Everything's screwed in place so that it can be removed as necessary through the access hatch above. The receiver will go next to the rudder servo. A bit of brass wire has been used as the linkage between the rudder post and the rudder servo. This is bent so that it doesn't hit the bulkheads as it passes forward. Altogether, I'm quite please. Here are some pictures of progress so far.
 
I'm really glad I decided to do all of this before planking the other side closed... it's made life WAY easier

Thanks for the likes
 
Planking continues... Port side is now planked, and starboard side well underway...  I'll leave the serious sanding until I've got the whole hull planked.



Also, the right parts for the universal coupling, along with a new motor arrived... 
 

Thanks for that, I really want to make it from the same wood, as it's all varnished.
Also the profile is triangular  with a small lip, not half round.
I doubt I will et the small lip at 1/40 but yeah adamant its got to be wood
It can be seen here in this image.

Ten more days have given me time to mix up some blue paint for the hull - I've used whole bottles of vallejo paint so that I can re-make this colour if I need to... it's four bottles of blue, four bottles of blue-green, and one bottle of light green-blue. 
 

I've did a test on the planking (which is left over from Barque Stefano), to make sure that Admiralty (Caldercraft) Matt Varnish didn't make the sharpie I used to add caulking, run... it didn't. I also painted the insides of the bulwarks light green-blue, and the top of the superstructure will be this colour too.
 
The planking was stuck in place with carpenter's glue. Once varnished, it should be fine for fairweather sailing. The edging of the planking was achieved by adding a margin plank, which was glued just inside of the bulwark posts. I'm pretty pleased with how it's turned out. Here are some pictures of progress so far. (There are still a few lines of planking to be added on each side to finish the job.)


 
 

Just some shots of the last CAD jobs to do.
The Monkey poop interior for those who wish to build it out, maybe even have a removable roof, all to scale.

And lastly the deckhouse panelling, this is going to be a challenge, it's made in 3 layers of thin cherry, a 2mm base then the .8mm second layer and then the .6 third layer, the mouldings will be a real challenge as the main ones are just  .9mm square and have a profile. If possible I would like some advice on this if anyone has any, I know abut scrapping profiles but due to the tight bends I am thinking of using strips and bending them into place with steam and water...thoughts? anyone who has done this sort of work?.
Surprisingly no plans have these details as built on ship, but rather just approximations, however this is done from tracing photos and measurements and correcting perspective distortion.
Below are the colours and  codes for the types of panels in arrangement but yeah the light blue mouldings are .9mm wide and 1.1mm deep and triangular in section

Here is how it will go together (not complete).
The Dark brown is the 2mm base, then the send layer in light blue, and finally the grey outer layer all built as per the real thing. 
But as I said if anyone has some awesome tricks for making very small profiled mouldings please share.
For the purpose of scale this deckhouse wall is 43mm high

 

Ten more days have given me time to mix up some blue paint for the hull - I've used whole bottles of vallejo paint so that I can re-make this colour if I need to... it's four bottles of blue, four bottles of blue-green, and one bottle of light green-blue. 
 

I've did a test on the planking (which is left over from Barque Stefano), to make sure that Admiralty (Caldercraft) Matt Varnish didn't make the sharpie I used to add caulking, run... it didn't. I also painted the insides of the bulwarks light green-blue, and the top of the superstructure will be this colour too.
 
The planking was stuck in place with carpenter's glue. Once varnished, it should be fine for fairweather sailing. The edging of the planking was achieved by adding a margin plank, which was glued just inside of the bulwark posts. I'm pretty pleased with how it's turned out. Here are some pictures of progress so far. (There are still a few lines of planking to be added on each side to finish the job.)


 
 

Ten more days have given me time to mix up some blue paint for the hull - I've used whole bottles of vallejo paint so that I can re-make this colour if I need to... it's four bottles of blue, four bottles of blue-green, and one bottle of light green-blue. 
 

I've did a test on the planking (which is left over from Barque Stefano), to make sure that Admiralty (Caldercraft) Matt Varnish didn't make the sharpie I used to add caulking, run... it didn't. I also painted the insides of the bulwarks light green-blue, and the top of the superstructure will be this colour too.
 
The planking was stuck in place with carpenter's glue. Once varnished, it should be fine for fairweather sailing. The edging of the planking was achieved by adding a margin plank, which was glued just inside of the bulwark posts. I'm pretty pleased with how it's turned out. Here are some pictures of progress so far. (There are still a few lines of planking to be added on each side to finish the job.)