Jump to content

Sailor1234567890

Members
  • Posts

    970
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sailor1234567890

  1. Nope, not foreign at all. Just hadn't thought that far ahead yet. Thanks for enlightening me though.
  2. What are the steps for in that stem part? I presume they must slope downwards so water cannot collect?
  3. Why is the upper yard abaft the mast? And on that note, why is the topmast abaft the lower mast? I know that was done in some ships but I thought it wasn't until much later that it happened. Beautiful work on her so far B.E., you're truly a master at your craft. Cheers, Daniel
  4. What are the ringbolts below each gun port for? Those are some heavy ringbolts so I can't imagine it has to do with the port lids and they'd be above the gun for slinging the guns in and out. Fastening camels maybe?
  5. I'd say he's learned a thing or two in his time. That's a sweet looking hull. The ultimate 1:64 ship out there I would suggest.
  6. Saw a FB group about building this model, I presume it's your group James? Started just the other day. I'd love to see a 1:64 Victory kit out there. Somthing to strive for one day. Once I build some other 1:64 kits. I'll be watching this closely. As well as the FB group. That is a gargantuan hull and 1:64 allows some nice detail.
  7. Each mast will be differently raked. If they are parallel (with the same rake) they don't look right. Mast rake normally increases as you move aft in a ship for both aesthetic reasons but also because if you splay them by increasing the rake from forward to aft as is normally done, you allow more space between the masts at the top which means you can carry more sail without overlapping them too much. I'm not sure what the variation is on Red Jacket but I seem to recall Cutty Sark's masts were raked 1 degree more from fore mast to main and another degree for the main to the mizzen. I can't recall the exact rake but it was in the high 80s, maybe 87 degrees or so for the main but don't quote me on that number.
  8. How heavy do you think she will be once completed? There's a lot of timber in that build.
  9. Those chain pipes to the lockers are called either spurling pipes or naval pipes. I agree with some sawdust glue and then re carve them. I think those doors were more square than elongated rectangle. Maybe that's the design of that particular one, I'm not sure. Most I've seen in old images have been more square and a bit further aft from the stem.
  10. I can't tell, are the yards "braced" to one side or the other or are they square to the centreline?
  11. I think I can explain his nonsense comment. Or, at least, there's a part of me that wonders why "which is the best" questions were broken down into plans, quality etc, while the "which is the worst" question lumped all subcategories into one question. Chuck, maybe you could separate them into individual questions for the worst kit questions as well? Just a thought. I still find the information informative and will certainly keep it in mind when buying a kit in the future.
  12. Could be, I think she was rearmed a few times throughout the books. I think at one point she carried her long gns as internal ballast and could rearm herself if required.
  13. That sounds about right to me. From the reading I've done on her, the original had the 36 gun ship's mast. And 32lb carronades as her main armament with a few chase guns. Pretty much what Jack sailed. She really was a special ship in real life, not just in the books.
  14. The level of detail this scale affords in pretty mind blowing. Those two shots, 5 and 7 in post 290. Beautifully executed.
  15. What is the purpose of the moused up stays? I see that it keeps the eye formed from closing tight on the mast as slack is taken up but is there another purpose? I'm more knowledgeable about later ships.
  16. I built a canoe of WRC and it's kind of splintery so I doubt it would make good planking for a model. Funny, I used it for planking the canoe. It bends well, but can be brittle if that makes any sense. The grain wasn't what I would call tight.
×
×
  • Create New...