Sailor1234567890

OH, I must have misinterpreted then. Yes, she is most certainly one heck of a beautiful ship. I'm more a fan of the smaller British clippers, Cutty Sark in particular but for the most part both the earlier American and the British clippers that came 20 or so years later look the same. Sleek lines, graceful towering rigs and driven JUST to the breaking point and hopefully no further. Damage to rigging was all too common though as evidence that they were driven extremely hard. I'd put forth that they were driven harder than the iron and steel ocean carriers of the next generation. The iron and steel carriers could take more punishment but they weren't pushed quite as hard as the graceful clippers were. Almost, but not quite. Keep at it Ed, we all love your work. Sorry for the thread drift. 

Cheers,
Daniel

Rob, I completely agree with everything except one statement. I don't think they were the ultimate in strength to withstand the punishing their masters gave them. I think that palm goes to the iron and steel ocean carriers of the next generation. Pamir, Padua, Garthsnaid etc. Otherwise, your statements are eminently correct in my mind. I say this with a very strong preference for clippers over the later ocean carriers. Clippers were the ultimate sailing ship design in my mind. Beauty, speed, grace. They had it all. Now we have box like super tankers and container ships that can carry infinitely more cargo with a fraction the crew size but where's the fun in that? 

Keep building Ed, your work is outstanding and I love to watch the progress, dreaming that one day someone might actually build one of these and show the world what it was like at sea in them. 

In the RCN we'd call it a battle ensign. 

Are those notched posts to support rungs for a ladder or are they a ladder on their own? If so, why put two side by side like that? Or are they something entirely different?

A 5x4" section of iron almost 4 feet long? CRAZY huge compared to my little topmast fids. 

The P shaped block and the other larger block are my topmast fids. A lanyard hole is required yet but it is much more rectangular than square. Parral beads, parral dividers, belaying pins, my newly turned carving mallet and a centreboard cleat at the bottom of the image are the other bits you see there. It's all Black Locust, my favourite wood. Sorry, it's 1:1 scale.

Those fid holes look square. I would have envisioned the fids rectangular in section and therefore taller than they are wide. 

Where does a single individual find the time to build even one model like this? And you've built many. Excellent work. 

WOW. Looking forward to seeing more of this project. 

Having narrowed down the conversation to French and English, we've neglected the Spanish ships. Montanes I understand had the beauty and sailing qualities of the French ships but the strength and longevity of the English. Anybody know about the Spanish 74s and are willing to weigh in on them?

Brass plated pedestals? I built a 1:96 Revell CS in probably the late 80s/early 90s. It certainly didn't have brass plated pedestals. Looks like that's a much nicer kit than the later production runs. I purchased another one on Ebay, maybe 8-10 years ago. It's partially finished, ready for rigging at this point. Again, no brass plated pedestals.

I have a few as well. I have a french one about iron sailing ships between 1880 and 1930. I purchased it in Toulon a couple of years ago on the pretext that it would help me study for my french exams. Ha! That didn't work. It's still an interesting read. Sort of a Boudriot of French iron ships. The four posters and France with 5 certainly were a different beast for hauling volume but they could surely stand up to a blow. I seem to recall hearing somewhere that their lower tops'l sheets were not led to the deck but shackled to the course yard below as they were never furled at sea no matter what the conditions. Not sure of the veracity of that but it struck me as odd and as a testament to how strongly those ships were built. I'd love to have the opportunity to sail one (Kruzenshtern is the only one still sailing I think) but my real love is the little British tea clipper Cutty Sark. Sailing her would be a miracle dream come true for me. I'd replicate her given unlimited resources just so I can see what she's like running her easting down in the southern ocean. 

I think Great Republic is a bit of an outlier, even amongst the larger ones, she's significantly larger. There's simply no comparison. How would the ones you've depicted compare with the iron four posters of the next generation size wise? Pommern, Padua, Lawhill, or the five master France? A bit outside the clipper ship area of expertise I guess but a valid question none the less. 

Glad to see you back. Any updates for us? How's Bellona doing?

I love the realism of your results Ed. Your work is awesome. 

Some would call playing with wires and stuff fumbling around but somehow a telephone was invented from that fumbling around. Call it what you like, we're calling it testing.

Greg, I think the answer to your question lies in where Ed went with his reply. The tops in these ships wasn't used like it was in warships. As Ed mentioned, they sent marines up to fire down on the enemy. This isn't a working platform in a Clipper ship. There wasn't a whole lot of work to do up there. It was just climbed up to get to the next level. Most of the work was done on the yards themselves so not much need to spend much time in the tops so... no railing. That's how I see it anyway. 

I tend to think the 74s from about the 1780s and 90s are the nicest looking but they continued to build them for decades following that so there must have been improvements. I guess the improvements meant reducing weight higher up by eliminating decoration. 

Ed, do you care to have a go at Great Republic in the same scale as your YA build? What a project that would be. Nice work Rob. Look forward to seeing the last few pics once you finish this project.

Just had a read through the relevant info in my copy of search for speed under sail. Very interesting reading even if one is not building the PdN.

I don't think of her as beautiful though. She's clunky looking in the stern to my eye and her bow seems clunky as well. I prefer ships a little older vintage, but not so far back as the mid 1700s. Late 1700s or to my eye but aesthetics are just one part of the package. A beautiful ship that's top-heavy and can't sail to windward is useless. 

The later the ship the better the design theory seems born out by Frolick's comment that many seem to think USS Ohio to be the best and she's from 1820, toward the end of the time these vessels would have been built. I suppose I could ask the question another way, "If one were to replicate one today at full scale for the purpose of experiencing the best 74 gun ship experience we could without building in engines and other modern gizmos that take you out of the 18th and 19th century, what ship would one choose to replicate?"

Maybe a bit more detail is required. Clearly greatest could mean many things. I'm trying to figure out what class (or individual ship) had the best mix of sailing qualities, weatherliness, speed, firepower, seakeeping abilities in storms, stowage space for victuals and stores for long voyages, ease of maintenance etc. I'm sure some were better than others. Some classes were very small but other classes, such as the forty thieves were quite large. One can presume that if only one or two of a class were built, it was deemed not to be successful and they dropped it, while if they continued to build them (such as the forty thieves) one might presume they were successful. That isn't to say that the most prolific class was the best vessel. 

Any thoughts now that I've added a bit to my question?

As the title says, what ship (or class really) of 74 gun ship was the best of the breed? Most tend to lean toward the French ships but I really don't know. Temeraire maybe? I can't imagine the forty thieves would be considered for the award. What say you?

The carriages under the museum model guns are terrible. Why are they so basic in construction when the rest of the model is so nice?