Beef Wellington

Jan - you are on the right track with your thinking.

Spotted at our local pub/bar, made me think of you...think they bottled this just before you started your coppering

One tip I've seen is to use plan ahead for where the wales will be and use a slightly wider planks at the top and the bottom which are then covered by wale. This would avoid a potential problem if the wale and the planking don't meet exactly and avoid the appearance of a 'thin sliver' of a plank under the wale planking to spoil the effect. Hope that makes sense.

Thanks Robhvw - Next up....

Looking forward to more progress Rusty

A.J. Meerwald?

Thanks for confirming druxey.

Know its a pain Joe, but I'd suggest calling them. They've always been very responsive to that.

Very nice decking Joe, and great job on the capping rails. It would make much more sense for the kits to supply the capping rails oversize so they can be then trimmed to the correct shape.

After studying the deck planking diagrams as shown in both the AOTS books 'Diana', I am looking to follow these books as closely as possible, but there seems to be a little discrepancy with the planking diagrams and what I have taken to be 'common wisdom' from this site, namely the use of a 'butt shift' pattern. The AOTS books clearly show a staggered deck termination, but clearly show which beams these are terminating, suggesting a sound principle behind this. These are clearly well researched and authored by people far more knowledgeable than I....but why the discrepancy? I've tried to illustrate below not wanting to infringe on copyrights. Planking pattern per AOTS Diana _________________________________________________________________________ _________________I________________________________________________________ __________________________I_______________________________________________ _______________________________________I__________________________________ _____________________________________________________I____________________ _________________I________________________________________________________ vs. Commonly referred to butt shift pattern (approx only) _________________________________________________________________________ _________________I________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________I____________________ ______________________________I___________________________________________ _____I____________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________I_______________________________ _________________I________________________________________________________

Ray - your log continues to be an essential reference and I appreciate the luxury of being able to follow in your footsteps. Mark - I'm in Ray's debt as he has traveled down this path and helped identify the possible problem areas. I realized I forgot to ask a key question in my earlier update post - I was hoping to follow the AOTS Diana book as closely as possible, and my question relates to how reliable are the deck planking diagrams? The reason for asking is that they seem to indicate planking terminating as follows, rather than what I believed to be the ubiquitous but shift pattern. That being said, they clearly show which beams this planking terminated at so doesn't seem to be random - I checked this with the AOTS Pandora which indicates the same pattern. Thoughts anyone? Planking pattern per AOTS Diana and Pandora _________________________________________________________________________ _________________I________________________________________________________ __________________________I_______________________________________________ _______________________________________I__________________________________ _____________________________________________________I____________________ _________________I________________________________________________________ vs. Commonly referred to butt shift pattern _________________________________________________________________________ _________________I________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________I____________________ ______________________________I___________________________________________ _____I____________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________I_______________________________ _________________I________________________________________________________

Mike - unfortunately yes, the 3rd bulkhead is needed. The interior bulwarks need to be planked (there is no ply 'template') and the bulkheads provide structural support for that as well as the exterior planking. Doubly important because the gun ports are cut through this planking - I'll cross that bridge when I get there!

Jim, Mobbsie and Frank...welcome aboard! Always appreciate more people looking over my shoulder. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly Wish I could take pictures of 'thinking' and 'fiddling' because I'd have more progress. Wanted to get caught up on a few things before I lose sight of them. The stern and counter: Heres a current state photo of the stern. I built up the rearmost bulkhead by laminating some additional waste ply to the forward face to hopefully give me a bit more surface area to play with and glue planks to when I get there, same is true for the shaper pieces attached to the keel former. You can see how I'm hoping then sandwich in a replacement section in boxwood for the exposed sternpost. Some additional scrap was used to provide some additional strength here as well as the stern is hanging of a relatively thin extension until I get this installed. The starboard side has had only rough shaping, I'm still working on the port side. It was apparent that the rabbet for the first planking needed to be extended further up than indicated in the plans. I have decided to leave the troublesome transom profiles (26 & 27) off until last possible moment, and use the gunport positions to help determine the vertical position of the quarter galleries and the stern fascia. Interior of foremost frames: The kit indicates that interior planking on the upper deck should terminate at bulkhead 4. I wanted to bring this as far forward as possible to give me some options as I may want to add some additional detail in this area (forward bitts, manger etc). However, the upper deck forward frames are thicker than required so I had to reduce their thickness at the upper deck level to be consistent with the other frames. The was a bear to do, and wish I had done this before the frames were installed, you can see where I've inadvertently disfigured other parts of the bulkheads. The other thing to note is the additional ply added to frame 3. The plans indicate that gunport 1 sits right over the 3rd frame, which is just plain poor design by Caldercraft. To hopefully give me some options to cut gun port in the correct place, I built up the rear so to maintain structural stability in the event I cut through the original bulkhead. Hopefully with planking in place this should be enough Decking: Have started the upper deck planking. I replaced the supplied tanganyika decking material with maple which seems a pretty cost effective alternative to holly on such a large ship. Edges were still quite jagged, and rather than sanding each strip individually I used a small jig to line multiple strips and sand all together to get a smoother edge. Definitely quicker! You can see the comparison of the maple against the supplied tanganyika which has lots of brown stripes and flecks - didn't like it.

Robhvw - you got it, well done and thanks for the history. Mark - it maybe added an extra 5mins :-)

Thanks Robhvw - the background gave it away for me, the shore opposite Mystic seaport is very distinctive so put it down to local knowledge! Struggling a bit, but here goes..

Something that I have done is to use a satin varnish first, it brings out the colour of the wood more, it can then be lightly sanded and layers of matt applied. Using only the matt didn't really enhance the wood at all. Of course its all personal preference.

I think Jim's suggestion should work just fine...is the difference noticeable to the eye? Bubble levels can have a tendency to induce panic and call out problems that at not that noticeable. When raining masts on my Snake, I tried to look at the whole mast together (main, top, and topgallant) as there were likely small bowing of the down not noticeable individually, it also helps ensure that you don't fix a problem that creates a larger one down the road. Just my experience!

Photo is very small...is it the Nellie Oyster Sloop in Mystic Seaport?

Robhvw - as the correct guesser, its your turn to post a ship

Mobbsie - great stuff. Please never feel like you are boring people withe the techniques - I find that just as, if not more, important than just marveling at the end result!

I agree with Jim - Its better to get the mast positioned correctly and determine the position of the hole than rely on the 10mm indicated. The plans are not accurate enough to blindly rely on them.

Glad to see you back working on Mercury Richard.

Wish I knew! - I had just come across the photo when looking at some pictures some time ago. It looks suitably 'authentic' and not just some sort of touristy reconstruction. It seems to be the only example I've seen that is contrary to the perpendicular hook.

Except when they're parallel!

USS/HMS Chesapeake is correct. There are some interesting pictures posted here of the interior, many of the floorboards are from the deck of the ship, and many timbers bear the marks of their original purpose. Interestingly, the US considered the USS Chesapeake to be the runt of the litter of the original 6 frigates produced, but I wonder how much of that was historical propaganda after the loss of the ship. The Chespeake was captured by HMS Shannon (Leda class frigate, sister to HMS Trincomalee in Hartlepool) after a brief 15min dual, . http://www.armchairgeneral.com/the-fate-of-uss-chesapeake.htm/2 As many know, the captain of the Chesapeake, James Lawrence was killed in the action after uttering the famous "don't give up the ship" order. Captain Broke of the Shannon was severely injured and never commanded at sea again,although he did support improvements in Royal Navy gunnery schools. Probably the luckiest person in the whole affair was First Lieutenant Provo Wallis, after a rather mundane and non-distinguished career to that point, he was promoted Commander as was usual at the time after such an engagement and ultimately died at the age of 100 as Admiral of the Fleet - still on the active duty list after having refused suggested retirement by the Admiralty in his 90s. He was the last survivor of the Napoleonic war era. Pompey 2, you had the winning guess, so the next ship is yours to post.