Beef Wellington

Once I shaped the and sanded the proper sheer it was time to add the fairing cap.   I did in fact sand the top of the sheer as Greg describes.  Either a side to side sanding with the stick posted in the last update or by holding the stick on one side as a pivot.  Then sanding on the opposite side with the stick moving it in an arch fore and aft.  
 
The fairing cap will now be added.  This serves two purposes and I discovered with the Winnie project that this is a great design element to help me when fairing inboard.
 
First it establishes a consistent width along the entire sheer.  It will be hard to screw that up as long as I dont sand into the strip.  The fairing cap is 5/32" wide.
 
In addition,  the fairing cap is glued to the top of each frame which really strengthens the hull.  There is no wiggle in any of the frames as you fair inboard or out.
 
There are 2 sections of fairing cap for the waist.   I added the forward piece first (#1)...then the aft section (#2).   These must be added first because a hance piece sits on top of the forward length.  We will add that later.  These are labeled #1 and #2 on the laser cut sheet.  When gluing these on the outside edge is flush with the outboard framing which should already be faired.  You can see below what remains inboard to be faired.  The only fairing I have done inboard up to this point is whatever I managed to get done progressively after raising a half dozen frames.  I had reached inside under those cross jigs to at least get rid of the heavy stuff.  But the cant frames are virtually untouched.
 
The qdeck fairing cap (#3) needs to be beveled on the aft end to sit flush against the transom.   The bow section of fairing cap is self explanatory.   Just make sure its flush with the outboard framing for all four of these pieces.   Then you will know exactly how much material you need to remove inboard.   
 


In this photo after the fairing cap was added,  the two hance pieces were added at the bow.  You can see how it sits on top of the waist fairing cap.  Also check out the framing plan for clarity.  Its at the break in the waist up to the fcastle sheer.   A scroll will be added much later after we finish planking everything.
 

I originally thought that I would need to wait until all the outboard planking was completed before I could fair inboard.  But the hull seems so strong with the fairing caps glued on so I just decided to go for it.
 
The gull has now been completely faired inboard...or about 98% there.   There are still some areas that will require some "noodling".  But I really wanted to get this done because it makes so much dust and its a pain in the butt.  I started with 60 grit sandpaper to get rid of the heavy steps from frame to frame.  Then I switched to 150 grit and then to 120 grit.  Remember when you are doing this NOT to reduce the fairing cap.  Its inevitable that you may hit it from time to time and you may remove the laser char but try and keep the width of the sheer as consistent as you can.   The fairing cap helps you do this.  Here is a picture after finishing up the inboard fairing.  Now I can return to the outboard planking with a much cleaner hull. Although I am compelled to add the keelson first just to make the inboard area even cleaner.   Its nice NOT to have to look at all that unkempt framing and laser char.  It cleaned up rather well dont you think?  
 

Just for note, Pt.2 of my Indy article is now out in the Model Boats mag. Here's the intro pages. 
My workroom has also had a serious deep clean too. It really needed it. I've reinstated my beck storage station, and stripped down the photo area where you can now see the Indy hull. New cutting mat and this weekend I'll have a new chair so I can work more comfortably.
 
Ignore the Spitfire kit. That will be started after Indy is complete and I go on a small hiatus from wood.
 

Looking great Kevin, nice paint job.  When I first saw the pictures it looked like the upper hull was blue, but its clear that's just lighting!

Hi Steve,
  I’ve been looking at the historic record on Victory for a decade now, I really need to get a different hobby!   It is surprising as to how little there is published on Victory, literally just a hand full of books, some of them quite bad I’m afraid.  In contrast with Nelson and Trafalgar you could fill a library, but I’m afraid 95% of it is the same.   To understand how Victory has changed I would recommend starting with ‘H.M.S. VICTORY REPORT TO THE VICTORY TECHNICAL COMMITTEE OF A SEARCH AMONG THE ADMIRALTY RECORDS’ by LG Carr Laughton, published in the Marriner's Mirror, even though a hundred years old much of it is still relevant.   Unfortunately there are no detailed records of Victory’s 1920’s restoration, it was a simple case of rip it out and re-build it, no thought for archaeological processes I’m afraid.   Next on the list sequentially is Arthur Bugler in 1966 with his ‘HMS Victory; Building, restoration, and repair’.  Quite a comprehensive work and it details some of the 1920’s work and brings it up to date for 1966.   Next in line, chronologically, is Alan McGowan’s ‘HMS Victory; Her Construction, Career, and Restoration’.  He brings the restoration story up to date in 1999.  His restoration update is good, but his historical analysis is lacking in primary research.   Next in line, is the HMS Victory Conservation Management plan, I see you have part 1, there is a Part 2.  This brings the story up to date, but beware the Wessex Archaeology caveats, they have accepted the work of others historically as given.   Taken together the last 3 publications detail the structural modifications, the primary reference is by ‘Station’, the stations are the individual frames running sequentially from Bow to Stern, and I believe there is enough information in the 3 volumes to plot the timeframe in which frames were replaced.  If you attempt this it should keep you busy for a while.   Gary    

Looking great Kevin, nice paint job.  When I first saw the pictures it looked like the upper hull was blue, but its clear that's just lighting!

I got a base made up, I’ll spray it gloss black then place the ships and boats like a diorama but I don’t want to use water as I want to show off the undersides and it’s massive and it will never store anywhere, so once I show it later this year I can disassemble it 
 

Looking great Kevin, nice paint job.  When I first saw the pictures it looked like the upper hull was blue, but its clear that's just lighting!

good evening everyone
thank you for comment and likes
day 79-2
i have now put another couple of coats on the yellow banding and repainted the gunports linings

all the gun carriages have been made up, but only six have been fully completed with wheels and metal fittings the tabs that enable accurate fitting onto the deck were removed as the boxwood deck was to hard to get a decent slot, so the wheels have now been sanded slightly to enable a good 4 point contact to the deck and will be held in place with PVA


the ships oven is a lovely piece of resin and Photo etch, primed and black painted


forward deck beams, sanded to remove the char, and painted on the forward and after sides only, as some of these will be exposed, on test fitted they just dropped into place
 
nothing is fixed, but a few shots of how she is today

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

I think we're chasing our tails.   First... museum ships aren't necessarily rigged the way they were back in the day.  That goes for guns also.   The other is finding historical documentation.   Seems to be rather sparse at best.  One thing I have noticed over the years is that for the most part, English and French ships and guns seem to get mixed up mostly by kit makers which doesn't help either.
 
Will we ever get that WayBack machine?

Back again with more contemporary information and I promise it to be my last - in this topic that is. However, as it’s fairly compelling info I thought I should post it.
 
This time it’s from the USS Constitution. All her carriage guns appear to have two pairs of outhaul tackle rings and the way they are rigged supports the theory that one pair is used for outhaul and one for the traverse - see pics below.

It is possible that the outhaul tackle could be used, as Gary says, to secure the gun, but it appears that outhaul is its prime purpose. I think the traverse tackle is providing too much lateral pull to be used as an outhaul, but have a look at the pics and decides for yourselves.
 
The first pic BTW is the starboard bow gun.
 

 

 

 

Good question Allan.  James is probably spot on that for many kit makers it would be an unnecessary complication and would not be a big deal for most modelers, so it is understandably omitted.  What is a little more surprising is that some of the more complex (i.e. expensive) POF kits (e.g. CAF Grenado, Bellona) do not seem to account for this in what would otherwise seem to be very comprehensive and well laid out kits.  Its a small detail, but one that makes for a more pleasing model.

Caruana, probably the foremost expert on sea ordnance, is silent on this matter.  No other author or contemporary publication  I have, whilst showing the second eyebolt in illustrations does not mention in the text the second eye bolt, although the proper term is apparently ‘Loop’.  It could be we are trying to ascribe a function for what is merely built-in redundancy, if one set of tackles or breaching fail on the carriage then there is a backup.
 
Interestingly Caruana seems to show the second Loop being introduced on the 1732 sea carriage, but only for carriages for guns greater than 12-Pounders, 12-Pounders and below have only the one Loop.  In my mind this would strongly suggest that it is the size of the gun is the determining factor for a second Loop per side.  It could simply be that the larger gun sizes were more prone to metalwork failure due to the forces involved, probably in pulling the Loops out, or the eye for the breaching ring being drawn as well.
 
I only have Caruana Volume II, it would be worthwhile examining what Volume I shows to see if any of this holds up for Pre 1715.
 
Gary

So after the 3 strakes of the wales were completed,  I started working my way towards the sheer.  There are five more 7/32" wide strakes above the wales.   So far I have added two of them.   I wouldn't normally post an update for simply two strakes of progress.  But in this case its good to point out a few things.
 
First, with five strakes now on both sides I think the hull is sufficiently solid to remove all of the cross jigs along the top of the model.   But I could very well have just kept going.  But above this last strake is where you have to start notching the planking around the port opening and sweep ports.  So I thought this was as good a time as any to remove those jigs.
 
In addition,  I would note that on many ships the planking above the wales is pretty straight forward.  There is no real tapering of the strakes at the bow or stern.  So you can more or less just use planking strips all the same width (in this case 7/32" wide).   But for Speedwell,   these five 7/32" wide strakes do in fact taper at the bow.   At least they should if you want the end up with a proper run of your sheer.  As you can see below.
 

These five 7/32" wide strakes will taper from about the forward sweep port and get narrower as they hit the stem.   So there are many ways you can do this planking.   You could literally pasted this template onto a 3/64" thick sheet of Cedar and cut your planks out.   They would be the exact shape you need.  And yes I could simply laser cut them for you but it is unlikely that the cedar I use for these would match in color with the cedar you use for the remainder of the planking.  So folks will have to cut their own.  
 
You could also transfer the lines from this smaller template of which a PDF copy will be available...to your hull frames.  This would give you the tick marks for your individual strakes and you would proceed to plank just we did on the Winnie or any other model.  There are so many ways to do this.  You guys can pick your own.   As this project is considered an advanced one,  I wont repeat myself and do a blow by blow on how to properly plank a hull.
 
Here is my hull with those two additional planks above the wales.  I used a 4H pencil to simulate caulking.   
 
Remember that the strakes for the wales have no taper at the bow.  Those are straight 7/32" wide strips.   BUT, the next five strakes above the wales do taper at the bow as discussed.  
 

 
So if the hull is not sufficiently strong at this point so I can remove the cross jigs then something is seriously wrong.  These five strakes are very carefully glued to each frame.   So everything should and will stay intact after we remove them.
 
To start this process...The first thing I did was remove all the tape along the top of the jigs holding them together.  Easy-peasy.
 
Then I just used a pair of nippers....flush cutters,  to snip the strips on the cant frame jigs first.
 

This will allow you to actually remove the whole jig after you cut those strips on both sides.  I see lots of inboard fairing in my near future!!!
 

Then I repeat this process at the stern for those cant frames.   But the very aft jig should just come right out.  Then just repeat the process to remove the aft cant frame jig.
 

 
So far so good.
 
Next I started tackling the extensions for all of those cant frames.  For this I prefer to use my home-madesaw.  Its basically just a scroll saw blade in an Xacto knife handle.  Its has fine teeth but is somewhat wide to prevent bending while in use.  I just cut myself a short length of blad to insert into the handle.
 
Start carefully cutting the extensions.  As you can see below...I am sawing them off one at a time.  But I am not sawing along the sheer too closely.  I am cutting in the center of the notches cut from the top-timbers.  I want some wiggle room when I finally establish the proper sheer.
 

With those removed for all of the cant frames we are almost done.   Now we must tackle the jigs for the square frames.  I am just using the very same scroll saw blade to cut the top timber extension on the port side.  Then I do the same to the top timber extension on the starboard side and the cross jig for that square frame will be freed.  
 

When all of the cross jigs are removed,  you will be ready to establish a proper sheer.  To do this we need to use our trusty templates once again.  Place them back on the model.  Line up the bottom edge of the template with the top edge of the wales.  This will give you a nice idea where the  sheer of the model should be.  With the template on the model I am going to use various sanding sticks to bring down the top timbers so they are flush with the top of the template.  In a few cases the sheer may fall higher or lower than those notches on your frames.  This is fine as long as you match the template.  We will be adding a fairing cap to the top of those frames in the next step.   
 
I have lots of inboard fairing to do!!! 
 
But I will wait to start that until after the outboard side is completely planked…for extra strength for the hull.   
 


 
 
bow planking strakes template.pdf

2nd side banded, and quite even

Good question Allan.  James is probably spot on that for many kit makers it would be an unnecessary complication and would not be a big deal for most modelers, so it is understandably omitted.  What is a little more surprising is that some of the more complex (i.e. expensive) POF kits (e.g. CAF Grenado, Bellona) do not seem to account for this in what would otherwise seem to be very comprehensive and well laid out kits.  Its a small detail, but one that makes for a more pleasing model.

Very nice Henke, your Agamemnon has a very authentic look to it.

Hi James
I would go further and bet that most builders are not aware of this design feature that existed on most ships, so whether they would care or not really cannot be determined with any degree of confidence unless polled. 
 
Maybe my poor wording in the first post so my apologies, but my question is why these basic design features are ignored, not how many people would or would not find it important.   
 
Hi Chris,  Kudos for showing this on Indy!!!  Great to see another little extra on what are already exceptional kits.
 
Cheers,
Allan

Very nice Henke, your Agamemnon has a very authentic look to it.

I did add this on Indy, but really it's only for those who really know what they're doing, and added for completion's sake. But Jim is correct, for those 99.9% of those building from kits, this is no big issue -a and for those 0.01% that want to, can by all means add the taper, ensuring that it does now mess up the figurehead slot.
 
ETA - Added a pic from my Amati Victory manual I did a decade ago, showing the taper to the rudder designing into the copper PE - so adding taper is by no means a new thing.

Good question Allan.  James is probably spot on that for many kit makers it would be an unnecessary complication and would not be a big deal for most modelers, so it is understandably omitted.  What is a little more surprising is that some of the more complex (i.e. expensive) POF kits (e.g. CAF Grenado, Bellona) do not seem to account for this in what would otherwise seem to be very comprehensive and well laid out kits.  Its a small detail, but one that makes for a more pleasing model.

This looks like a great kit coming together!  Question maybe for Chris, I see the carronade beds that will be provided look to have a molded wheel arrangement vs the flat PE wheel arrangement that is currently available.  Will these be available to buy separate from the kit?  They look so much better.
 

OK, Grecian is now fully complete and available for pre order:
The Baltimore privateer schooner Grecian 1812 – VANGUARD MODELS
 
I also have some extras for the Grecian kit, pearwood blocks:
Grecian Pearwood Block Set – VANGUARD MODELS
 
US Flag:
Grecian flag for US service – VANGUARD MODELS
 
PE copper plate set (to replace copper tape that is standard in the kit)
Grecian Copper Plates set – VANGUARD MODELS
 
And finally, a Grecian paint set:
Grecian paint set – VANGUARD MODELS
 
A big thank you to Jim for the superb build, pics and text for the manual!
 
I have attached a pic of the box label. Like the actual model, the box is long and sleek..
 
Now, I continue to work on Trial Cutter, the 14th kit. Next week, I will receive a truly massive shipment from Italy of photo etched sheets for almost all of my range (Fifie. Zulu, Sphinx, Duchess, Grecian etc.) plus my Trial Cutter sample sheets, so I can continue with this model.
 
Also included is a new set of Speedy PE. This kit will be out of stock (I think we have one left) until I have completed a little re design and updated the plans and manual, which I shall do once the Trial Cutter is complete. 

Other than the kits designed by Chuck Passaro, do any other kits address the large amount of tapering of the subject parts?   This seems to be very basic design criteria as the dimensions are detailed on the various scantlings sources including the Establishments, Steel, et al. and are significant.  For example the stem tapers about 30% from top to bottom at the keel and the knee of head tapers more than a very noticeable 50% fore and aft from where it meets the stem to the place for the figurehead.    Why is this shaping not done on the parts in other kits, or, at least described in the instructions so the builder can do it themselves if it is a cost factor?   
Allan

To be bluntly honest, I don't really think most kit builders would really care about stuff like this.
 
Maybe as 'some' modellers progress down a more serious route, would they contemplate details such as tapering of those areas. 
 
I would think that most kit modellers wouldn't want to progress down that route and are happy to build very respectable finished projects without the sort of things that only a purist would look at.

Very nice Henke, your Agamemnon has a very authentic look to it.