10th-11th century Byzantine dromon by Louie da fly - FINISHED - 1:50

[donrobinson]

removed, not required. 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 25, 2018 by donrobinson
not required

[Louie da fly]

Thanks for the likes.

 

Also thanks to Don and Carl. That kadirga footage in particular is amazing and very informative. Unfortunately both these vessels are single-banked, so there's no upper and lower deck, so no ladders down belowdecks.

 

I think there are no perfect parallels, because after the 12th century galleys became single-banked owing to a technological advance - first they began having more than one oar per bench (alla sensile), then later a single oar per bench with several oarsmen per oar (a scaloccio). Double-banked galleys vanished from the scene because these new galleys were faster - a higher power to weight ratio - less weight per oarsman because they didn't have that extra deck.

 

I also looked at the footage of the trireme reconstruction Olympias, but they had an upper deck with a "slot" in it running from bow to stern, which gave access to the oarbanks below.

 

So, can anybody who's been building multi-decked vessels, no matter the period, give me some idea of the expected size of the hatch in the deck and the width of the ladder itself?

 

The main factor I have to allow for is getting oars down from deck level through the hatch without obstruction, so the hatch might have to be longer fore and aft than if it were just to allow access for a crewman. [edit] And maybe I should be thinking about adding a cargo hatch as well . . .[/edit]

 

Thanks,

 

Steven 

Edited August 19, 2018 by Louie da fly

[Louie da fly]

In the meantime, I've been working on the structure to support and protect the side rudders.

 

A pair of through-beams form the supports, and are cut out to take the rudder shafts.

 

A framework from the beams forward to the hull forms a triangle which protects the rudders from collisions etc. It will be filled in with planking.

The upper through-beam is forrard of the lower one, so the rudders will be angled forward to where the steersman stands. The rudder shafts will be lashed to the through-beams, but with enough play so the rudders can pivot around the shaft to steer the ship.

I had this structure in place earlier in the build but had to remove it because other things needed to be done first. Now it's time to put it back again.

[edit] Looking at the photos, maybe I have to have another look at those oarports. They do look a little rough. [/edit]

 

Steven 
 

Edited August 19, 2018 by Louie da fly

[Mark Pearse]

Hi Steven

on the hatch, it sounds like the lower sole to deck height is less than the rowers' height, so at the bottom of the ladder it might be a good idea to allow enough room for a person to be able to stand & have their head through. If the ladder angle is 30-40º from vertical for the 1.5m or so of height, & the horizontal length of the hatch opening would need maybe another 300mm beyond the foot of the ladder...without doing a drawing I'd guess at 1-1.2m long. Hope this helps.

 

edit:

Just saw the 'fittings the oars' comment...if that wasn't required to be done very often, perhaps a removable panel to extend the aperture beyond what would be required for people. 

 

Mark 

Edited August 20, 2018 by Mark Pearse

[Louie da fly]

Thanks, Mark. That helps a lot. Any idea of the likely width of the opening? Obviously enough for a person's shoulders to fit through, but how much wider than that would it have to be (a standard house door is 820mm, and I was thinking of something about that width)?

 

Steven

[Mark Pearse]

that's good; most yachts that I'm familiar with aren't large, & they have a hatch with a clear width of about 700-750mm; for your vessel there's obviously a lot more people but if the hatch is 'one person at a time' then a yacht hatch width might be comparable. At least maybe that's a good minimum - unless there's some other limitation to width.

[Louie da fly]

I put all the beams in for the prymne (poop deck) and dry-fitted planks on the prymne and the main deck. At that point I realised there was only about 4" difference in height - really not a proper poop deck. This problem goes back to the original design for the ship with its curved "tail" - the prymne was originally going to be quite a bit shorter, and extending it makes the line of the deck intersect the gunwale lower down - and there's not much I can do about it.

 

If the poop is much higher it'll be above the gunwale, but I can at least raise it as much as possible. This of course involved removing all the deck beams for the poop, plus the beam shelf on which they rested. 

 

So I've done that, and put in a new beam shelf and the highest (sternmost) and lowest (furthest forward) beams, and now I've got to fill in the beams between them.

Fortunately I can salvage the beams I took out. They may need to be adjusted in length, but I think I can re-use most of them. If not, they can go in the bow.

 

Steven 

Edited August 20, 2018 by Louie da fly

[Louie da fly]

Thanks for the likes.

 

The reason for the problem is that in the original design the prymne was too short - it was both too short and too narrow to hold both the awning and the steersmen - see post 268 of 16 September 2017. By making it longer it also became wider, providing all the room needed. But to avoid the deck sticking out past the gunwale, it had to be lowered.

 

The changes have resulted in about an 8" (200mm) step between the decks. Still not as much as I'd have liked, but enough to look somewhat respectable. It does mean that the steersman's feet are level with the gunwale, but as the rail of the pavesade (the structure to hold the shields at the sides of the ship) extends right back to meet the tail, he shouldn't be in danger of toppling off the side.

Steven

 

Edited August 21, 2018 by Louie da fly

[Louie da fly]

Here are the deck beams complete for the prymne (poop) in its new configuration.

   

I've laid a couple of planks on the beams so you can see the (rather small) step between the prymne and the main deck.

 

And as I got onto a roll, I started on the beams for the bow as well.

  

When I get further into the main deck I need to make allowance for the deck furniture - at least one (or possibly two) hatches for a ladder below decks, maybe a cargo hatch, plus openings for the masts and also the stands to support the masts and the yards when they've been lowered. But that's yet to come . . .

 

Steven  

[woodrat]

Looking good. I like the through beam to support the rudder. A similar through beam was found in situ in the Contarina 1 wreck. I assume a tackle going forward to pull the rudder  against the beam and a tackle going aft to raise the rudder. What is seen on some illustrations is a kind of rail to hold the rudder post in against the hull as it is being raised.

Dick

[BANYAN]

Great progress Steven, you must be happy that you have resolved most of the 'issues' now?

 

cheers

 

Pat

[Louie da fly]

Dick, that's very interesting about the Contarina ship. The through-beams idea came from a doctoral thesis from TAMU which I was able to download, on the development of the rudder. Unfortunately I didn't bookmark the site that offered all these TAMU theses and now I can't find it again. It may be that they've taken it down, which would be a shame. I did get to download all the ones I was interested in, however, so not all is lost.

 

I've noticed that a reasonable number of mediaeval pictures show either one or the other of these sets of tackle, but I've only come across one source that shows both - a bas relief from the tomb of St Peter Martyr in the church of St Eustorgio in Milan, dated 1339 (see https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/photo/ship-in-storm-detail-from-tomb-of-saint-high-res-stock-photography/159618074 ). I'll probably be following this for my own rudders.

 

Pat, it's good to have worked out these issues, but I have a feeling there'll be others just as difficult waiting down the track. Still, the detective work is perhaps the most interesting part of doing a conjectural reconstruction.

 

Steven

Edited August 22, 2018 by Louie da fly
added link to picture

[Louie da fly]

Thanks everyone for the likes.

 

Mark Pearse said:

on the hatch, it sounds like the lower sole to deck height is less than the rowers' height, so at the bottom of the ladder it might be a good idea to allow enough room for a person to be able to stand & have their head through.

 

Mark, your comment inspired me to check the headroom belowdecks (something I hadn't thought about before) with one of my carved figures from earlier in the build. It turns out person approx 5'6" tall has the top of his head exactly level with the deck. So though the lower oarsmen might have to duck their heads to move around belowdecks (depending on how tall they were - someone 5'2" may have no trouble at all), it would possibly be no more difficult than in the ships of Nelson's time.

 

More progress on the deck beams. Got as far as the foremast, and created an opening for the mast with intermediate beams at right angles; the deck beam that would otherwise go right across the ship at this point is cut and connects to these beams.

 

 

I wasn't happy with the finish of the plating on the spur, so I've removed it on the starboard side. The main problem was the glue - I used a clear glue from a junk shop that professed to glue anything to anything. But it was lumpy when applied and made the plating have lumps and bumps. Also I cut the side plating too narrow, so there was a gap at the corner where it joined the plating on the bottom of the spur.

 

This time I made the plating a tiny bit too wide so there was an overlap. Also I tried standard PVA white glue and was rather surprised to find it worked very well - I thought it only worked on wood. A very thin layer of glue,

and when I clamped it all together, a very nice flat surface on the plating.

Then I bent the surplus aluminium plate around the corner at top and bottom.

 

This covered the join at the bottom, and at the top I filed off the overlapping plating with a fine file so it reached just to the top of the spur.

When I do the top I'll bend the plating over both corners to cover the joins, which I think is probably how they did it back in the day.

 

Some of the photos don't have a lot of detail because I took them in the evening when there was too little light. But I find it hard to work on this stuff in the daylight because the reflections are so bright I can't see the detail of what I'm working on.

 

The joins between the plates were scored with an awl

 

and the marks for the "nails" were made with the pointy end of a rat-tail file. They're less obvious this time - the ones I'd done before were too deep to be in scale.

 

Here's the finished product for the starboard side; the port plating is still in progress. 

 I think it looks considerably better than the previous version. Next I have to do the port side and the top, and then colour the plating to look like aged/oxidised bronze. Then I'll make the "iron" - the pointy bit at the business end.

 

And in between times (in daylight) I'm continuing with the deck beams.

 

Steven  

 

Edited August 23, 2018 by Louie da fly

[druxey]

Looks very business-like, Steven!

[BANYAN]

Now that's a 'don't argue'!   Nice work Steven

 

cheers

 

Pat

[mtaylor]

Wonderful work and research, Steven.

 

Here's the link for TAMU:   http://nautarch.tamu.edu/academic/alum.htm

[Louie da fly]

Thanks everyone for the likes. Druxey and Pat, thanks for the comments.

 

Mark, thanks very much for the link. I can't believe I hadn't bookmarked it for myself. I've found it very valuable in chasing up details for this and future proposed builds - including such things as pumps, lighting, lateen rig, seats of ease . . .

 

Just in the last couple of days I've been researching pumps and discovered that though the Romans had chain pumps, they seem to have fallen out of use, at least in Western Europe, until the mid 15th century, when they were rediscovered by a Venetian who ascribed them to the "Tartars" (possibly the Turks? The Tartars weren't a seagoing race). However, the early 11th century Byzantine wreck found at Serce Limani had the remains of what's thought to be a housing for a chain pump, so I'm going to have one on my own model. All I have to do is get more information on what it would have looked like and where it would have been on the ship. The only pictures on the Net appear to be Captain Bentinck's "improved" version, and all the diagrams are a bit lacking in 3Dness.

 

Steven

Edited August 25, 2018 by Louie da fly

[Baker]

Very well done Steven.

Beautiful detailed

[Louie da fly]

Progress on the deck beams. Earlier in the thread, the effect of the spur's weight on the ship's trim was discussed, and I decided that storing the water barrels aft should offset the weight of the spur. So I've put a hatch about 1.5x1.2 metres (5'x4') aft of the middle mast to allow for the water barrels to be lowered into the hull. It's in the second photo but doesn't show up well because I took the photo with too little light.

I discovered the beam shelves for the prymne (poop deck) were a bit out of alignment with those for the main deck, which caused the prymne's deck beams to be angled upwards towards the port side. Not very much, really, and my inner demon told me "go on, leave it - nobody will notice". But I'll notice, and if I didn't fix it, it would sneer at me for the rest of time. So one by one I'm taking off the beams and shaving the bottoms at the port end, so effectively the beam will be returned to the horizontal. I've done three so far. You can see the difference in the photo below. A lot of fiddly work, but worth it in the long run.

Oh, and I had a very fortunate find. I wanted some chain to support the spur, and had decided to visit all the local op shops (charity stores) to see if there were any cheap jewellery chains I could get hold of. But before I did, my wife and I visited our local branch of Ishka, a shop that sells stuff with a hippie emphasis, Indonesian furniture, that kind of stuff.

 

Found a multiple-chained necklace for $12.50, reduced to 50% on sale, exactly right for the dromon. But that wasn't the best thing. A necklace with really fine chains, in black metal (what, like iron?), already reduced from $24.50 to $5.00, further reduced by 50% to $2.50! I checked to see if this really was the price and being told it was, went and got the only other one in the shop as well. Ideal for the grapnel chain for my sadly neglected Great Harry model which is on the list for eventual restoration and repair. Score!

 

 

Here's the chain with the spur. I now have enough chain to outfit a fleet!

 

Anyone in Oz wanting some really cool chain might be well advised to check Ishka out.

 

Steven   

[Louie da fly]

Finally finished the deck beams. Here are some progress pictures.

Still quite a way to go

Gradually closing up the gaps.

Finished! There are four openings - two for the masts, one for a cargo hatch and the other for a companionway.

And here are some of the wood shavings from making the last lot of beams. Note that this little table is currently all I have of workspace, so it gets pretty cluttered and I tend to lose things. But I have a cunning plan, which cannot possibly fail . . . 

And here is a view of the completed beams from the bow. For a first effort at this level, I don't think it's too bad. Now I have to work out what planking I can do while still leaving enough visibility below decks to put the lower bank of oars in place.

 

Nice to have got this far. A real milestone!

 

Steven

[Landrotten Highlander]

Very nice work,

just a mall comment -peraps it is the angle of the last photo, but is the stern at an angle?

Slainte gu mhath

L.H.

[Louie da fly]

Yes, I'm afraid it is - see post #271 on page 10 of this thread to see why. I finally decided I'd have to accept the slight out-of-squareness after my repairs, because it would have required just too much extra work to correct. I decided I'd just have to put it down to experience, and I'll know more for the next build.

 

Steven 

[Landrotten Highlander]

thanks for the clarification.  I have been silently folowing this log since the beginning and had forgotten about that.

[cog]

you have to stay sharp LH, there is to much happening on this magnificent log

[Baker]

9 hours ago, Louie da fly said:

Nice to have got this far. A real milestone!

Congratulations.

There is a lot of research and work in this build

[Mark Pearse]

Congratulations Steven. An enjoyable investigative story to follow & a beautiful model as well. To our eyes they are a very dramatic craft.

[BANYAN]

Great progress Steven, a learning experience in many senses of the word.

 

cheers

 

Pat

[donrobinson]

Nice progress Steven, the framing looks fine. Have you tried inserting an oar through the hatches yet? In the pictures they seem as though they maybe a little small for the oars to get through.

[Louie da fly]

Thanks everybody for all the likes and the kind comments.

 

Don, just tried it. Through the cargo hatch no worries (you have to slide the oar through the hatch at a small angle above the horizontal - and have someone below decks to receive it), a rather tighter squeeze through the companionway, but it can just be done.

 

I'm now finishing the plating on the spur and also just beginning at least part of the deck planking. Other projects I'm looking at are getting under way on the yards and making the anchors.

 

Here are pictures of the anchor from the contemporaneous Byzantine Serce Limani ship. Judging by the size compared to a human the scale is presumably in centimetres.

 

The anchor in 1:50 scale is just over 1mm thick at its thickest point and I'll be making them in 1mm sheet brass and then colouring them to look like iron.

 

I have a cunning plan to get that extra bit of thickness in the brass where it matters - cutting the shank a little too wide and then annealing and belting it with a hammer so it gets narrower  and thicker. Should be fun.

 

 Steven 

Edited August 29, 2018 by Louie da fly

[GrandpaPhil]

It’s coming along nicely, keep at it!