74-gun ship by Gaetan Bordeleau - 1:24

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

The main reason for his work, was to draw 11plates showing the frames. He also shows other possibilities for different 74.

 

To work with set of plans containing errors is part of the game. Are these mistakes  so disturbing that someone should not use these plans? If so, nobody would sell plans and nobody would buy plans.

[G. Delacroix]

Sure, JC Lemineur drew the frames of the V74 that were demanded by the modeling sphere, but was this necessary? Many 74 are built with their frames and many have an excellent level of job.

 

The good question is: is it reasonable for a publisher to offer a book whose content is questionable? It was perhaps excusable it 20 years ago but today, knowledge in this discipline have evolved and model-makers are much more knowledgeable and especially more demanding.

 

Certainly there are no monographs free of errors but they are often minor and undetectable in the reading of the plans and only discovered during the construction.

 

GD

[Jeronimo]

Hello Gaetan,

why again the same ship type?

Good luck with the construction of the model.

Karl

[Richard Griffith]

Hello to Gaetan and G. Delacroix.

 

Jean Boudriot did make a tremendous and stupendous contribution!  I have studied his seminal work 'The 74 Gun Ship' and this allowed me to build Le Superbe for a client; the model was much improved due to his 4 volumes.  And both of you gentlemen are also making tremendous contributions; I have your monograph 'Le Gross Ventre' plus Gaetan's build log.

  

Mr. Delacroix, would  you please expand the concept of  "arsenal modelism"?  

 

Thank you.                       Duff in Middletown, CT USA 

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

The 74 guns was first published in 1973.

This means there are only 6 years remaining to do an update for this 50th birthday of edition.

 

Karl,

 

The primary reason why I choose a model ship to build is always the same. I must find  beauty in the model.

[YankeeD]

Well I am in for this! Cant wait to see you start....

 

Good luck and have fun!!

 

Hans.

[G. Delacroix]

...

Mr. Delacroix, would  you please expand the concept of  "arsenal modelism"?  

 

Thank you.                       Duff in Middletown, CT USA 

Well let's try to be concise:

 

Arsenal modeling is a discipline of naval modeling, the oldest and most demanding.

 

This activity consists of replicating to scale down the design and construction of old ships. This reproduction must be as faithful as possible in the making of the parts which constitute the framework, the arrangements of the decks, the equipment and the decoration of the original ship. The construction of the masts, the rigging and the sails are not imperative, it is a question of personal preferences.

 

In France this activity was practiced in the arsenals of the king since the XVIIth century, Jean Boudriot "awakened" this practice in the Seventies and the name has remained and is still used today.

 

The different parts must be perfectly conform to the original parts, their assembly also. Bolts, nails and treenails should be reproduced as far as possible. If a keel has four parts, these four parts must be represented and assembled as true with scarph, bold et nails.

 

No facility, modern materials or artifacts of manufacture are allowed in the traditional arsenal modeling unlike some models makers who make superb models but out of established conventions (absence of framework, sculpture in series (even metal), artillery in resin , etc.). For the enthusiasts who are often very cultured on the subject, these models are not part of the true model of arsenal.

 

The arsenal models are based on monographs or personal studies which are the representation of the real ships, they are not plans of model. These books are the result of advanced knowledge of the naval architecture in general and the ship concerned in particular (era, builder, place of construction, peculiarities, etc.). It is often a long-term process that requires a great deal of research.

 

Many regard it as a noble activity, close to art by the skill he asks.

 

GD

 

I do not know if the automatic translation will reflect the meaning of my talking...

[tadheus]

Well let's try to be concise:

 

Arsenal modeling is a discipline of naval modeling, the oldest and most demanding.

 

This activity consists of replicating to scale down the design and construction of old ships. This reproduction must be as faithful as possible in the making of the parts which constitute the framework, the arrangements of the decks, the equipment and the decoration of the original ship. The construction of the masts, the rigging and the sails are not imperative, it is a question of personal preferences.

 

In France this activity was practiced in the arsenals of the king since the XVIIth century, Jean Boudriot "awakened" this practice in the Seventies and the name has remained and is still used today.

 

The different parts must be perfectly conform to the original parts, their assembly also. Bolts, nails and treenails should be reproduced as far as possible. If a keel has four parts, these four parts must be represented and assembled as true with scarph, bold et nails.

 

No facility, modern materials or artifacts of manufacture are allowed in the traditional arsenal modeling unlike some models makers who make superb models but out of established conventions (absence of framework, sculpture in series (even metal), artillery in resin , etc.). For the enthusiasts who are often very cultured on the subject, these models are not part of the true model of arsenal.

 

The arsenal models are based on monographs or personal studies which are the representation of the real ships, they are not plans of model. These books are the result of advanced knowledge of the naval architecture in general and the ship concerned in particular (era, builder, place of construction, peculiarities, etc.). It is often a long-term process that requires a great deal of research.

 

Many regard it as a noble activity, close to art by the skill he asks.

 

GD

 

I do not know if the automatic translation will reflect the meaning of my talking...

Google translator quite well translated it into Polish.

 

 

Pawel

[Richard Griffith]

Merci beaucoup!  

The translation appears to be very good.  

All the best to you.                

 

Duff

[Mumin]

Arsenal modeling is a discipline of naval modeling, the oldest and most demanding.

 

What is the meaning of the word "arsenal" in this case? I know that the historical ruins called "Arsenali" (eg. in Heraklion, Crete, from Venetian period) are in fact places where the ships were build, not the places to store the weapons/armaments.

If that's the case, then the term "admiralty model" is very close, or even the same?

 

Edit: link added

Edited February 18, 2017 by Mumin

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

THE KEY TO USE CHERRY WOOD

 

‘’My mystery partner’’ will be starting  a model of a 74 guns as soon he finishes his actual model.  He wants to know if  cherry wood could be a good wood choice for his next build? He asked to see a picture of the darkest wood avaialable. Why not show everybody the answer and  at the same time, try to demistify if this wood could  be use in a model ship construction perspective.

For  3 different batches of cherry wood that I saw, the wood grain pattern was different each time. I have been working few years up to now and if I take time to regroup the observations I made during this period, I can observe  4 main wood grain pattern for this specific wood:

 

1- Sap wood is white and heartwood is somekind of  different brown.  Time  darkens and embellish condiderably the color.

 

2- By comparison, which is often the best way to learn a subject, pear wood has no grain pattern. This gives the wood an adavantage for the model maker enthousiast.  All the planks are identical for the wood grain. He does not need to select any plank,  all the planks have the same  identical  grain pattern. From the point of view, workability pear wood and cherry wood  are similar even if pear wood  has a slightly higher density. Finally, for the sandability, both are identical.

 

Cherry wood has  a grain pattern. This pattern is different on the top and on the side of the plank. The pattern is partially governed by the annual year growth . Ideally if the rings were smaller, cherry wood could be the ideal wood to use for us, modeler.

 

When you look at a plank from side or top the pattern can be completely different, This pattern  comes back often and it is pretty nice to see but on 1 side only.

 

3- The worst grain pattern we can find is when when the growth lines come perpendiculary to the lenght of the plank. This kind is the less desirable to use. The worst  mistake I could do is to use this pattern for the planking.

 

Ideally by decreasing   the scale of a model, we should also decrease the wood pattern of the grain. For the best results, we should find a wood grain which looks exactly like oak but at a much smaller scale. Does this perfect wood exist? I do not know.  One of the nicest wood I have seen for the planking is apple wood, yet another fruit wood, our best friend.

 

4- Each wood as his own advantages. Oak has a grain pattern which goes in the same way as the plank goes. Occasionally, a cherry wood plank will have the grain perpendicular to the lenght of the plank. This is exactly this kind of situation which must be avoid. If someone succeeds to avoid this trap, it should be possible to get a good result  simply by categorising the wood, not as a selling perspective classification as on the market, but as a perspective of use in model ship realisation.

 

For the frame,  the less attractive wood grain of the batch can be use and the best looking grain is kept for the planking. 

[Kishmul]

The grain will also depend on how the planks or billets were sawn from the original log.

In English this is known as "conversion" and there are four principal methods.- through and through, flat (or plain) and quartersawing (modern or traditional). Each method has both strengths and weaknesses and the conversion method is chosen to suit the intended purpose.

Terry Porter's book "Wood Identification and Use"  is a fine resource and will introduce readers to a vast range of woods to consider for use.

 

Ken

[G. Delacroix]

What is the meaning of the word "arsenal" in this case? I know that the historical ruins called "Arsenali" (eg. in Heraklion, Crete, from Venetian period) are in fact places where the ships were build, not the places to store the weapons/armaments.

If that's the case, then the term "admiralty model" is very close, or even the same?

 

Edit: link added

An arsenal is a place where we build and arm the warships. It's also in this place where the first models that represented the vessels under construction were realized. These models have given the term "arsenal model"

The term is indeed equivalent to "admiraly models".

 

GD

[Redshirt]

Looking forward to your 74 at 1:24. Your Fleuron was already among the most impressive ship models i have seen on this forum.

Yet i wonder, where on earth do you plan to store a 3m long ship model?

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

Redshirt, the Fleuron, 7 feet is already stored, it was very easy.

The first one, 8 feet was more difficult, it took me 2 years to find a place.

 

In fact, when there is no place, you have to clear and build a place.

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

The smaller the scale, the less details  is likely to be seen on a model ship.

Here is an example:

 

How the frames sit on the keel. Boudriot give an extensive description but  How the heels fit under the frame is not so clear. It is difficult to see exactly how it is done.

So I tried to manufacture 1 set of frames.

You can see the result of this try.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Gaetan Bordeleau

[rwiederrich]

Man....!  Love it.

 

Rob

[mtaylor]

Bigger is indeed better, Gaetan.  

[dvm27]

Going to be a fantastic build Gaetan. Perhaps include a ruler every so often so we can appreciate how large this build actually is.

[tadheus]

The smaller the scale, the less details  is likely to be seen on a model ship.

Here is an example:

 

How the frames sit on the keel. Boudriot give an extensive description but  How the heels fit under the frame is not so clear. It is difficult to see exactly how it is done.

So I tried to manufacture 1 set of frames.

You can see the result of this try.

 

 

Gaetan, in my opinion this should be done so. Quite well it is drawn in the plans "L'Artesien" , "Commerce de Marseille". Similarly, in my model, "La Salamandre."  But I may be wrong....

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pawel

Edited February 21, 2017 by tadheus

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

Tadheus, 

 

I am not saying my representation is good or wrong.

I tried only  to reproduce  Boudriot’s drawing.

1 reason it is difficult to understand is because the drawings  use a piece called talonnier which is in the same family as talon, heel in english.

There is  text explaining the talonnier but drawings show it partially.

 

If you can provide better drawings to explain, please do so.

Edited February 21, 2017 by Gaetan Bordeleau

[tadheus]

Figure 49 is a badly drawn.

 

 

Pawel

[G. Delacroix]

Hello,

Jean Boudriot reversed some pieces in the installation of the couples on the drawing published by GB.
The correct configuration is as follows:

Edited February 22, 2017 by G. Delacroix

[G. Delacroix]

Hello,

A "talonnier" (heel-piece ?) is a filler piece to avoid the use of large wood. It is a supplementary piece which has no fixed dimensions, it serves only to fill the middle of the floor timbers whose original part lacks wood.

The one drawn by JB is not entirely accurate, it does not correspond to the time data.
Here are, for example, those used on the 24 prd frigate L'Egyptienne:

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

Very well drawn, I tried the assembly and everything interlocks together.

[Pierretessier]

Tabernac c'est compliquez . 

Excuse my french. Loving the details and its just the beginning.  So glad to be on board to see this build. 

[Sailor1234567890]

This build is going to be epic. Looking forward to it. Gaetan, will a 1:1 scale be next?

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

Hi Sailor,

this is a very good question, of course I will not, but 

I had plans enlarged from 1/72 to 1/24. giving sheets of 3 feet by 9 feet at around $15/ sheet

Probably the maximum I could go would be restricted by paper size for frames, in this case 3 feet, 

printer larger than 3 feet probably exists?

 

Size of the apartment is also a limitation. I like to move around the model and the model must move 360 degrees around, 

so physical limitation would be around 10 feet.

At 10 feet May be I could do a frigate... may be next time

[druxey]

There's an expression, "Go big or go home". In your case, Gaetan, it should be "Go big and get a bigger home"! Seriously, I am enjoying this discussion very much.

One can get very large prints made, (think outdoor billboards) but I don't know whether distortion for model-making purposes may become a factor in extremely large sizes.

[YankeeD]

Well I had the drawings of Otte Blom (the 7P) printed on an architect paper printer.

They are in size, when printed 1 to 1, bigger than A0 (how to convert to feet???).

So yes these printers exist and the nice thing about these printers (in fact they are called plotters here) are for  what we call "work drawings" the paper does not shrink or expand during printing or afterwards.They are measure and scale fixed, so no distortion.

Maybe an idea?

 

Rgds Hans.