HMS Bellona 1760 by SJSoane - Scale 1:64 - English 74-gun - as designed

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

As usual, I know nothing about English Construction.

If it would be a French warship, the lower part touching the feet would be parallel to the upper one, simply because it would be much more pleasing to the eye, but as a counter  effect, it would probably change a bit the angle of the figurehead.

 

[SJSoane]

Thanks, Gaetan, someday when I get further along, I would be interested in studying French ships of the period. Always fun to see what is universal, and what is culturally different!

 

Further progress today. I finally got in the second layer of the hawse lining, ready for drilling the hawse holes:

 

And now on to that pesky support for the hair bracket. I tried letting a liner down into a rebate I cut today on top of the knee, but I may sleep on this. It seems flimsy, kind of cobbled together. I may consider making the entire core in one piece. A decision for tomorrow!

 

 

 

[yancovitch]

just found....i'm humbled to the nth+ degree.......

[Steve Anderson]

Magnificent work and craftmanship. Stunning is all I can say.

 

[SJSoane]

Thanks so much for the kind comments, Yancovitch and Steve. Slow but steady!

 

In my last post, I express doubts about the way I had managed the hair bracket, sitting tenuously on top of the knee at the stem. After pondering it a while, I decided there was nothing for it but to cut down the top of the knee that I had shaped in 1998 when I started construction (see image below). It was too short for the hair bracket, the gammoning slot and the hole for the mainmast stay collar were in the wrong locations. To this day, I don't quite know how I got that so wrong. I might have copied something out of Lavery's book on the Bellona, which I have subsequently discovered is not  accurate enough to build a model from. And I started construction years before I finally started drawing more accurate drawings--always a mistake!

So, I made a complete new piece, combining the hair bracket and a carved ornamental piece that stands directly behind the figurehead. It seemed more solid the two together, and they are the same thickness relative to the figure head:

 

 

And after a lot of faying and tapering, the new core for the hair brackets now holds everything firmly together.

 

I made up a dummy of Bellona (don't tell her I said that, she is supposed to be a very scary warrior...), just to see how things are starting to fit together. The first image below shows the new core piece still covered in the paper pattern, showing the bas-relief carving to come on the piece behind the figurehead (she is pulled away from it a little in this photo). It also shows the captain standing on the cheeks. Gives a good idea of the size of the figurehead.

 

And here are parts starting to fall into place:

 

 

I have been reading David Antscherl's excellent explanation of how to carve a figure head in Volume II of the Fully Framed Model. I might start with the maquette, and see how it goes...

I have pondered what wood to use, to carve the figures on the ship. My boxwood is not buxus semperivens, the stuff the old modeler's used, and that David recommended when he first wrote his book. But I can find no supplier anywhere in the world of buxus semperivens anymore. I know my boxwood is from South America, but I don't know its actual species. It seems to be stiffer in relation to what others have written about working true boxwood. I think it will have to do. And I can always blame a bad outcome on bad tools or bad wood, not lack of skill!🙂

 

Best wishes,

 

Mark

edited with higher resolution image here:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 17, 2023 by SJSoane

[SJSoane]

I have now drilled the hawse holes, and fitted a bolster waiting for final assembly for final trimming:

 

 

 

 

I now have to turn my attention to the trailboard. I am getting closer to painting the blue around this area, and I want to know where the trailboards need gluing.

I want to build the Bellona as first designed, and shown in the first model. But the trailboard detail is frustratingly difficult to see or to reconstruct, from the photo I took:

Unless someone has a better photo, I may have to build the trailboard on the second Bellona model:

 

If I do the latter, do you have any advice for how to glue this down to a backing board for piercing and carving, and then how to get it unglued from the backing board with those tiny, fragile pieces holding it together?

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 26, 2023 by SJSoane

[AON]

Might I suggest

1. Rubber cemented applied to both pieces.

Let it dry for a couple minutes then stick them together. You can pry them apart carefully with a thin putty knife. Try it on some scrap to prove it.

2. Or PVA and use rubbing alcohol to get it apart.

Soak a cotton ball and wrap it over the pieces with clear wrap (saran wrap) over night and it will lift off easily.

[SJSoane]

Hi Alan,

I like the idea of letting it release without having to pry two things apart. I'll try the PVA and alcohol idea.

Mark

[Stuntflyer]

6 minutes ago, SJSoane said:

I'll try the PVA and alcohol idea.

This always worked well for me.  I wrap a paper towel around the parts and soak it with alcohol before wrapping everything with clear plastic wrap. I usually let the joined pieces sit for 4 hours before removing the wrap.

Edited February 26, 2023 by Stuntflyer

[mtaylor]

If you don't like the idea of wrapping the small parts and then unwrapping and hoping all goes well,  Get a small plastic container like some food products come in.  Then pour in some alcohol and drop in the parts.  Let it sit,  All the parts should drop off the wood after a few hours or less.

[druxey]

Definitely PVA for holding delicate pieces: rubber cement is not reliable for this application. I soak the pieces off when complete in a bath of isopropanol ( a jam jar!).

[noel_colledge]

If you are submerging small parts into a liquid for a period of time, are you not potentially exposing the carving to expansion and swelling / distortion of delicate areas.. I have no experience in this area, so would be interested in hearing of greater experience in this area and how it may affect t different carving woods.

[SJSoane]

Hi Noel,

 

Others more experience than I may have a better answer, but so far, I have used this trick for temporarily holding other parts together (for example, to shape a port and starboard piece at the same time for perfect symmetry), and I have had no problems with distorting or discoloring the wood. Using 99% isopropyl means it is mostly alcohol, and it dries quickly when the piece is removed from the bath.

My biggest mistake was using too much glue. Only a tiny drop or two will temporarily hold parts together, and this is much faster to release than a full coating of glue. Indeed, I have given up trying to separate pieces that were glued too thoroughly together.

 

Best wishes,

 

Mark

 

[SJSoane]

A small update on the traiboard question. In posting 2286 above, I showed the two different trailboards for the two different Bellona models. I wanted to follow the first model because it is closer to the original design (since it predates the second model by 20 years or so), but the only photo I have is frustratingly out of focus.

I also looks like it lost parts in the center, and I could not imagine how to recreate the original design.

Then I saw the trailboard for a contemporary ship, HMS Hercules or Thunderer, launched just one year before the Bellona, in 1759. This shows a floral scroll:

 

So I traced what I could see of the remaining Bellona pieces, and speculated on how it might have been filled in in the spirit of the Hercules design. Too far down the road of speculation? At least it would be easier to make than the second Bellona model design, with its super thin spears, the George III cypher, etc.

 

 

 

[SJSoane]

I finally made my first foray into miniature carving. I started with the lion heads on the outboard ends of the cat beams. 7.85 mm or 5/8 inch square, so tiny enough to keep me focused!

 

I used my Russian chisels for the first time. They are as wonderful as everyone says. Super sharp, well balanced, controllable cuts.

 

I glued 3000 grit paper to a hardwood block for sharpening. I have been able to sharpen freehand with success, using the fore and middle fingers to hold the chisel at the right angle to the block, and the fore finger to press slightly down on the cutting edge. It brings back the super sharp edge in only a few strokes. And it does have to be touched up regularly, like every 8-10 cuts. I haven't had to do the gouges yet. That looks more challenging, especially the .5 mm one.

 

 

At first, I took chisels out and put them on my desk when switching to another chisel. I quickly found out that this does not work. First, they were all to easily starting to roll towards the front edge of my bench when I wasn't looking. Second, the cutting edges are so tiny that I would have to pick up each on on my bench to look very carefully to find the right one. I decided it was a better idea to keep them in their box whenever not in use. To facilitate finding them, I made a small chart and double sided taped it to the back of the box. Now it is very easy to find a chisel right away, and put it back safely between uses.

 

I held these in my GRS vise. Its ability to pivot really helps get at the wood from the right direction. Since this vise mounts on the edge of the bench, I pulled out my sliding platform beneath the bench (that usually holds my cutting board), and built a small platform to sit on top the platform and around the wood block to be cut. This gives me something to rest my hands on as I try to control these very fine cuts.

 

Gosh, a three dimensional figurehead doesn't look so scary after this!😏

 

 

[jdbondy]

What are you using for magnification? Optivisor or something similar? I know I would be using the microscope.

[SJSoane]

Hi JD,

 

I am using an Optivisor with a 5 lenses. It is definitely pushing my limits. As I get closer to what I think is finished, I take macro photos with my iPhone to see more detail than I can see with my eyes alone. then I clean up some more.

 

I probably should start looking into a microscope as I start ramping up the carving part of this project. What do you use?

 

Best wishes,

Mark

[jdbondy]

I have a Zeiss dissecting microscope that is intended for "student" use (probably students at a high-priced private school) that has been very nice. But it was expensive, even at a discount. Like $1000. I am now trialing a second microscope that I recently obtained second-hand that will have the capability for display on my computer's screen, once I figure out the software program. In general, a microscope has been key for enabling the kind of carvings you are now working on. Dissecting microscopes can be found on eBay starting at $100-200. I think that any average quality microscope will enhance your ability to generate fabulous small-scale carvings. 

 

Photos of the two microscopes are attached.

 

[gjdale]

Mark,

 

A digital microscope with a 7” LED screen can be found on Amazon or eBay for not very much at all - in the range that JD mentions or perhaps even less. I’ve recently acquired one myself, but have not done any carving. I’m sure it will have all sorts of uses for our hobby.

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

I did a figurehead at 1/192 and used the microscope  just for finishing touch of the head and the hands. I do not like to carve with chisels because you have to control the strength you are using. It is  much easier to control with dentist burs, no strength required, you just let the tool work. Also for the vision it is  easier to work with chirurgical magnifying glass or dental loupes with a working distance between 10 and 20 inches.

[SJSoane]

Thank, JD, Grant and Gaetan,

 

I have looked into microscopes (pun intended), after your suggestions to kit up. It is a world entirely unknown to me (somehow, I managed to get through all my school including college with never taking a life science class, only physics; so I have never even looked through a microscope).

 

I need a little more information about what I am actually looking for.

 

Reading some back issues of the Nautical Research Journal, I came across several articles by William Sproul who discussed his microscope, an old Bausch and Lomb Stereozoom 3 or 4 with a 10X eyepiece. If I have this right--and please correct me if I don't--you need a stereo microscope to enable your depth perception. Not all microscopes are stereo? And you need one with enough working depth under the microscope to allow the workpiece and the tools. He says he works at 7X to 10X most of the time. My Optivisor #5 is 2X, so that would make a big difference.

 

Is the 7X to 10X range for the eyepiece what determines how much working depth there is under the microscope?

 

Since my vise is sitting out in front of my bench, I imagine I need a boom stand. Or are you all using another way to fasten the work down underneath the microscope?

 

I thank you all in advance for help on looking for a microscope!

 

Gaetan, my dentist once showed me her dental loupe, which must have been a chirurgical magnifying glass. It sits in front of her glasses. Do you have suggestions about which ones would work for model making, and is the main requirement that it has a working distance of 10-20 inches? The ones I see online only seem to go up to 3.5X.

 

Best wishes,

 

Mark

 

 

 

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

[AON]

can't wait to tell the wife we need to go shopping!  😉

[SJSoane]

Thanks so much, Gaetan!

Alan, would you be willing to tell my wife how important this is?🤪

[jdbondy]

In general, you are looking for a stereo microscope. These use light reflected off the surface of a 3 dimensional object, as opposed to microscopes used for looking at tissues by transmitting light through a glass slide. The binocular vision of a stereo microscope allows that depth perception you referred to. In general, these kinds of microscopes do allow for enough working space between the object and the lens. In the case of my Zeiss microscope, I get about 3-4 inches of clear space between the surface of the object and the lens. Plenty of space for my small chisels. This space is not affected by how much or little I zoom in on the object because the zooming mechanics are within the microscope. The eyepieces have a magnification power of 10x. Then, using the zoom, that magnification can be increased as high as 32x.

 

Since I just acquired the microscope you see on the boom stand, I am still learning it. Its magnifications are comparable to the Zeiss, with 10x eyepieces and zooming up to a magnification as great as 45x. But I can't see much of a difference between the 32x on the one and the 45x on the other. The new microscope has two advantages: one, a greater amount of clear space between the object and the lens (6 inches), and two, I don't have to remove my glasses to look through the eyepieces. Which has been getting to be a real drag as I go back and forth from under the Zeiss microscope to on the model. The clear space is again not affected by how much zoom I apply.

 

You will need to figure out for yourself if you need a boom stand. It's not essential for me; I simply steady the work with my left hand while carving with my right. I put a high-friction non-skid pad between the work and the base of the microscope (or the desktop). Or sometimes I am working on a piece that is fixed in a jeweler's ball vise.

 

Regarding dental loupes, I actually had a rep from a loupes company come to the house to try to fit me with loupes that allowed a long working distance. Nothing he had would provide the magnification I needed. I came to find that if I wanted really high magnification without using a microscope, I would have to do like the watchmakers and wear a watchmaker's loupe up against my eye, then bring the workpiece to within 1-2 inches of my eye. I wouldn't be able to work that way for very long.

 

I hope all this helps!

[druxey]

As for lighting, if you are doing serious carving, you need a directional light, preferably point source. The headlamp type is not suitable as the light will be head-on (sorry!) to the carving and you won't see how the light and shadows interplay  from the surfaces when it is installed. 

[tlevine]

To a large extent, what type of magnification you employ is a matter of personal taste (and budget).  It also depends on what your vision is and if you wear bifocals.  I own an ancient Zeiss operating microscope which I brought home after closing my practice.  It has all the magnification levels you could desire.  But with any microscope, you need to remove your glasses and hold your eyes a certain distance from the oculars.  I hate taking my glasses on and off and so rarely use it.  Optivisors come in different magnifications.  The lenses are interchangeable.  But the higher the magnification, the closer you must be to the object.  The nice thing about an Optivisor is that I can easily flip up the lens and still be able to see because I am wearing my glasses.  Druxey is right about lighting.  Not only does a headlight prevent you from appreciating how light and shadow will interplay in the finished piece, but it will make everything look two dimensional during the carving process.  That is fine for certain applications, like microsurgery or dissecting a frog, but it really is a detriment when you are creating a 3-D object from a flat surface.

[druxey]

Lighting? What you say is so true, Toni!

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

Every tool yo will choose will always be a personal choice.

Here is what I would use especially to be comfortable while working: height adjustable  table, omnidirectional vise, micro motor, magnifying lens and at least 2 LED light adjustable in intensity and position.

[jdbondy]

That looks like something out of either the Starship Enterprise, or a hospital operating room!