Template for Naval Cutter Build

[Mr. Hornblower]

Hello Gentlemen,

 

I am the new 'Middy' on the block from Australia! 

I am attempting a scratch-build of a Royal Navy Cutter (circa 1790's) and I am wondering if anyone has a template I could use for the hull structure/ribbing?  It would save me a lot of work and time if this was obtainable and I would have peace of mind that the hull is entirely symmetrical, rather than trying to measure and draw my own.

I thank you in advance.

 

Cheerio,

Caleb

[bruce d]

Hello Caleb and welcome to MSW. It sounds like we are plotting similar projects. 'SPEEDY' 1828, available online, may be useful to you, also '10-gun Sloop MEDIATOR'. There are others, of course, and there may be some feature of the ship that leads you to one particular set of plans, but I will let the members with more experience speak on that point. Can you tell us the ship?

In my case, I found that the plans I originally wanted to use as a starting point simply were no help because there is a difference between what makes a good laser-cut kit (ease of assembly, good solid joints between keel and bulkheads etc.) and what is best for a scratchbuilt model: also, after a couple of false starts, I realised that any existing plans for a model with different buttock lines would only be useful as inspiration and guidance because I still needed to draw my own bulkheads. This turned out to be more straightforward than I thought and the feeling of accomplishment once I had produced 'my plans' for 'my ship' was pretty good.

You will get knowledgeable support here (I have) and I hope you start a build log.

Regards,

Bruce

[tkay11]

It would be good if you could specify a particular ship as there are quite a few variations in that period. There are hundreds of plans at the National Maritime Museum at Greenwich in the UK. For the particular date you choose (1790) there's the Cutter Trial which had sliding keels. You can see the range of its plans and pictures at https://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections.html#!csearch;searchTerm=cutter_1790

 

I have also taken quite a few pictures of the model in that collection which you can see on this site at

 

 

There are also lots of pictures of other cutters between 1763 and 1820 in the discussion at

 

 

I hope that helps

 

Tony

 

Edited May 18, 2019 by tkay11
typo

[davyboy]

Hi Caleb,

You might consider Chuck Passaros' HMS Cutter Cheerful from Syren Ship Model Company advertised here on the forum. He sells the POB plans at 1/48 scale for this ship and excellent plans they are. There is a practicum on his site showing all stages of construction,he also sells various mini-kits et al for the model.

I've just finished scratch building this ship excluding the Windlass (didn't have a mill then when I ordered the plans) Took me over 3 years but I'm well pleased with the result as it's only my second build.

 

Welcome on board MSW.

 

Dave   

[Mr. Hornblower]

Hello All,

 

I thank you all very much for your welcomes and replies.  

I had two vessels in mind, firstly the Cutter Sandwich of 1805 (same ship as the Sandwich of 1798), or the Entreprenante of 1799.  I do not know of any pictures, models, illustrations of Sandwich to actually exist, but you chaps may be able to tell me otherwise.

I have just acquired the plans for the Alert of 1777, but as Bruce said, there is a difference between plans and bulkhead/rib templates!  I was hoping for a template of sorts.  Another thing to let you all know:  as this is my first scratch build, I have decided on doing a card/paper model, similar to that of the Alert by Shipyard models.  I do not have all the timber machinery, but I have always enjoyed making things from cardboard, so I will try my hand at a card/paper model (with extras such as dowel for mast/bowspirit etc).

Thanks again.

 

Cheers,

Caleb

 

[iMustBeCrazy]

G'Day Caleb,

 

You've had some good suggestions above but perhaps you should reconsider the Speedy (1828), there's just more information available, including plans for a 1:100 scale paper/card model published in Modelarstwo Okretowe 22, which can be found online.

 

I'm on a family history quest myself about the Lapwing (1816), one of my ancestors was part of the crew when she sailed to Adelaide.

 

Despite having four 'sisters' - Kite, Fancy (1817), Racer and Sprightly, three 'half sisters' - Nightingale (1825), Speedy (1828) and Snipe (1828) and six 'nieces' - Vigilant (1821), Swift (1821), Basilisk (1822), Bramble (1822), Skylark and Diligence - I'm still struggling for enough good information for a scratch build.

 

Craig.

Edited May 20, 2019 by iMustBeCrazy
Name added

[bruce d]

On 5/18/2019 at 10:09 AM, bruce d said:

It sounds like we are plotting similar projects.

Back in post #2 I said 'It sounds like we are plotting similar projects.' Little did I know: mine is 'Pickle', which I am sure you know worked with Entreprenante at Trafalgar on rescue work.

Can't help immediately with plans for either of your ships but I will keep my eyes open.

Keep us informed.

 

Regards,

Bruce

[bruce d]

41 minutes ago, iMustBeCrazy said:

Lapwing (1816), one of my ancestors was part of the crew when she sailed to Adelaide.

 

Despite having four 'sisters' - Kite, Fancy (1817), Racer and Sprightly, three 'half sisters' - Nightingale (1825), Speedy (1828) and Snipe (1828) and six 'nieces' - Vigilant (1821), Swift (1821), Basilisk (1822), Bramble (1822), Skylark and Diligence - I'm still struggling for enough good information for a scratch build.

Have you seen this?

 

[iMustBeCrazy]

10 hours ago, bruce d said:

Have you seen this?

Thanks Bruce, but yes.

 

The first is a proposed 'Fancy' I think based on the lines of the 'Cheerful' but it was cancelled and a 'Fancy' was built from the 'Lapwing' instead.

 

The second is the 'Lapwing' with notes about the 'Fancy', 'Kite', 'Racer' and 'Sprightly' and including alterations to the interior for the 'Speedy'.

 

Anything online from the NMM I have (I think). What I hope for is better quality and I'd love the contract or scantling details.

 

Craig.

Edited May 20, 2019 by iMustBeCrazy
Name added

[allanyed]

Steel (1805) and the Shipbuilder's Repository (1788) list scantlings for a 16 gun cutter, 80'6" and 80' ( Length from the forepart of the stem at the height of the hawse holes to the aft part of the sternpost at the wing transom respectively.)  Unfortunately there is nothing in either on cutters smaller than 16 guns. 

Allan

Edited May 20, 2019 by allanyed

[iMustBeCrazy]

41 minutes ago, allanyed said:

Steel (1805) and the Shipbuilder's Repository (1788) list scantlings

Opps, sorry I do have scantlings for Speedy (ZAZ6426 and 6427). My brain hurts, too much learning new things.

 

Also apologies to Caleb for the unintentional hijacking of his thread.

 

Craig.

[Mr. Hornblower]

No worries at all Craig, we're all learning new things here

 

I'm pretty sold on the HMS. Alert of 1777, now that I have 129 pages of plans solely on that ship!  Just have to work out how to draw up my own bulkheads, should be an interesting exercise indeed.  Bruce do you have any advice on how you measured your own bulkheads?  I may be looking at at a scale of 1/90.

Will keep you informed.  

 

Cheers,

Caleb

[iMustBeCrazy]

54 minutes ago, Mr. Hornblower said:

No worries at all Craig, we're all learning new things here

Ok, I'll share some of the things I think I've learnt.

 

First off your thread led me to this thread which should help you and also taught me some new things.

 

Second: All drawings contain errors! Measuring devices, paper distortion, copying distortion, those beers they had for breakfast etc all add to errors.

 

More later.

[bruce d]

41 minutes ago, Mr. Hornblower said:

Bruce do you have any advice on how you measured your own bulkheads?  I may be looking at at a scale of 1/90.

I will tell you about my process before I offer advice: you may think I am bonkers.

I am nearly finished drawing my plans. This will be my third version. As there were no drawings of the prototype, but her dimensions were known, I researched, compared other ships, studied scantlings, fretted over details and then, with relief, settled on La_Recouvrance as a starting point. She shared many features with my subject AND had been modeled AND was well documented. So I used her lines, distorted the image with PhotoShop to make her the correct beam, painstakingly traced each frame section to scale, drew a keel, blah blah blah... and then realised that La_Recouvrance just could not be stretched/tweaked to look like Pickle. A lot in common, yes, but what I wanted: no.

Next, I tried manually adapting the drawings I had digitally produced to make her lines right. This required a total reboot and after some wasted time I accepted that I would be better off to start again from scratch. So I did.  

Now, the silver lining to this cloud is that my first two attempts taught me good lessons in both digital and traditional technique and, more importantly, over time I had refined my 'mind's eye' image of what Pickle should look like and what will and won't work in a scratchbuilt model. The drawings I am producing now are stripped right down to the basics of hull lines, deck levels, mast and gunport positions etc.

So, Caleb, I hope this is useful to you. I have not found a magic wand or a button to push that will produce drawings on demand and I confess there may have been a touch of such silliness in my original decision to scratchbuild a subject that has no existing plans (I can almost hear myself saying 'How hard can it be?), But I am stubborn, or so I have been told.

I know you asked about bulkheads but they are a component in the puzzle so forgive the ramble. If you can find a drawing of a ship with the same lines and sections, you should be able to trace them and make the adjustment for depth of planking. Otherwise, study the excellent articles in MSW and other online sources that show how to read drafts, buttock lines etc and plot your own. I know that sound oversimplified but it is what I had to do in the end.

Other than roll up your sleeves and see what happens when you start, there is only one bit of practical, nuts-and-bolts advice I can pass on. If there is a set of drawings for the ship you are modeling, or one with the same proportions and general lines, great: get it in your head and ignore the differences. Then, find a set of plans for a model of a similar ship that you like. In this case it is not the ship you need to like, it is the PLANS FOR THE MODEL you must like. Use these plans as, shall we say, 'extensive reference' when breaking down the parts needed to make your model. See what the keel, deadwood, fashion pieces etc look like in the model plans, how the stern and stem are shaped, how the bulkheads join up with the centre piece, do they support the deck or is that a job for separate beams, and so on. Then you at least have a starting point for each of the same issues when you go back to the tasks needed to make that ship you have in your head.  

Sorry for the long answer, you have given me a soapbox to tell of the experience so far. I will start a build log when there is something to show for all this preparation.

Hope this helps and doesn't scare you off, I have enjoyed it even if I do moan about the learning curve.

Bruce

[iMustBeCrazy]

7 minutes ago, bruce d said:

Sorry for the long answer

Bruce, (good rant) there is no short answer. Also there is always a learning curve.

 

Methods.

 

1/ Paper, pencil and ruler. Painful but works.

 

2/ Photocopier. Also painful but quick.

 

3/ Scanned image in photo editing software. Learning curve (Scaling, distorting and other things) but it works.

 

4/ Scanned image in CAD software. Biggest learning curve but best results.

 

Let us know which method you think you might use and we'll go from there.

 

Craig.

[bruce d]

3 minutes ago, iMustBeCrazy said:

Let us know which method you think you might use

I have used all of them except CAD in preparing my Pickle. The most promising for a quick result must be photo editing provided the subject has the right proportions to start with. The most reliable must be 'Paper, pencil and ruler (with a little help from French curves) and an eraser.

[iMustBeCrazy]

6 minutes ago, bruce d said:

The most promising for a quick result must be photo editing provided the subject has the right proportions to start with.

Provided you have both vertical and horizontal size references (objects of known height and width) you can resize the image using different multipliers for height and width. So a 1000x1000 image could be resized to a 1011x998 for example.

 

That's the easy bit, removing distortions is harder and can be impossible.

 

Craig.

[Mr. Hornblower]

Yep, paper, pencil, eraser and a waste paper basket   Thanks gentlemen for your contribution, it is much appreciated.

I will give it a try soon and let you know how I fare, using Goodwin's guide for 'Alert'.

 

Cheers,

Caleb

 

[iMustBeCrazy]

4 minutes ago, Mr. Hornblower said:

Yep, paper, pencil, eraser and a waste paper basket

Copying your image on to graph paper and drawing the new one on to graph paper will help. Otherwise draw a grid on the original.

 

Craig.

[iMustBeCrazy]

A few examples. These are the Bountys launch.

 

First is as downloaded, as you may see from the frame it is narrower at the top. Also the aspect ratio is wrong, the height is too short for the width.

Second has been corrected in photoshop. (but I did work out the ratios in CAD first as it's more accurate).

 

Third is many hours of mucking around in CAD with more to come.

 

All of this is just a learning exercise so I can better understand redrawing Lapwing in CAD.

 

Craig.

[iMustBeCrazy]

Lets continue:

 

Remember those errors I mentioned? As Bruce said, you can just "ignore the differences". I chose to try to fix them.

 

So we now have the image in the CAD program with the shape and aspect ratio corrected.

 

First image is the 'uncorrected' version.

 

The purple lines represent the measurements taken from the Plan (top view) and Elevation (side view) these should match the measurements in the table of offsets which I don't have. On the Stern side they were pretty close (shown in the second image) but on the Bow side at station H (looks like an 'N' on this drawing) it's slightly out while station A (in green) is too wide. If I reduce the height to bring the sheer down at station H, it will be too low at station A. This is an error in the original drawing which cannot be corrected by distorting the drawing, it needs to be redrawn. Also the rabbit is incorrect at both the bow and stern compared to the elevation drawing.

This meant that I had to re-import this section of the drawing in two parts (Stern and Bow) so that I could leave the stern untouched while correcting the scale and aspect ratio of the Bow as best I can then drawing new hull lines respecting the curves where possible. The curves are a number of arcs joined by (sometimes very short) straight lines. I think one station had 5 arcs and one had 2.

.

 

Also remember that I really don't know what I'm doing.

 

Craig.

Edited May 21, 2019 by iMustBeCrazy
Disclaimer.

[mtaylor]

I'm a newbie at lofting also and may be wrong, but I think you need to treat the stern and bow sections separately.   

[Cabbie]

Have a look at my Sampson boat co post in important links for shop modelling. Leo has a couple of videos on laying out and lofting. I havent looked at them but he seems to know his ship building.

Cheers Chris

[iMustBeCrazy]

1 hour ago, mtaylor said:

I'm a newbie at lofting also and may be wrong, but I think you need to treat the stern and bow sections separately.   

G'Day Mark,

 

I freely admit I'm a newbie at ships and may be wrong. Can you elaborate on 'separately'? Maybe we can work out if we're coming at the same thing from different directions.

[iMustBeCrazy]

1 hour ago, Cabbie said:

Have a look at my Sampson boat co

G'Day Chris,

 

I've seen many of his vids, got hooked and watched them one after another. Will look again for specific lofting vids.

 

Edit: Just watched Lofting the Lines Part 1, the discussion on lofting starts after 17 minutes in and it seems I my understanding of those bits was right (so far).

Edited May 22, 2019 by iMustBeCrazy
Added Edit

[mtaylor]

Let me think some more and do some reading.  Or maybe I'm just confused which is probable.  From here, it looks like you're setting the deck line at same height at the bow and the stern.   I hope I'm wrong.

[iMustBeCrazy]

3 minutes ago, mtaylor said:

Or maybe I'm just confused which is probable.

I do know the feeling

 

4 minutes ago, mtaylor said:

From here, it looks like you're setting the deck line at same height at the bow and the stern.

No deck in this boat. If you're talking about the green line, think of it as a potential bulkhead actual height yet to be decided. Otherwise, the sheer is the same height at the bow and stern.