A Dutch 17th century pleasure vessel by Ab Hoving - CARD

[Ab Hoving]

Hello Henry,

Thank you for the compliment.

The fact that I try as good as I can to document what I do, is because long ago I chose the Dutch 17th century as my specialism. I know the literature on the subject and the pictorial material left, as well as archaeological finds.

The plate you show here depicts a ship from way before that age. Maybe 16th, maybe even 15th, but certainly an era of which no written sources are left, that reveal enough information for us to build a model after. I know nothing about these early ships. Everything beyond 1600 is based on guesses and interpretations. That's where the dark ages start for me. Some people on this forum (very admired by me) show us their interpretations of gathered material to make reconstructions of dromons, galleys, carracks, gallions and whatever names these vessels have. Highly interesting, but also often highly speculative. If you want to make a model after this nice, but not extremely realistic plate, you will have to start with diving into the material there is. Soon enough you will find out that there is next to nothing you can work with.

My advise: find a more recent ship type. More and more publications are becoming available about an almost infinite line of ships, both specific ships with a name, and data on ship types in general. I'm sure that will bring you more satisfaction than spending a long time of your life on a model that is based on a series of unproven ideas and assumptions.

I wish you good luck with your choice for your next model and if you really find things we, here on this forum, can learn from, I will be first to read it.

By the way, not because I want to use this as a way of advertising one of my books, but I think Cor Emke made drawings of a very early buss in '17th Century Dutch Merchant Vessels (Seawatch Books). Perhaps that is an option (although in my opinion this is one of what I call the 'too early models'.

Ab

 

 

[henry x]

Ab

Many thanks for your reply and I totally understand what you have written. I know there are people on this forum including yourself who could build a model from engravings, paintings etc. think of the knowledge scholars gain from studying such images. Just because there is no written evidence of such vessels does not mean the model is less untrue people who do build these models like yourself have a good understanding of ship construction and their models have been accepted as being as authentic as possible. I must stress that I am not in the same class as they are (wish I was) just think a model in your national museum would be something. Meantime I will keep researching.

Regards

Henry

[Ab Hoving]

That's the spirit Henry X. It may seem as if I know it alle, but basically I only have a very small expertise...

Ab

[druxey]

Although you know far more than most, Ab! 

[Meriadoc Brandybuck]

On 7/7/2019 at 10:53 PM, Ab Hoving said:

In the mean time work piles up on my work bench.

An old project, a 160 foot VOC East India man waits for a long time to get finished, a late 16th century vessel, a vlieboot, has temporarily run aground as a result of my ignorance how to install a gratings deck all over the hull, another project, a 'wad-konvooier' ( a small armed ship to escort unarmed freighters over the inland seas in the north) got stuck because of doubts about the decorations and finally the pleasure vessel, for which I am making decorations and crew at the moment. Very little speed in it all, which makes me impatient.

 

Hello Ab,

I'm a big fan of your models and the digital composite paintings your son creates with them. 

I like this view of your shipyard.  In particular, I was intrigued by the "wad-konvooier" on the right.  It seems to be a relatively obscure type.  Are there plans available for this craft anywhere?  I I was thinking about trying your card method to build it.  I'd love to learn more about it!

Meriadoc

[Ab Hoving]

Hello Meriadoc,

Thank you for your compliments.

Actually the ship on the View of the Amsterdam Harbor with the Admiralty Store house in the background is not really a wadconvooier. It is a 'kaag', a very popular small inshore freighter, often used for transport of people. The type with its straight stempost is very recognizable on many maritime paintings of the era. I have draughts if you are interested, but it is not really the easiest way to start building in paper, because it's clinker built. 

Although I don't know your level of skills, I would advise you to build the hooker in the tutorial first. You will have to find your way in what sorts of card are available and which ones are the best for your purposes.

 

I have made two efforts to try my luck on the wadconvooier, but neither of them entirely satisfies me. It is indeed an obscure type, maybe not even a type, but only a function. I spotted two variants, one seems to be based on the design of a statenjacht, the other is mostly fluit-like, both with an extra mizzen mast and triangular sail. As you can see I have draughts of both, but although most of the work on the models has been done, they could not completely convince me, so I 'abandoned ship' in both cases.

 

 

 

Let me know your choice, perhaps I can help you.

Best,

Ab

[Ab Hoving]

I’m so sorry Meriadoc, I did not read your message well. Indeed the one on my ‘shipyard’ is a wadconvooier, you are right. For the answer, my reply here above will be sufficient, I hope.

[Meriadoc Brandybuck]

Ab, thank you for your reply.

Both of these designs you showed are quite intriguing and illustrate that "wad-konvooier" refers to a role rather than a well-defined type.  I imagine the differences in style may be due to varying local preferences, affordable hull availability, or even different time periods (for all I know!). 

 

I quite like the one on the right, similar to a statenjacht with the elegant prow curving up from the waterline; that's the one I'd like to build, or try to build (I haven't worked with card yet).  Did you build this one from plans or recreate it from contemporary artwork?

Appreciate you sharing your expertise on these things. 

Meriadoc

[Ab Hoving]

I made new plans, based on a statenjacht and with an interior that seemed useful for the ship. I stopped building because there were so many questions, too little answers and too much guess work, which is not good for my motivation.

Here is the lines plan, I hope it works better for you than for me :-).

The length of the ship was 70, the beam 19 and the depth in hold 8 Amsterdam feet (28,3 cm).

You will have to do some math to put it all together, but that is only part of the joy.

 

Ab

[Ab Hoving]

Here is the original design, which was worked over by Rene Hendrickx in Delftship:

On the basis of Rene's lines plan I made the front and aft frames:

 

The rest is relatively simple:

 

 

 

 

Good luck!

Ab

[Ab Hoving]

Oh, and before I forget, these were the pictures I based my design on:

 

 

The upper one is by Willem van de Velde (father) and the other one by Reinier Nooms.

[Meriadoc Brandybuck]

32 minutes ago, Ab Hoving said:

Here is the lines plan, I hope it works better for you than for me :-).

Ab, thank you for sharing the plans you made! 

I've never scratch built a ship too large to fit inside a bottle, but I think your fish-hooker tutorial explains the process well enough.  I imagine you had to reconstruct most of the details apart from overall dimensions from guesswork. I am not much of a perfectionist when it comes to inherently obscure subjects, so I'll probably seek to make it look pleasing and believable enough, and be happy with it.  In any case, learning to scratch build from card will be quite valuable for cost effectiveness and the freedom to choose my scale. 

Where could a person go to learn more about this type of ship, like when and how it was used?  Are there any images of them under sail?  Google doesn't seem to be much help on the matter.  Sorry if I'm asking too many questions! 

Meriadoc

[Meriadoc Brandybuck]

Ab, thank you for the images of your construction and the artwork.

In the last picture by Nooms, are both vessels wad-konvooiers, or just the one on the left?

Meriadoc

[Meriadoc Brandybuck]

Wait, I think it says the one on the right is a statenjacht. 

Meriadoc

[Ab Hoving]

Actually there are not too many sources dealing with this ship type. It was used on the Zuiderzee (the area between the islands and the coast, which stretches all the way up to Denmark. Usually this was a dafe area, so most ships did not have any armament on board, but in rough periods these convoy ships were used to sail with the unarmed merchantmen (most smalschepen en kaags). Here is another picture by Van de Velde of some war ships built on private yards in Amsterdam for the French king. Because they were unarmed for delivery wadconvooiers guarded them in inland waters until Armed vessels for the trip to France took over. They are of the fluit-like type, but the purpose and the rigging are the same.

 

[Meriadoc Brandybuck]

Ab, very fascinating.  I'll have to look into the artwork a little more.  Thanks again for sharing!

I don't think I'll start anything too soon, but I'll be sure to make a build log when I do to record the adventure. 

Meriadoc

 

[PietFriet]

1 hour ago, Ab Hoving said:

Here is the original design, which was worked over by Rene Hendrickx in Delftship

Ab,

I have a question about the drawings you are showing. In your first sketch of the lines plan, it shows a fairly sharp edge going from the bottom towards the bilge. I understand from your book on Witsen that this is the result of the building method/tools of that time. However, in Rene's drawing this sharp edge has become a short radius turn. As I am currently designing a statenjacht based on a contract, I am very interested to understand what shape I should aim for.

Peter

[Ab Hoving]

Hello Peter,

In case the bottom is not entirely flat, like in fluits, the transfer from bottom to bilge is not so very pronounced. On top of that computerprograms hate corners in a hull. As you can see in my original design the straight bottom is there. In Delftship is is gone. In this case of a yacht-like ship I did not mind too much.

Good luck with your project,

Ab

[Roger Pellett]

Ab,  Your work, both your model making  and your scholarship, is wonderful!

 

The extent to which hull shape and hull structure is affected by construction technique is a sadly neglected subject.  The idea that all wooden ships were built from a draught, with lofted regularly spaced frames seems to be a myth that won’t die.

 

Although I’ve never built a model of one, I’ve been interested for years in the vessels that were built on America’s large inland lakes during three wars; the Seven Years War, The AmerIcan Revolution, and the War of 1812.  I am especially interested in the “Row Galleys” built by the Americans to defend Lake Champlain against the British in 1776.  Each of these round bottomed vessels were built on the edge of the frontier in about a month’s time.  To do this, the builders must have used a building technique similar to the one that you describe for Van Yik where a few widely shaped mould frames were first erected with the rest added as planking went forward.  It is interesting to note that the Americans were limited to building flat bottomed “gundalows” until builders arrived who knew how to build these more sophisticated vessels.  These builders must have arrived with some sort of design knowledge to allow them to shortcut the construction process.

 

Roger

[druxey]

Roger: See

 https://modelshipworld.com/applications/core/interface/file/attachment.php?id=689467

 

for a discussion on the gundalow construction focussing on marks on the timbers of the Philadelphia.

[PietFriet]

Thanks Ab. For the time being I will aim for the pronounced transition as the bottom is rather flat (1.5 inch rise over 16 feet). I may end up losing it either in the software or when building POB style. Interesting challenges with scratch building even before cutting wood!

[amateur]

That discussion pops up over and over again: was a pronounced transition always present when the bottom-first method was used.

 

I believe I have read somewhere that Wasa was build shell-first, and there is not a visible chine there. Are chine and shell-first one-to-one connected?

 

Even in Witsens book, part of the illustrations show a chine, and part does not.

 

Jan

[Ab Hoving]

It shows how little we know.:-)

Still, tests show that the question wether or not there is a chine depends on the builder. He can decide to give the outmost bottom plank a small angle, so that the chine does not show too much. But what will always be a stigma on a shell-first built ship is that the planks of the bottom are in a straight line in section. Some ships, for instance cats, meant to have wood as cargo, had only one plank in the bilge. Now, that shows a chine.

But wait for my 'pinas-program' to come out (probably next week). I think it gives a lot of information on this point.

[wefalck]

Technically speaking, not historically, there should not be a link between the building method as such and the presence or otherwise of a chine.

 

In both, carveel and clinker planking, one can introduce an angle between two consecutive planks.

 

What is technically possible, however, does not tell you what was done. You obviously could only rule out a feature, if it is technically not possible.

[PietFriet]

1 hour ago, Ab Hoving said:

But wait for my 'pinas-program' to come out (probably next week). I think it gives a lot of information on this point.

I'm looking forward to that!

 

Wefalck, I'm not sure that is actually the case. I would think that technically it is possible that a chine is a consequence of a building method and available tools. In your example of carveel and clinker planking it is the consequence of a choice, which is not the same thing.

[Ab Hoving]

Eberhart, I think PietFriet is right here. The fact that Dutch ships showed an angle between bottom and bilge was not the result of a choice the builders had. It was simply the consequence of the method of construction. And of course in some ships it showed more than in other ones. I tested the shell-first building proces, both in model scale and as a witness building the 'Duyfken' in Australia, and the outcome was (apart from that angle) that the bottom planks ran in a straight line in section from keel to the beginning of the bilge. Shipbuilders could choose to lift the outer plank a bit to diminish the angle, but the straight line between keel and bilge was necessary, because of the formulae that directed the builder in his construction proces. 

I hope to illustrate the method in my pinas program, which should have been online by now. However, working with enthousiastic IT-folks who are not specifically ship-building experts, delays the proces a bit because of all the corrections and improvements that have to be executed. I hope for this week, because there is a deadline from the Dutch Agency for Cultural Heritage, which finances the program. So PietFriet, hang on, we are on our way...

[wefalck]

OK, should wait then for the pinas.

 

I was thinking of the many shell-first (or at least part-shell), were there isn't a hard chine. Think of all the Nordic boats from the middle ages on or the Arab dhows, where builders plank up the shell up to around the chine and then start putting the timbers in. All is done by eye, using only an inclinometer to measure the angle of each strake.

 

I was thinking of the pure technical process of construction, not of the design process based on some formulae. I am curious to see then how this determines the shape from that perspective.

[Ab Hoving]

Perhaps with smaller craft the transition is more visible. Here an archaeological find in the Waddenzee, with one single bilge-plank:

[Jules van Beek]

Hello Ab,

New member here, but I hope you can still remember me.

I have been following this a bit, and, since the question of PietFriet is related to a 'statenjacht', I wondered why you did not tell him that there is a very good technical drawing of a 'statenjacht' in Witsen's book of 1671. Here it is:

 

 

It is the yacht Jan Ysbrantsz Hoogsaet built for the Swedish king in 1669, in Amsterdam. Witsen called this shipwright: "an uncomparable master in the art of building ships sailing the inland waters".

 

Kind regards,

 

Jules

[Ab Hoving]

Nobody is perfect Jules. Fortunately you filled the gap.