The Naiad Frigate by Ed Tosti

[tkay11]

I recently received my copies of Vol I and II of the Naiad books, and have just started studying the plans so that I can determine whether I go ahead and start the build or postpone it till I have better skills.

 

However, I am puzzled by the plan numbering, and just want to check that I do in fact have all the plans. It would be great if someone could provide a list of the plans and what they contain.

With volume 1 of the Naiad I have the following:

I sheet each of plans

1, 2, 2B, then 2 sheets of plan 3, and then 1 copy of 13A-D

With volume 2 I have:

1 sheet each of

Plans 5-12,  and plan 14.

 

I presume plan 13 from volume 1 is the plan 13 for the second volume.

 

My question is: am I missing plan sheets 2A and 4 or are there no plans with that numbering?

 

I haven't read through the volumes thoroughly yet, but I can't see any obvious listing of the plan sheets.

I'd be grateful for any advice. I've written to Bob and Cathy at Seawatch Books, but I'm posting here in case there's a simple answer.

Tony

[tkay11]

Oops! After more careful going through the text, I think I've answered at least part of my question. It seems I am indeed missing plan 4 (the centreline structure drawing) which I now see is referenced as such in Volume 1 on page 19. I think two copies of plan 3 were sent by mistake instead of one copy each of plans 3 and 4.

However, I'd still like to know if there's a plan 2A, if anyone can help.

Thanks

Tony

 

[sfotinos]

There is no 2A, only 2 and 2B.

 

Shawn

[tkay11]

Thanks a lot, Shawn. That's cleared it all up!

 

Tony

[EdT]

Tony,

 

I am sorry for the confusion over the plans.  The drawings were all planned and numbered early on, before the books.  The inclusion of Drawing 13 in Volume I has caused some confusion.  The short answer is that there is no 2A.  The 2B was meant to identify this plan as the Base, or shipway drawing.  It does sound like Seawatch owes you a drawing 4, so I am sure Bob will send you one.  Let me know if this does not happen.  I have attached a list of the large printed drawings for your reference.  I posted this in an Addendum on this forum topic some time ago.  I suggest that you go back through this topic, download and print all the Addenda.  While most of these deal with minor corrections and clarifications, there is also other useful supplementary information.  There are 6 addenda for Volume I and 1 for Volume 2, all as printable pdfs.

 

Naiad Frigate Drawing Lists[1].pdf

 

Thank you for your interest in the books.  I hope you will decide to proceed with the project.

 

Ed

[tkay11]

Ed, you're a marvel! Thanks so much for all the info. I'll collect all the addenda and have downloaded the list. I'll definitely start a log, though, because of house moving this summer, it may be some time before I can make my decision. In the meantime I'm planning very carefully!

 

Tony

[French Mr Bean]

Hello Ed, I received the 2 volumes of La Naiade a week ago. Fabulous !!

I study the plans with the help of your post on this forum and the achievements of other modellers. It's a great challenge to want to run this model.

I have two questions for today: éléments of stem: 20 to 15"- éléments of knee of the head: 13.5" ? At the junction, it creates a gap. Is there a reason for that?

On the cross sections of the frame, there are 2 vertical lines on each side of the keel. What do they represent?

Thank you

 

( sorry for my and google english...🙄 )

Edited June 22, 2022 by French Mr Bean

[EdT]

Hello Mr Bean,

 

Thank you for your interest in the model and for purchasing the books.

 

The stem is 20" athwartship (that is breadth perpendicular to the ship centerline) at the top and tapers down to 13.5" to match the width of the keel at the bottom.  The knee of the head is 13.5" at the join with the stem over its entire length.  I would guess that the reason for that is that the knee of the head does not require the 20" thickness to serve its function of supporting the stem in the fore and aft direction.  It also tapers to a narrower breadth going forward.  At the upper end, the stem it will be wider than the knee of the head by about 3" on each side.

 

For convenience. the frame section drawings used a common template that shows the keel widths at both midship (15") and at the ends (13.5",  so the inner vertical lines on the keel represent the breadth at the ends and the outer lines the breadth at the center - on these pattern drawings.  This was a drafting convenience to avoid me having to develop the actual keel width at every frame, which would have been more correct but not really useful, since the keel is not part of the frame. These lines on the frame drawings may be ignored - but do not neglect to taper the breadth of the keel from midship to the ends.

 

Hope this helps.  Thank you for posting your question here on the build log, so others may see it.

 

Ed

[French Mr Bean]

Thanks for the replies, I'll be back! 🙂

[French Mr Bean]

Hi Ed,

Always studying the plans.. (why didn't I learn English well in my youth..).

A question for today: I have a misunderstanding on the stop of the rabbet at level 28. All the models that I observe have a rabbet that goes up to the stern.

I don't understand how to stop the rabbet at 28. How would the planking attach to the keel?

Waiting for your answer,

Thank you ! 😉

Edited August 17, 2022 by French Mr Bean

[EdT]

Mr Bean,

 

Please see Vol 1, p 46, para 4.  Stopping the keel rabbet well forward of the sternpost seems to have been typical on these ships based on original drafts.  The planking rests on the top of the keel (and bolts to the deadwood) aft of 28.  I do not know the reason for this practice, but speculate that it was to avoid weakening the keel at the stern where the supporting deadwood was very small in cross-section. 

 

Ed

[French Mr Bean]

Thank you Ed but, on this picture ( p. 78 ) I see a rabbet at the bottom of deadwood....

Document numérisé.pdf

[allanyed]

M. Haricot

Ed is correct, this was normal practice.  For Naiad in particular look at the contemporary drawing from 1797 at RMG Collections.

https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-82405    You can see that the rabbet ends at station 28.

Allan

[French Mr Bean]

Thank you Allan. In fact, I complicated my reasoning. But, better to ask than to make mistakes.

[allanyed]

 

2 hours ago, French Mr Bean said:

But, better to ask than to make mistakes.

You are absolutely correct.   Many of us have been scratch building for MANY MANY years, long before the internet and we all still ask questions.

 

 

Allan

[druxey]

Stopping the rabbet on the keel forward of the post was standard in English ships. Not only (as mentioned by Ed) did this not weaken the narrowing keel, but the garboard strake which widens here can be got out of a slightly narrower plank as a result.

[EdT]

David and Allan, thanks for the input - and nice to hear from you.

 

Ed

[allanyed]

It is fun watching so much of the great work resulting from your books Ed so it is a great pleasure for me as well!

Allan

[druxey]

Ditto, Ed!

[French Mr Bean]

Hello,

Question of the day:

Why is the stay bracket in 2 parts?

Thank you.

 

[allanyed]

M/ Haricot

  Why in two pieces?? Hopefully someone has a reason based on contemporary information but it is not at all unusual.   Look at a few  of the thousands of drawings and contemporary models on the RMG Collections site and you will see that this is more often than not the case.  There are of course variations over time and types and sizes of vessel. One of many exceptions to the split channels includes Boston 1762 as seen below.  One of the split channel versions can be seen on Cerebus 1793 in the second drawing below.

Allan

[French Mr Bean]

Thank you Allan for these clarifications.

[Mark P]

Good Evening Allan;

 

I think that you will find that the longer of the metal fittings shown close together is a crutch for the main lower studding sail boom to rest in when it is not rigged out for use. Similarly, at the fore end of the channel, the longer metal fitting is an eye for the hook on on inboard end of the studding sail boom to swivel in.

 

All the best,

 

Mark P

 

 

[druxey]

Often the stay part of the channel is narrower than the main part; the Boston example above indicates this variation.

[Mark P]

Oops!

 

Apologies to Allan; I seem to have misunderstood the purpose of the question. It relates to the timber structure, not the metalwork on it.

 

All the best,

 

Mark P

[French Mr Bean]

Hello friends,

 

On plans  can't frames  are   represented 3X. Why ? 🤔

Have a good day.

Michel

[EdT]

Extras if needed.

 

Ed

[French Mr Bean]

Thank you !

[rtropp]

Ed,

hope your still out there.

I was getting ready to start the Naiad per your book.  I have the first book but cannot find the second one.  I would hate to start and not be able to finish it. 

Do you have thoughts on how I might obtain a volume two?

I appreciate your help,

Richard

[EdT]

Hello Richard,

I do believe that volume 2 is out of print, but cannot advise you how to get a copy.  You might try writing to the published, Mike Ellison, (Mike@seawatchbooks.com) but I doubt there is any inventory.  You might also try Amazon.  I have seen a copy or two of my books show up there used.  You might also, post requests on MSW.  Perhaps someone may be able to sell you one.

 

Sorry, I could not be more helpful.

 

Ed