HMS Terror by Erebus and Terror - FINISHED - Scale 1:48 - POB - as fitted for polar service in 1845

[druxey]

That quantity of flour confirms your theory, I think!

[trippwj]

That wouldn't necessarily be that large a volume - if in bags, would take up a total of about 130 cubic meters.  Sounds like a huge volume, but if packed in bags around other barrels &c. it isn't so bad.  If in barrels, well, then it is a bigger space hog.  A flour barrel held about 196 pounds in the early 19th century, so to store 70 tons (assuming a long ton of 2,240 pounds), then would require some 800 barrels spread across the 2 ships.  That is a LOT of barrels!

[Erebus and Terror]

Thanks for your insights, trippwj. I've seen the lid from a barrel of flour from HMS Resolute, so I suspect they used primarily barrels. Crozier was so worried about the overloaded state of the vessels that he sent anchors and iron davits home with the transports. The ships are described as having only a narrow path fore and aft, and even the deck plans show fittings to secure dozens of barrels on deck.

[Erebus and Terror]

ASSEMBLING TERROR’S STERN

(Or, finally some sawdust!!!)

 

I haven't posted an update regarding my model in several months. While I've kept busy with side projects, the real reason for my delay is that I had reached an impasse with Terror’s stern.

 

As I've discussed in previous posts, the sterns of Franklin’s ships were modified in 1845 to accommodate a new auxiliary screw propulsion system – to be used as a time saving device “providing the wind should prove contrary or a dead calm”. There are two sources of data on these modifications: Oliver Lang’s original design plan, and its counterpart, a contemporary model of the design. I had purchased full resolution copies of the plan many months ago, but unfortunately Lang did not include a cross section in his draught. That information could only be gleaned from the contemporary model held at the National Maritime Museum’s storage facility in Chatham.   

 

The contemporary model of Oliver Lang's 1845 design. 

National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London (SLR2253 [L2251-001]). 

Used under Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA) license

 

 

Fortunately, I recently had an opportunity to visit the Chatham model ship facility. Assisted by the expert curators, I was able to study the stern model in detail. It is quite unique, being constructed using a series of carved blocks arranged to conform to the position of major structural and engineering elements of Lang’s design.  The information I gathered has allowed me to complete my construction of the stern;  below, I’ll reveal the new information I've learned from the contemporary model, while documenting my final assembly of Terror’s stern:

 

1) The propeller well used to raise and lower the screw was rectangular, almost square-sided, with the sternpost and rudderpost forming the fore and aft sides of the well, respectively. To accomplish this, thick timbers were bolted to the sides of the rudderpost and sternpost. The rudderpost bolsters were much more complex than I originally assumed and were each constructed of at least two pieces, with the lower portions tapering gently to the width of the rudderpost, following the lines of the body plan (see here for my original conceptualization of the design).

 

The stern pieces prior to assembly. The bolster on the left is the old design I intended to use,

which was incorrect.

 

The overkill method I used to glue the bolsters to the stern and rudderposts.

Thankfully this was just a dry-run (note the older bolster design). 

 

The  new bolster timbers glued on the rudderpost. Note the groove for the "Lihou" rudder on the

rudderpost. I may need to sand the bolsters somewhat to match the run of the planking as they

may be slightly oversized - but no by much. 

 

Another angle showing the bolster timbers on the sternpost.

The NMM model shows that the bolsters on the rudderpost are

longer than those on the sternpost. 

 

2) The rudderpost and sternpost were each tenoned into the keel extension, as was typical, but each was secured with a single bolt, which was not indicated on Lang’s plan.  

 

Marking the precise position of the tenon bolts.

 

The bolts were simulated with 20 gauge copper wire, precisely the

same as that used on the keel scarphs. 

 

3) The propeller well was framed on the port and starboard sides in three distinct sections. The upper section included stout rectangular framing fayed to the deck beams, which formed a ledge for a scuttle on the upper deck. Below this, the well was probably enclosed by watertight planking down to the height of the stern timbers. Because of the construction of the contemporary NMM model, such planking was not shown, but it is unlikely that solid timber pieces would have been used, as these aren’t shown in contemporary models.

 

The heavy framing used to form the top of the propeller well.

The upper part of these timbers formed a lip for a scuttle to the well. 

 

Planking on the upper section of the well. I've estimated a width of 12 inches.

The actual width is unknown. Note that this section of the model will be covered

so I haven't simulated bolts or spikes here. 

 

A view of the topside of the well. The upper pieces of the sternpost

and rudderpost bolsters will be trimmed at a later stage of the build,

but are useful for alignment at this stage. 

 

4) A new section, clearly visible in the well of the model, started at the position of the stern timbers. This suggests the stern timbers were bolted to the sides of the rudderpost and sternposts to provide major structural support to the new rudderpost and well. This makes good sense, and Lang’s 1845 stern plan clearly shows the stern timbers as a major element of the design. In fact, these new timbers are substantially more robust than Terror’s original stern timbers, suggesting they were an integral part of the strength of the new structure. Again, this type of structure is supported by contemporary models.

 

The bottom portion of the framing planks were trimmed to match the run

of the stern timbers. Note the rabbet on the rudderpost on the right. 

 

5) The lower section of the propeller well was composed of the second layer of hull planking where it ran aft, horizontally.  Eventually, the run of the higher planks would have veered away from the straight-sided wall of the well. At this point, straight horizontal planking would have been used to frame the sides of the well. The position where this occurs is marked by a block seam on the contemporary NMM model.

 

Unfortunately, Lang’s contemporary  model does not include any of the ironwork used to strengthen the stern, nor does it include the propeller rail/track mechanism. I've based these portions of the model on Lang’s plans and extensive research on other contemporary models and designs. This research is outlined in several blog posts (and here, here, and here).

 

Oliver Lag's stern design. Note the extensive ironwork and the propeller systems.

National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London (ZAZ5683 [J1529]).

Used under Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA) license.

 

The iron staple knee glued in place. The knee provided essential support for the rudderpost. 

 

Mini-Crozier inspects the staple knee in dry dock. 

 

Lang used iron strapping to further reinforce the stern structure. Here they are made from

chemically blackened copper. 

 

Each strap was glued in place and then the bolt holes were drilled out by hand. 

 

Bolts glued in place. These were simulated using blackened brass. 

 

Another view of the completed iron work.

 

Mini-Crozier frets over the modifications. 

 

The staple knee was protected by a fitted  chock bolted to the keel section.

I carved this using a simple chisel blade. 

 

The finished chock compared to the plans. 

 

Image showing how the chock fits over the knee. Unfortunately it had to

be glued in place to permit the propeller rails/tracks to be installed.

At least I know the knee is there. 

 

The chock glued in place.

 

The propeller was raised and lowered using rails or "tracks". These have been

modified slightly from my original versions based on new data. Copper bolts

were simulated using wire. 

 

The rails glued in final position. Note  the  rabbet on the rudderpost 

for the second layer of hull planking. The rabbet will be modified  to 

accommodate the precise run of planking when it is installed. 

 

View of the rails installed on the sternpost.

 

View of the rails installed on the rudderpost.

 

Another view. 

 

Wooden bolt plugs added to the chock. The bolts were "counterbored and plugged".

 

The staple knee was bolted to the rudderpost; these bolts were also counterbored

and plugged. I'm not entirely happy with the contrast here and may redo them at a later date.

 

The completed stern assembly.

 

Lowering the screw propeller in place (it raise and lowers - and the propeller spins). 

 

The propeller in position. Unfortunately the angle of the photo makes it

look slightly crooked, but it is not - is spins freely, with very small

tolerances as shown on Lang's original plans. 

 

A view from the stern.

 

Another angle showing how the propeller was seated.  

 

Looking down the well from the position of the upper deck .

 

Mini-Crozier contemplates how the stern will fare in the ice.

 

How successful was Lang’s stern at protecting the ship from the pack ice? Parks Canada divers are assessing that currently, and with luck they’ll find the answers soon. We know from historical sources that the Admiralty was concerned about the strength of the design, and that while Lang believed the “sternposts” (sternposts and rudderposts) were as strong as those on other ships, he would not certify that the strength of the filling chocks was sufficient to protect the Erebus and Terror [4].

 

No matter how vulnerable it made the ship, we can suspect that Lang’s radical redesign also altered the sailing qualities of Terror. Contemporary sailing reports indicate that Vesuvius class bomb vessels were rather lumbering and could not carry sail well, and Ross reported that Terror was constantly falling behind Erebus during his Antarctic voyage, delaying and endangering the expedition.

 

Recently, Regina Koellner, assisted by William Battersby, transcribed a letter from Francis Crozier to his friend John Henderson, written shortly after the ships arrived at Whalefish Islands in Greenland. In the letter, Crozier provides a brief report of Terror’s sailing qualities: "Our steering is decidedly improved by the alterations on the counter we now sail much more evenly with Erebus which is advantageous to us in many ways." I suspect that the effective lengthening of the keel to accommodate the propeller allowed Terror to sail closer to the wind, finally permitting her to keep up with the more nimble Erebus. It seems the final conversion of Terror to screw propulsion made her a more capable vessel under sail, an irony certainly not lost on Crozier.

 

 

 

 

[dgbot]

Your assembly and attention to detail is making for a real nice model and works as an inspiration for others.

David B

[RichardG]

Wonderful!

 

Richard.

[Keith_W]

Amazingly accurately constructed. You are doing a great job. 

[druxey]

Terrific update, E & T. Question: would not the reinforcing straps have been inset flush to the surface of the wooden elements?

[mtaylor]

Amazing update with an eye-opening amount of research behind it.  Beautiful work on the stern.

[Erebus and Terror]

Thank you all for the comments and "likes", they are very much appreciated!

 

Druxey, that is a good observation, and I'm not looking forward to making the lowest gudgeon straps! I didn't mention this in my post, but the straps were actually bolted through on either side to each other - to provide more strength. 

 

The short answer is that I do not know for sure, and it's likely we won't know for some time. I was lucky enough to see a photograph of the Erebus rudderpost in a recent lecture (hence the slight alterations to the propeller rails) and the entire structure appears to be buried up to the position of the seat for the propeller. So, placing them on top of the wood seemed the safest bet until we know for certain - I can always remove and inset them later.

 

Regardless, I think it's possible that they were not inset flush with the wood surface. On Lang's plan they are drawn with a three dimensional effect precisely the same as the gudgeons  - giving no indication that they were inset. To me, this suggests Lang's intent was to construct these similar to the gudgeon straps. I've poured over the many models of early screw vessels and while none are precisely like Terror, all the reinforcing straps I've seen are not set flush. The other issue here is that the keel is sided only 10 3/4 inches at this point and removing many inches of wood to make the straps flush might have compromised the strength of the structure. 

 

Slim evidence, to be sure. But my main reason for doing it this way was to provide me options later if we actually get a look at this portion of the wreck! I won't be installing the rudder for some time... 

Edited April 15, 2015 by E&T

[druxey]

Thanks for the comprehensive reply, E&T. I was thinking only of underwater streamlining. It's nice to know that, in this case, all you need do is 'wait and see'!

[EdT]

Great work, E&T.  I'm dizzy from all the pictures.  The precision of your work is superb.

 

Ed

[Erebus and Terror]

Thank you for the kind comment, Ed.

 

In fact, I have been meaning to thank you for putting me on to copper instead of brass when blackening metal. Since the switch, I haven't had any problems with corrosion - and the blacks are nice and even without flakes. It's also much easier to work than brass. 

 

I also need to thank Druxey for introducing me to Jax copper/brass blackener. It produces much more consistent with results at a 10:1 ratio than Blacken-it. I love the stuff. 

[Erebus and Terror]

LASER CUTTING TERROR’S BULKHEADS

 

I have arrived at the stage of my build where I am assembling the bulkheads that will give shape to the ship’s hull. I have already created bulkheads for this model using the traditional method – gluing the plans to plywood and cutting them out using a scroll saw. 

 

The old bulkheads - cut using a scroll saw (prior to sanding). 

 

However, I recently decided to change the way I will construct the bow of the model. I had originally modified the forward stations to account for the extra bolsters and planking at the bow, but I've recently decided to try to build these fittings (as a means to determine how Rice actually reinforced Terror against the ice). This necessitated rebuilding the two most forward station bulkheads. 

 

And this gave me an excuse for a whole new mini-project.

 

Following a current trend, my local public library recently opened a prototyping studio, which includes design software, 3D printers, and an Epilogue Mini 24 Laser Cutter. The library allows you to book the equipment for several hours each month - for free. I've wanted to experiment with a laser cutter for some time, and since I needed to make new bulkheads anyway, I decided to recut all of them. My hope was that it would result in a more accurate build.

 

The Epilogue Mini 24 Laser Cutter. The bed capacity is 12" x 24". 

 

The cutter works very much like a traditional printer and will engrave (raster) or cut (vector) based on the thickness of the lines shown in the image file (I used high resolution PDFs for this). My first attempt, using factory recommended settings, was somewhat of a disaster, resulting in charred and smoldering wood and unusable pieces (plywood is notoriously difficult to cut because of its inconsistent composition).

 

My first disastrous attempt. Note the burned and charred edges.

 

For my second attempt, I conducted some tests and determined the proper power settings needed to cut 5mm plywood with the thinnest, most accurate, cuts and a minimum of charring and burning [1].

 

As a test, I cut a series of discs with different power settings. 

 

The appearance of the cut edge with the proper settings (no charring). 

 

I engraved the station markings on each bulkhead.  The machine automatically engraves before cutting.

 

The bulkheads being cut. 

 

You can tell the cut was successful if the part drops away from the sheet.

 

A finished sheet. 

 

Each bulkhead fits into slots on the false keel. 

 

The bulkheads slide snugly into place.

 

Test assembly proceeds. This is just a dry -fit. 

 

The bulkheads dry-fitted in place. They need to be properly aligned, but I'm

happy with the run already. Mini-Crozier allows us to visualize how large

Terror actually was (quite small for a Royal Navy vessel).

 

A view from the bow.

 

This view shows the run of the ice channels very nicely.

 

A top-side view from the stern. The bulkheads are just dry-fitted

here and will need to be aligned properly before gluing. 

 

I am very pleased with my experience using the laser cutter. The bulkheads are much more accurate than I could have produced by hand, and the process took about a tenth of the time normally required to cut and sand these parts. I will certainly be using it again when I need to cut more complex shapes and components for my build. 

 

Footnotes:

[1] For those interested, low speed, power, and PPI settings are a must, and the recommended wood settings for the Epilogue Laser will not work on plywood. Your goal should be a setting that will just barely cut completely through the wood, as this results in the thinnest cuts and edges that are browned, but not charred. My settings for good quality 5mm birch plywood were: Speed = 10, Power = 38, and PPI(Frequency) = 150.

[druxey]

Nice use of the free library technology! Where do you live? I'll be right over! Everything on the hull lines up beautifully.

[dgbot]

Years ago when RCHTA had it show here there were was an outfit selling laser cutters.  Nice stuff but limited in size and th price was a little steep. I thought it was interesting and fun to watch.

David B

[Erebus and Terror]

Thank you for the comments and likes - they are sincerely appreciated. 

 

Druxey, I'd pay to see what you would create with a laser cutter!

 

I admit to feeling a little like I was cheating, until I saw the results. Another reason for not feeling overly guilty - my scroll saw recently had a catastrophic malfunction (and is now in the heaven for well-loved, but worn-out, power tools). 

[druxey]

Heh, heh. And tomorrow, the world! Actually, I'd need to learn a suitable CAD program first before scorching any wood. Sorry about your scroll saw, E&T. I hope you got good mileage out of it before it quit.

[AntonyUK]

Hi E&T.

Nice to you back at the tools again.

That's some very nice modeling skills you got going there

WOW. Wish our library had resources like that... But that's the UK for you. Back to the stone age.

I love the way you take photos of the stages you are on..

 

Looking forward to your next post.

Regards Antony.

[Erebus and Terror]

Thanks for the kind words Antony. What are you working on at the moment? I haven't seen your wonderful cross section in a while...that's a real work of art.

[mati]

E&T,

I'm hardly able to say how I’m impressed about your reserch and „sawdust” results

As you know I can’t wait when you’ll be ready with plans. Getting crazy about that

 

That’s gonna be amazing model and amazing documentation!

 

 However… I have few question. If you don’t mind

 

1. Which silver paste you’re using for soldering? I mean brand (maybe small pic?) I’m using several brands and just looking for other to compare and to find the best.
   
2. Are you using just simple propane torch for soldering?
   
3. Your blackening solution gave very nicely even black effect, can you reveal which solution you have used? Is it Brass Black from Birchwood Casey or maybe Caswell Canada product?
   
4. The bolts/rivets on stern iron strapping… did you made them by yourself? I really like roundness and accuracy of the heads. I found also very precise products from Scale Hardware.
   
5. Propeller tracks… are you gonna keep them in this shiny brass color or the final finish will be black?
   
6. I was thinking about hull of this vessel. 1845, let say very modern fitting and special construction for unusually service. Only bow section were plated for protection and to give extra strength with Arctic Ice Battle. But what about the rest part of the hull. Did they never decide to copper plate full underwater hull? It’s becouse of double hull? So it was pointless to add another layer? It’s just my thoughts and concerns  
   

 

Anyway, thank you in advance for answers.

It’s alway plesure to see an update in this log, so I’ll keep folow

 

Kind regards from the middle of North Atlantic Ocean.

 

Cheers,

Matt

[Erebus and Terror]

Hi Matt, 

 

Thanks very much for your kind words. 

 

To answer your questions:

 

1: I use a brand called "Fusion". It melts at a fairly high temperature, but it works well. 

http://www.amazon.com/Solder-Paste-Flux-Silver-Easy/dp/B000VQ9HX4

 

2. I use a small butane pen torch. It's very underpowered, but it will get up to the melting point needed for silver soldering.

 

3. I use Jax blackening agent (http://www.jaxchemical.com/jaxshop/shopexd.asp?id=45). It was recommended to me by Druxey and it's a really awesome product (mix it 1:10 with deionized water). I had problems with brass and Blacken-It, so I've switched to using copper for simulating iron. 

 

4. The bolts are Corel brand brass nails (http://www.cornwallmodelboats.co.uk/acatalog/corel-nails.html). They are slightly undersized, but they blacken well (they require a bit of filing and prep, however).

 

5. The propeller tracks on the Erebus and Terror were made from gunmetal, so I don't plan to darken the tracks at all. 

 

6. All of the copper sheeting was removed on the E and T, as this was expected to be a short duration voyage and likely the last voyage for both ships. Both ships had double planked hulls with extra thick planking at the wales. At the bows, each ships had extra bolsters added to make the stem flush with the hull. On the Terror, an extra layer of 4 inch thick planks was added which extended twenty feet aft. Finally, 5/16 inch iron plating was added over this. With the bolsters, Terror essentially had four extra layers of planking at the bow. Internally, the bow was lined with and additional eight to twelve inch layer of planking.

 

At the load waterline, Terror had more than eight feet of solid oak between it and the ice! It was essentially a wooden ice-breaker. 

 

Does that answer all of your questions? Thanks for your interest!

 

 

 

 

E&T,

I'm hardly able to say how I’m impressed about your reserch and „sawdust” results

As you know I can’t wait when you’ll be ready with plans. Getting crazy about that

 

That’s gonna be amazing model and amazing documentation!

 

 However… I have few question. If you don’t mind

 

1. Which silver paste you’re using for soldering? I mean brand (maybe small pic?) I’m using several brands and just looking for other to compare and to find the best.
2. Are you using just simple propane torch for soldering?
3. Your blackening solution gave very nicely even black effect, can you reveal which solution you have used? Is it Brass Black from Birchwood Casey or maybe Caswell Canada product?
4. The bolts/rivets on stern iron strapping… did you made them by yourself? I really like roundness and accuracy of the heads. I found also very precise products from Scale Hardware.
5. Propeller tracks… are you gonna keep them in this shiny brass color or the final finish will be black?
6. I was thinking about hull of this vessel. 1845, let say very modern fitting and special construction for unusually service. Only bow section were plated for protection and to give extra strength with Arctic Ice Battle. But what about the rest part of the hull. Did they never decide to copper plate full underwater hull? It’s becouse of double hull? So it was pointless to add another layer? It’s just my thoughts and concerns

 

Anyway, thank you in advance for answers.

It’s alway plesure to see an update in this log, so I’ll keep folow

 

Kind regards from the middle of North Atlantic Ocean.

 

Cheers,

Matt

 

[druxey]

I note that today is the anniversary of Terror and Erebus sailing in 1845 for what proved to be their last voyages.

[Erebus and Terror]

Yes indeed it is Druxey, thanks for the post.

 

In February I had a beer at a pub, now called the "Sir John Franklin", in Greenhithe, the very establishment the officers rented the day before they set sail.

 

The quay where the ships were moored still exists just behind the pub, and the cobble stones leading up to it are the same stones Franklin, Crozier, and their men would have walked over to board the ships. Unfortunately the rooms where they slept weren't accessible.

 

It's a must-see for anyone interested in Franklin and beer.

 

 

https://m.facebook.com/pages/Sir-John-Franklin/110532939006680?id=110532939006680&refsrc=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fpages%2FSir-John-Franklin%2F110532939006680

Edited May 20, 2015 by E&T

[Erebus and Terror]

Pulling a Rabbet from Terror’s Hat

 

Last month, I finished the most angst-ridden part of my project to date - cutting the rabbets into my model's keel and stem.

 

My trepidation was rooted in the fact that the rabbet position isn’t shown in Terror’s 1836 draughts [1] (the 1839 draughts [2] only show the rabbet position for Erebus). Normally this wouldn’t be an issue, as Terror’s 1812 [3] profile plan clearly shows the position of the rabbet. However, the 1836 plans show that Terror’s bow, and in particular her upper deck and bulwarks, were extended forward approximately 12.5 inches (why this was necessary is still a mystery to me). This implied that her rabbet position must have been moved forward as well, to accommodate a smooth run of planking along the bow.

 

The rabbet carved into the model’s keel. Like the merchant ships which

were the basis for Terror’s design, the 1812 draught shows the rabbet

was taken out of the centre of the keel (incidentally, this position probably

contributed to her poor sailing qualities).

 

I had originally assumed that Terror’s cant frames, hawse pieces, and bollard timbers may have been modified to accommodate this lengthening of the deck. This wasn’t an unwarranted assumption, because Terror’s 1836 profile plan shows that Terror’s upper stem piece was extensively remodeled, suggesting a significant refit of the bow timbers.

 

However, after further consideration, I’ve come to the conclusion that such extensive modifications were very unlikely. We know that Terror’s original top-timbers and bulwarks were entirely levelled when she was caught in a hurricane near Lisbon in 1828 [4]. This means that replacement bulwark stanchions needed to be installed when the ship was repaired. The upper deck may have been expanded at this time, but I suspect this occurred in the 1836 refit as the solid chock channels provided an opportunity (and platform) to most effectively hide this shift forward. In either case, because her bulwarks had been levelled, the modifications could have been made without extensive reworking of the bow timbers.

 

Therefore, my solution is to leave the rabbet position precisely as shown in Terror’s original 1812 draughts and to rely on modified bulwark stanchions to account for the lengthened deck. This permits me to move forward with the project with the least amount of conjecture, because the only speculation I need to make is about the construction of the most forward bulwark stanchions.

 

The port stem rabbet.

 

Another view of the rabbet - Terror had a very bluff bow, but the

rabbet "opens" slightly in this area.

 

A dummy section of planking, dry-fitted into the rabbet

to test how it fits with one of the station bulkheads

 

Settling on a final position of the rabbet allows me to finally assemble the bulkheads and begin planking the model. This decision also permitted me to finally draft a plan of Terror’s complete bow architecture.

 

 

Profile of the Terror’s bow architecture, showing the manner the

bow was strengthened for polar exploration service. To accommodate

the lengthening of the deck, I added a conjectural 12 inch chock

fayed to the fore edge of the bollard timbers and cant frames, against

which the bulwark stanchions would have been bolted.

 

Plan of Terror’s lower deck, detailing the layers of planking and metal

sheathing added to the ship.

 

The plans expose the effort the Admiralty placed on strengthening the ship’s bow at the waterline. More than 55 inches (4.5 feet) of iron reinforced oak separated the stores on Terror’s orlop deck from the water. Near the foremast step, that distance multiplied to nearly 12 linear feet. James Clark Ross [5] tested these reinforcements in a most daring fashion during his Antarctic Expedition. By January 5th, 1841, Ross had spotted what he thought was open water south of the Ross Sea but found his way to it blocked by a ring of thick pack ice. Confident in his ships, he sailed along the barrier until he saw a “favourable point” and, under sail, rammed the Erebus and Terror into it for an hour, eventually fracturing the ice and punching his way through. He discovered the Ross Ice Shelf six days later.   

 

 

Footnotes:

[1] National Maritime Museum Object ID: ZAZ5672, ZAZ5663

 

[2] National Maritime Museum Object ID: ZAZ5673

 

[3] National Maritime Museum Object ID: ZAZ5615

 

[4] 1835. Narrative of the Wreck of H.M.S. Terror. United Service Journal and Naval and Military Magazine 1. Pages 229-236.

Edited June 30, 2015 by E&T

[Erebus and Terror]

 

 

Also, if you like to drink coffee, and like free stuff, you might want to check out my blog.

 

 

 

 

 

[druxey]

Great stuff, E&T. It's always a little frustrating having to 'best guess' things. I've often found that I was right on later when more information came to light. I hope you have the same experience. Looking forward to seeing your progress, particularly as you layer it on at the bow.

 

Just checked out your blog: excellent commentary and pictures!

Edited June 29, 2015 by druxey

[Erebus and Terror]

Druxey, sincere thanks for your kind words. Actually that makes me feel much better - I dislike "guesstimating" intensely, but at some point you just have to move on. 

[druxey]

Yes, one does! Otherwise paralysis sets in....

[S.Coleman]

A superb job so far. Nice and neat wood working. This ship was defiantly reinforced!! I like that idea of raising or lowering the Screw. Imaging the damage the ice would of done to her.