Hi from France

[Mic.fr]

 

Good morning all, I am a French model maker passionate about the old navy. The works of Jean Boudriot are my references (and my dreams ...). I hesitate for the moment on the choice of a model to realize, so much I like the two, the Ambitieux or the Saint Philippe. The choice should be made quickly because, by thinking too much, we waste time and enthusiasm ... See you soon on this rich forum.

Mic

 

[Jim Lad]

Hello, and a warm welcome to the forum from 'Down Under'.

 

John

[allanyed]

Bonjour Mic!!!  Welcome to MSW.  It will be interesting to follow a build based on M. Boudriot's work.   I hope you will start a build log for us to follow.

 

Allan

[bruce d]

Bonjour Mic and welcome aboard MSW. I look forward to seeing what you choose.

[Edwardkenway]

Bienvenue to MSW Mic, I look forward to seeing a build log for whichever one you choose, bonne chance!!

[Baker]

[JeffT]

Welcome to MSW 

[Keith Black]

Mic, welcome to MSW. Tie up and enjoy your stay. 

[mtaylor]

Welcome to MSW, Mic.  I'm looking forward to you choice of builds and seeing a log.

[Jaager]

On 2/22/2021 at 1:19 AM, Mic.fr said:

I hesitate for the moment on the choice of a model to realize, so much I like the two, the Ambitieux or the Saint Philippe.

Both of these are magnificent.  They are also fiercely difficult.  I have been thinking that Ambitieux is a bit sparse on decoration detail, but a closer look shows that the stern and head are both well detailed.  Saint-Philippe is the more complicated of the two,  The frames and stations are canted forward a little over 1 degree.  None of the usual baseline, keel, waterlines,etc. are any help in matching the stations from the profile to the frame outlines (to locate the position of the decks and wales and ports).  It dawned on me that the L.Fon and L.In1 will locate a station profile to its frame outline. 

 

There is another factor that is unique to S.Philippe.  The stations  are not spaced all the same or a derivative of a common factor.  For every other ship that I have investigated, the stations involve some interval of a common frame sided dimension.  Usually, it is the same R&S, with the number of that factor being 4 or 3 or 2 0f them per station interval.  The same thickness of framing stock is used for the whole hull.  The intervals for S.Philippe are in 4 different groupings.  They are 12x12.75", 48x15.4", 24x14.9", 43x 13.9" (Imperial inches).  It requires four separate thickness of framing stock and constant attention and awareness. No system or rhythm is possible.  It is a mine field and bayonet as you go.  The tabled mortise joint within a bend is eccentric, but that is not something that I would replicate and is easily ingnored.

 

If these 17th century liners are a bit new to you, a close look at Fracois 1683 may be worthwhile.  It has all of the style of the two big ships, but is a lot less imposing.  In lofting the plans, I realized that this ship is even smaller than it appears to be, given that it is a two decker.  The two big ones are going to be a LONG journey.

Edited February 23, 2021 by Jaager

[Mic.fr]

Hi,

 

Thank you for your welcome. My choice fell on the Ambitieux. The plans of the S.P. are full of errors which oblige to redraw a good part of it. The plans by  Jean Boudriot are more respectful of the construction techniques of the time, hence my choice.

 

Mic

[Jaager]

Just now, Mic.fr said:

The plans of the S.P. are full of errors which oblige to redraw a good part of it.

I am not so sure that the plans are in error.  I think that Lemineur became so involved in the contemporary method that he lost sight of the real purpose of his monograph.  It is all well and good to document what was actually done.  Reproducing an eccentric building method does add a serious complication and an unnecessary one at that.  It would have been more friendly to have drawn the keel with the slope.  However, he developed the individual bend patterns for the commonly used POF assembly methods and did not think thru just how much more difficult doing it at an angle is.  It hurts my head to try to see how to use the routine methods to get a new baseline that gets the frames perpendicular.  The geometry is maddening.   I guess when viewed by the needs of most, this is an error, or at least an ill adivised decision.   I just have not seen any technical errors in the actual lines.    

 

I wish you smooth sailing on the project.  Ambitieux is a big horse. 

[Jaager]

There is one aspect of SP that is diving me to distraction.

On the Profile plan, the station lines are sloped with the frames.

The Body plan seems to be the actual frame shape, and not a foreshortened perpendicular to the keel parallax view.

The Body plan at M matches the extract bend shape for M.  It is not squished down.

So, why, if the Body plan is perpendicular to the viewer, is the rabbet not sloped down aft?

The geometry is confusing me.

[Mic.fr]

You understand why I'm giving it up ...