Sherbourne by Stockholm tar - Caldercraft - 1/64

[Stockholm tar]

I thought you might like to see a few more pictures of the (slow) progress on my Sherbourne. The pictures were actually taken about a month ago, and my wife and I are now at our cottage, so work won't resume on her until the autumn.

 

I've now finished the shrouds apart from the ratlines, which I'm leaving off for access until later, and have in place some of the running rigging, including the burtons, top rope, boom topping lift, and throat and peak halliards for the mainsail. The latter is bent to the gaff and brailed into the mast:

 

 

[tkay11]

Great to see it, Kester! I hope you post more pictures especially of detail. The sails and the ship's boat look terrific but it's unfair to pull those out for special praise because it all looks so wonderful!

 

Thanks for keeping us up to date.

 

Tony

[russ]

You should start a build log for this model rather than posting them in the kit discussion forum. I am sure a lot of members would like to follow along.

 

Russ

[Stockholm tar]

Dirk, Tony,

 

Thanks for your compliments, much appreciated. She's beginning to look something now, with the furled mainsail and some of the rigging.

 

Dirk, I'm pleased I spent some time on the details, as I think they add something to her – for instance the two stern lockers, one with the lid open to reveal in one half, the balls for the swivel guns, the other holding the lead line. In my mind there's a similar arrangement for the opposite side box, one half containing the balls for the swivels, the other the log line. The boat was quite literally made out of scrap pieces (the oars are orange sticks) and the sail is an old handkerchief, stained with tea. Threads were pulled out to represent the seams and, although difficult to see, there are reef points.

 

Russ, just seen your post. Yes, I suppose I could do that, even though she didn't have a log to start with.

[russ]

The moderators will just move this thread into the kit build log forum. That will take care of it.

 

Russ

[Stockholm tar]

Russ,

 

Thanks.

[Blue Ensign]

Fine looking build Kester, I love the furled sail, great natural look to it.

 

B.E.

[aliluke]

That is a beautiful looking ship. I'm sure I remember admiring this build on the old MSW - it has clinker planking? A great build.

 

Cheers

Alistair

[Stockholm tar]

BE, Ryland, Mark, Alasdair,

 

Thanks for the compliments.

 

BE,

 

The sail was made from an old handkerchief, cut to about half the size of the actual sail. Equidistant strands (about 1cm apart) were then teased out, to represent the seams. It was fitted with reef points, reinforcing etc, finally stained in tea. It was laced to the gaff, which was then fitted to the mast. There are two brails each side, the upper ones pass through two small single blocks at about the mid point on the gaff, through a double block at the gaff throat, and down to a pin on the boom. The others run from the clew, to the double block and down to the same pin. You can see the pin and coiled brails in the top two photos. I'm quite pleased with the look of the sail myself although, with hindsight, I think the reinforcing patches are a little overlarge along the gaff. I shall have to watch that with the other sails!

 

Alasdair,

 

Yes, she has been around a little while – not only was she on the old MSW, she was also on the now-defunct Dry Dock Models in the early stages! You are right too in thinking she is clinker planked, which I think adds to her appearance.

Edited July 21, 2013 by Stockholm tar

[Stockholm tar]

Since this log of the Sherbourne was started, rather belatedly, at the rigging stage rather than with the hull, I thought I should try and recall a few of the glitches that arose during earlier construction, that I remember. Hopefully, they may then become not be such a problem to current and future builders of this kit (although I am sure some have come across them already). These can lead to difficulties later in the build if one is not careful, but they can be avoided (or at least made good) with a little forethought. At the same time I shall mention where I altered, or made improvements, to the model.

 

The kit itself, by Caldercraft/Jotika, is a very suitable one for both the beginner and the more advanced modeller, and I can’t say that enough. At 1:64th scale, it is also a suitable size for the average home, and lends itself to further detailing if desired.  I found two books very useful. The volume in the ’Anatomy of the Ship’ series, ’The Naval Cutter Alert, 1777’, by Peter Goodwin (former curator of the Victory) was a great help with the early construction, and is already proving to be so with the rigging. Lennarth Petersson’s book, ’Rigging Period Fore and Aft Craft’, has also been useful, although it should be pointed out that the rig he describes, and rather more uniquely draws, is that of a cutter of the 1780’s, rather than the markedly different one of the 1760’s (Sherbourne dates from 1763) so discretion is advised. There is also another volume available, entitled ’Super-detailing the Cutter Sherbourne: A Guide to Building the Caldercraft Kit’, by George Bandurek. I have read part of it and it looks interesting, particularly with the making of the furled sails, and it has many colour photographs. I do not have it – at least, not yet – but that may change!

 

Anyway, to begin. So far as I remember, the material was of a good quality: birch ply frames, with separate keel, bow and stern pieces, and two gun port strips; lime was used for the first planking, with walnut for the second, and there was a reasonable amount left over. The only real concern here was that the walnut strips had to be treated with care as they were somewhat brittle, and slivers tended to break off of them, particularly when being bent. The usual dowel rod was supplied for the masts and yards, but more of them later. The cast metal anchors were well made, with minimum flash, but the guns (both the 3pdrs and the swivels) needed rather more work with the file. A couple of them were also not so well cast, although I did use them since the damage was not that noticeable, particularly when painted. Tan and black thread for the rigging was included.

 

Fitting the frames to the keel was fairly straight forward and they were a good fit. Soaking and bending the gunport strips presented few problems, but the first real hurdle arose when I fitted that on the port side, the starboard one being fine. I have to say here that this was probably not the fault of the strip, but was entirely of my own doing in that I probably glued it a fraction too low, particularly at the stern. It didn’t look particularly noticeable, but it had an unfortunate knock-on effect further down the line, when the deck was laid, in that (and I am sure many will know what’s coming next) the two aftermost guns wouldn’t fit properly through the ports!  I then spent some time in trying to make them do so by all the means I could think of – including filing the ports themselves, sanding the lower edge of the trucks, and lowering the holes for the trunnions – and all without making the guns appear ’odd’. At one stage, I was even thinking of having the aftermost gun run in to overcome the problem. Happily, the other measures were just about sufficient, and all the guns are now fully run out, even though the after pair are close to touching the top edge of the port. It is not particularly noticeable, but I hate to think of what would have happened on the actual cutter from the recoil, should these particular guns be fired! So the stricture here, for any building this kit, is obvious – make absolutely sure the strips are level fore-and-aft and glued in the correct position. You’ll save yourself a lot of heartache later on!

 

Next time, my clinker planking – and a few other problems.

Edited July 24, 2013 by Stockholm tar

[Padeen]

Nice to finally see a proper build log for your wonderfull cutter, Kester ! The main sail is truely becoming.

Do keep going and amzing us all with the construction steps 

[Stockholm tar]

Hi Adeline,

 

I thought you might drop in.

 

I don't know about the mainsail being 'becoming', although I must admit it doesn't look too bad.  As you'll appreciate, this 'log of sorts' (to steal a phrase from BE) is rather in retrospect, as I'm having to resort to my memory – not normally, I find, the best of work tools! However, there are problems I remember, and I'm just testing my powers of recall, in the hope that it may be of use to another Sherbourne (or other model) builder. My next offering should be up soon, together with a few photographs.

 

I've been following your log of the Fly. You're doing very well so far, but when will the next update be?

Edited July 27, 2013 by Stockholm tar

[bigcreekdad]

Excellent build. Much better than my Sherbourne, but for my first build, I am quite satisfied.

 

You mentioned going to your cottage.....I cannot resist....might you be a fisherman?

[Padeen]

Oh dear! Have I again employed a word in a funny way...   Anyway, don't worry about not recalling everything, what you do recall will still be appreaciated here I'm sure.

Fly's log will have a new entry very soon I hope, as I will be able to re-work on her in a few days.

[hopeful]

Wonderful build, Kester! Terrific photos.  Thanks for updating your log. I never tire looking at Sherbourne and Lady Nelson builds.

 

Cheers,

Hopeful aka David

 

"Standards set are standards met".

Edited July 27, 2013 by hopeful

[Stockholm tar]

Bigcreekdad,

 

I'm sure you're Sherbourne is just fine!

 

As to the cottage, although it's just inland from the coast north of Stockholm, no, I'm not a fisherman. We're reminded on occasion of the proximity of the Baltic, such as the other night which was somewhat misty inland, and we could hear the ship's fog signals. If the wind is in the right direction, we often hear the ship's engines. There is a small harbour not far from us, and often the mere sight of the yachts there makes one want to go sailing again!

 

A summer cottage is quite a usual thing in Sweden, my wife's father constructing it around 1960, overlooking a small lake. We now have a couple of neighbours. We've made a few improvements to it, such as giving it a new roof and chimney a few years ago, and we normally spend the summer months here. It is, mercifully, fairly quiet but it is getting noisier. There is a motorway to the north of us running between Stockholm and Kapellskär, which is the ferry port to Mariehamn in the Åland Islands, and when the ferries come in it seems to become a race track. It's worse when the wind blows from that direction! Unfortunately, there are plans to enlarge the port. We'll probably be here until late September or early October.

 

Adeline,

 

Not particularly a funny way, although I think it's perhaps more apt when referring to people. Not to worry though!

 

I'll do my best to recall my recollections, and I look forward to your Fly update.

 

[Stockholm tar]

David,

 

Thank you.

 

Yes, cutters and smaller vessels make good models don't they? Glad you liked the photos; there'll be a few more in the next update.

[Stockholm tar]

I omitted to fit bow and stern blocks when framing, but this was mainly because I didn’t know of them back then (well, that’s my excuse). They may perhaps have helped, but I don’t recall any particular difficulties in planking the bow or stern as a consequence.

 

I really didn’t encounter that many problems with the first lime planking either and it seemed to go relatively smoothly, provided the individual planks were properly tapered. I had also never thought to cut a rabbet line for the garboard plank, however, thinking about it in retrospect, it would probably have been a good idea. (In passing, I have sometimes wondered why the kit manufacturers never think to pre-cut this, since its placing is somewhat critical, and I would imagine is something of a daunting prospect for the beginner.) A fore rabbet, up the stem, would also certainly have been advantageous since I encountered a problem with what I have termed ’plank creep’. This is where the first planking, and thus by association the second, comes rather nearer the bow than necessary – and is your own fault! It is not that noticeable now, but you can see it should you care to look closely (please don’t!) Anyway, I tried to ensure a close fit of the garboard plank, by sanding down the inner edge, and this seemed to make a good joint.

 

Next came the second walnut planking, and here I made a perhaps ’radical’ departure from the instructions (easy enough to do now, but in those distant days…) and clinker-plank the second layer.  All that I had read about cutters told me that their hulls were so planked, and inherited from vessels of an earlier period, so I wondered why the Sherbourne was of carvel construction. However, having been designed by Thomas Slade (responsible for the design of the Victory two years later) and built in Woolwich Dockyard, the answer appeared obvious – they were more used to that kind with warship construction. I believe Chris Watton, the kit’s designer, has also said she was carvel. I imagine that the real Sherbourne would probably have been clinker planked, as was more usual, had she been constructed in a private yard. Moreover Peter Goodwin, in what had now become my ’bible’ (the Naval Cutter Alert), maintains that clinker construction remained in cutters until around 1810 – apart that is, from those constructed in the Dockyards. So, I persuaded myself I was on sort-of-safe ground for the project, and in any case I wanted to try the technique – so, clinker it was to be!

 

Planking of course had to commence at the garboard strake, since the planks above overlap onto those below. I overlaid my planks by about a third, which seemed about right, sanding down the top edge of each plank so that it formed a good joint with the one above. A thin bead of glue along the top of the strake below, plus a small amount along the reverse of each plank, ensured a good bond. I learnt early on not to use too much glue, as it tended to seep out onto the planking, which of course was not desirable! Provided the planks were sufficiently tapered at bow and stern, I don’t think I encountered many problems – or perhaps I have conveniently forgotten about them!  A few small stealers were needed at the stern, but apart from that the planking went surprisingly well. 

 

For both planking layers I opted to use scale length planks, staggering them as in full size practice. This was not only more historically correct, but I found that the shorter lengths made for easier positioning. I believe I planked about three strakes, on alternate sides, until the planking was done, and it was actually quite exciting to see it progress. At the time I was a member on the old Dry Dock Models site, and remember that posting a few pictures of my build encouraged at least one other member there to try clinker planking for himself. His results were pretty impressive too, so far as I remember.

 

Perhaps I should say a little about painting the waterline. Marking this was quite literally achieved by cutting a hull-shaped hole in a piece of hardboard, gradually enlarging it until I was satisfied the model was at the height I required, and then drawing a line with a pencil around the hull. Rather heath-robinson, but it seemed to work! The painting was a little tricky, especially at bow and stern, where the lie of the planks tended to interfere with a good line, but I think I managed it reasonably well. I opted to use an ivory shade rather than white, since it is a largish area and I felt that the white would be too harsh. It also has a somewhat old look to it. The planks from the waterline to the wale were left natural, although they were treated with beeswax.

 

The hull pictures are reproduced below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Next, the bulwarks, stern and deck.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Stockholm tar

[Stockholm tar]

Dirk,

 

Thanks again, although your magnificent Sherbourne puts mine in the shade.

[Blue Ensign]

I'm with Dirk, your clinker planking looks splendid, and I love the colour combinations you have achieved.

 

Regards,

 

B.E.

[Stockholm tar]

B.E.

 

As always, your comments are much appreciated.

 

Pleased you like the colour scheme – I thought it an improvement on the rather drab one on the box lid! I'll probaby say a little more about it later in the log.

[realworkingsailor]

Beautiful job on your cutter. Glad you decided to show her off again. That clinker planking looks amazing, more so since not many people attempt it.

 

Andy

[Stockholm tar]

Andy,

 

I appreciate your comment. You're right, not many attempt clinker planking but I think they should, on an appropriate model of course. It might look difficult, but it's really no harder than carvel planking.

[Gregor]

Looking at your Sherbourne gives me quite boost of motivation – so many beautiful details to consider (the colours, the stern davits…).

Thanks, Kester, for sharing your experience!

[Stockholm tar]

Hello Gregor,

 

Only too happy to – and its nice to be a motivator! I'll be mentioning the colour scheme and those stern davits in another post. However, even though my model might be inspirational, I'm sure you'll be wanting to give your own Sherbourne the personal touch. 

 

You're doing a great job on her, I see.

Edited July 29, 2013 by Stockholm tar

[Stockholm tar]

Before I move on, I omitted to mention a couple of items in the previous post. First, I wasn’t particularly happy with the stand provided and thought of various other types, including my own wooden one, a version made from perspex (which can often be very effective), or perhaps employ couple of pedestals (either brass or wood). I deliberated on this for some time before I was more-or-less forced, by progress on the model, to make a decision. In the end, I’m afraid, took the easy way out and decided to go with the stand supplied – although it was somewhat modified!

 

As can be seen, I cut down the height of the supports to around the bilge area, since this was where maximum support was needed, with rather more being taken from the front supports than the rear. This gave it a much better appearance, removed the somewhat intrusive extensions up the sides of the model, and didn’t affect the stability.  A wooden crossbar was then fixed between the supports, angled on the top face to match the that of the keel, and with two small holes drilled through it in appropriate positions. Corresponding holes were drilled in the keel and I found two suitable screws. Then with four thin strips of adhesive padding material added to the arms to protect the model, and following a light varnishing, the stand was screwed to the hull. I decided to leave the colour as it was, being less intrusive – to my mind, the stand should be as ’invisible’ as possible so as not to detract from the model itself. I added the lettering, ’HM cutter ’Sherbourne’ – 1763’ at a later date.

 

The rudder was planked with three planks on each side, with paper strips around it at suitable points to simulate iron bands. The planks I chose were a little marked, which gave the rudder a old ’worn’ look. I fitted an eyebolt on its after side. Thin strips of black paper simulated the pintle and gudgeon straps. With that well-known concept known as hindsight, I now think the rudder would perhaps have looked better tapered, but there it is.

 

The last photo also shows the metal lettering of the name, the individual letters being glued on separately. Since I had painted the stern yellow ochre, I thought black lettering would look rather effective. However, to actually position the lettering itself took a little thinking about to get the spacing right. Rather than begin on the left side which would perhaps be usual, but which might very likely end up with too much space to the right, I decided to start with the central letters over the rudder, and work out to each side. Working by eye this method kept things equal, and resulted in the same amount of space on each side of the name. Whilst on the subject, I have not managed to find out how the actual name came about. There is a town named Sherbourne, in the English county of Dorset I used to live in, but I rather suspect the cutter is perhaps named after an Admiralty or Dockyard official. It would be interesting to know.

 

So, now to the deck. With the gunport strips fitted, the instructions then said something like, ’with a pair of pliers, twist off the heads of the frames above deck level’. What?! I must have read that a few times, to fully understand that’s what they really meant – and I felt that there was no way I was going to do actually that, without causing some serious damage! It appeared to me that it would also leave an unsightly break, which I would then have to spend time tidying up with sandpaper, even a file. Instead, I came up with another solution. Before fitting the gunport strips, I decided to saw about half-way through the frame tops at deck level from the side, with a fine toothed model saw, and to use only the minimum amount of glue in fixing the strips. I reckoned I would then only need to use minimum force to remove the frame tops. It worked well, they came away with very little effort – and I expended very little effort in tidying up the remains. I seem to remember that I planked the bulwarks both inside and out, using scale length planks, as I progressed, in order to strengthen the gunport strips. These were quite weak at this point with little support, merely being glued to the upper edge of the wale. I actually used the thin strips of, I think maple, to plank the inner bulwarks (although I think they were supposed to be used for the deck) since they fitted round the bow more easily, and were painted red.

 

I decided to more or less follow the colour scheme of the Alert on the cover of the AOTS book, for the outer bulwark planking. I opted to use yellow ochre for the planking, with red in the gun and sweep ports, black for both wales, with a line of blue between the upper wale and the capping rail.

 

The deck was laid in three-step-butt fashion, working from aft forward and from the centre out, the outer planks being joggled into the margin plank. One side, and one end, of each scale plank were ’caulked’ with black rigging cord. The same cord was also used to caulk around the hatches.

 

 

Next time: the various fittings.

[Stockholm tar]

Dirk,

 

Thanks again.

 

Brian,

 

Pleased you like her.

[Stockholm tar]

Before I move on to the fittings I should first say a word about the stern, as I found this was one of the most difficult areas to work on. The horizontal planking of the stern piece, both inside and out, was straightforward enough, but I seem to remember that the sloping counter below it presented a few problems.

 

This was again planked horizontally, and I glued a raised plank around the edge to make something of a feature. This looked quite good, but I remember I had to make two small triangular-shaped pieces of plank to fill in two odd-shaped gaps, on either side at the top of the counter. I can’t now recall exactly why this was necessary, but anyway they were made and duly fitted in place. Although rather dark in the photograph, the one on the starboard side can be made out. As with the upper part of the hull, the counter was left natural.

 

 

 

I wanted to fit a rather more substantial transom rail than that shown on the box lid. This had to bend in two directions, the first following the shape of upper edge, the other the curve fore-and-aft. Because of this ’double bend’, I opted to use a piece of the thin maple planking, and it fitted quite well. The only problem when glued in place was the juncture of the transom rail with the bulwarks, which produced something of an odd angle with the bulwark. I eventually decided that the simplest solution to hide what would have been an unsightly join, was to fit a pair of davits over the stern, made from some spare pieces of wood and which I had seen in some pictures of cutters. Four sheave holes were drilled in the outer end for the falls, but I didn’t rig them although cavels were provided inside bulwarks, just below the swivel guns, to belay them. I should mention at this point that the main rail was put on in three pieces of about the same length, on each side. I found that when dry fitting it, the length made it rather unwieldy, and thought that when gluing, to much would be left to chance! My only regret is that I didn't scarf the joint. However, you can't see the join, as one part of a comedy double-act used to say when referring to his oppo – although you can if you look closely!

 

 

The lower (double) sheet block, for the main sheet, was fixed to a timber fitted between the inner standards supporting the transom, two cleats being fixed to them for belaying purposes. Moving forward, I decided there would have to be some sort of storage for the balls for the swivel guns, and settled on a couple of lockers, one each side of the tiller, the starboard one having its lid open. Since the lockers were oblong and of a reasonable size I divided them in half, the outer compartment housing the ammunition. The other side of the open locker contains the coiled lead line, with the lead on the top. You can just see this in the third photograph. (In my minds eye, the larboard locker also contains the swivel ammunition in the outer compartment, and the log line in the inner.)

 

Whilst on the subject of the swivels, I decided to reduce their number to two each side at the stern, similar to those at the bow – rather than fitting the three as envisaged in the kit. This was both because I thought three looked rather too many, and I could also imagine the crews getting in each other’s way – especially when trying to get the ammo from my lockers! I discarded the kit swivel supports, in favour of my own make – which are actually made from two eyebolts bent at the top, and glued back to back. The handles are small nails cut off and glued to the underside of the gun.

 

Like many building this kit I also thought a new tiller was needed, since I too wasn’t happy with the one provided. Made to a scale length of ten feet, as given for the Alert, I laminated it from several layers to get the correct shape, using nails fixed to a board. When dry, it was rounded with sandpaper, and a tenon was formed in the ’outboard’ end, which then fitted into a squared hole in the rudder head. This was a much better, and more accurate, arrangement than the fitting on the kit tiller – which rather strangely, I thought, completely encircled the rudder head. I then glued thin paper strips around the tiller at the rudder end, and on the rudder head itself, to represent strenthening bands. Some tan rigging thread was glued around the business end, to enable the helmsman to ’get a grip’, as it were. (I had originally thought of fashioning a turk’s head knot on the end, for decoration, however I’m afraid both the scale and the tediousness of forming it, defeated me.) To stop the tiller from swinging, I clove-hitched the middle of a line to the tiller, the ends then being belayed to one of the posts on each bulwark, and finished off with rope coils. I glued some ’treads’, for the helmsman’s feet, to the deck in a fan shape that followed the arc of the tiller.

 

Moving forward, we come to the small structure of the cabin companion. This is not provided in the kit, the space being merely occupied by the aftermost of the small hatches. I found this rather wanting, and thought the young CO deserved a more impressive entrance to his cabin! The companion was made from four pieces of ply from the kit frame surrounds, and given a sloping roof, which has a raised ’hinge’ across it. The after side has two doors each of which, although they don’t open, is provided with a knob!

 

 

Next time: more fitting details.

Edited August 8, 2013 by Stockholm tar

[fnkershner]

Kester - I just found this build. I am sorry I didn't find it sooner. I remember when you first posted it and we met. I have always admired your careful skill. It is great to see the progress! Enjoy your summer. We can wait for your return.

 

PS Per just spent the weekend with me and was giving me a bit of a Swedish geography lesson. I am going to have to look up your cabin.

[Stockholm tar]

Hi Floyd,

 

Thanks for the kind words. As we both know she's been going (slowly) for a few years now, and I posted a few pics of her on the old DDM site – where I seem to remember posting about your battle station hammocks. However, this is the first time I've attempted to write a proper log, although it is in retrospect, and should keep me going for a while. Actually, now I'm doing it, I'm remembering more than I thought – and recalling some things I wish I hadn't!

 

We've another couple of months at the cottage, before returning to Stockholm. It's been a good break, at least for my wife. I haven't faired so well, as I've had a painful bout of shingles, which I am just getting over, and which has prevented me from doing many jobs that need doing! I'm just starting to catch up.

 

The cottage, by the way, is north-east of Stockholm just off the main route to Kapellshar, the ferry port to Mariehamn in the Åland Islands. The nearest small harbour to us is called Spillersboda, which we are just inland from. I'm sure Dr Per can fill you in on the details! I'll try and find a picture.

 

I trust you had a good summer too, with plenty of sailing – and model building of course!