Jump to content

Mary Rose


Recommended Posts

Has anyone here built or knows someone who has built JoTiKa's Mary Rose. I have the kit 'ageing' in the living room.

I gave up on trying to build DeAgostini's Vasa-the parts didn't fit and queries to DeAgostini are unanswered. The short answer is the kit parts just don't fit together well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahoy  I built my Jotika Mary Rose kit only using just the keel,bulkheads and a few other parts. So about 90% of the rest was scratch built. You can use the Anatomy of the Ship book Mary Rose to help you along with the books by the Mary Rocse Trust. It took my 3 years for my build, I added the inside details from the main gun deck up with open decks so you can look down into the ship thru the open spaces in the decks. You can see more photos on this web site www.woodenshipclass.blogspot.com  . Keith Glueck from Troutdale,Oregon  Feel free to message me for more info or photos.

DSCN3537 (1).JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty! This is the type pictures I need to see the why and how of this kit. I'll be laying the keel this week. I'm old(er) at 71 so I don't work so fast any more. Any tips or tools you find especially useful? I have the Great Courses history of Medieval England playing as I work as backround.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Thanx. I parent a severely/profoundly(physically/mentally handicapped) adult son who 'helps' me. This makes some things tricky sometimes. He is easier to handle than CatMan my adult cat who loves to park near my build. Won't stop me.

Will exercise care in planking. I'm a firm believer in dry fit. I've seen both pictures and video on planking but none on mistakes and how to correct them.

I'm new to camera work of any kind-or cell phones for that matter but I will try to post my steps.

Edited by davidrasch
additional info
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David, the JoTika model (like most other commercial kits) has a forecastle that is probably incorrect, because of the lack of available archaeological evidence (so far they haven't found the forecastle), and based more upon galleons than carracks (which is what the Mary Rose was).

 

At the stage you're at on the model, if you want to, you could think about doing the forecastle differently. But it's your model, your decision. Whatever you do, the important thing is to have fun with it.

 

Steven

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plenty of good information. As I set up I'm reading David Child's 'Mary Rose'. I watch/have watched all I can fond of You Tube. The archeology if it reveals the forecastle I'll watch. Should JoTiKa change the kit, I'll do another one. Its the idea of the ship which has meaning for me at this time.

I'm learning how to photograph so I'll post when there is something to post-warts and all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not even a novice when it comes to pictures but I will try. As of this writing I have the wood laid out for framing. The kit has been in the house a couple three or four weeks so I think its safe to release the parts from the sheets and try some dry fit. I am as far as following sheet #8 sub A in marking the parts. I will do this to all parts on both sides as I a geezer and at times forgetful. Once they are all marked I will release the parts and dry fit the keel, plank termination patterns and walnut keel parts to dry fit and glue. I plan to use as much wood glue as possible and cyanoacrylic only where necessary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David,

 

If you have a tablet or cell phone with camera, you can take and post pictures that are “good enough” for a build log; see my Benjamin Noble, scratch built models 1900 and later for an examples taken by a complete point and shoot photo novice.

 

Once you have taken the pictures, go to the “Add Files”  at the bottom of your post, select the pictures you want, and follow the prompts.

 

Our forum includes members that run the gamut from Professional model builders to novices building their first kit model.  We all learn from each other.  By posting your progress and frustrations you will gain the encouragement from our community to keep you going.

 

There are active ship model building clubs on the East and West Coasts and in Chicago that provide this advice and encouragement.  Here, in a state with long driving distances and the possibility of  nasty weather 5 months of the year, we don’t have that opportunity for face to face discussion and encouragement.  Fortunately we have MSW.

 

Roger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

    Just purchased a copy of  Douglas McElvogue's Tudor Warship Mary Rose. I'm thinking about designing a scratchbuilt model of the ship, but information on the details of the upper masts is necessarily incomplete owing to the disintegration of these portions of the mastings in the real ship. There are useful drawings of the mast platform structures, along with partially speculative diagrams of the masts themselves, but there are no details about how the main, foremast, mizzen, and the respective top- or topgallant masts were joined, stepped, and capped. Been googling all morning, but cannot find even generic diagrams of these assemblies for carrack masts. Does anyone out there have a source of information on this? Thank you in advance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, EHood said:

Been googling all morning, but cannot find even generic diagrams of these assemblies for carrack masts. Does anyone out there have a source of information on this?

 

 

I've collected all the contemporary pictures I can find of "great carracks" (my name for them - the really big carracks, of which Mary Rose is a good example) and put them on a Pinterest page here: https://www.pinterest.com.au/lowe1847/great-carracksnaos/

 

I hope that helps. This is an area where there really isn't all that much information available - we are really just reduced to contemporary pictures. I'm restoring a model of the Great Harry, the Mary Rose's big sister, and I've been working from Wolfram Zu Mondfeld's book "Historic Ship Models" and R.C. Anderson's "The Rigging of Ships in the Days of the Spritsail Topmast 1600-1720". Neither is perfect - Mondfeld has only a little information, and with Anderson I have to extrapolate backwards up to 100 years and hope for the best.

 

Some good news - they have found a fighting top and a parrel truck from the Mary Rose. Pics are available on a google image search. 

 

Steven

Edited by Louie da fly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many thanks! The book I mentioned is from the Anatomy of the Ship series. The edition I have includes photos of the restored top and parrel truck. A line drawing (plan view) of the top shows a rectangular opening for the step of the topmast, but that's about the only clue provided; none of the drawings show, for example, the height of the overlap between the main mast and main topmast, or any clues regarding the dimensions or location of the step cap. I certainly appreciate mtaylor's advice and Louie's comments and links. Onward and upward. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. Unfortunately, most of it is (informed) guesswork. The archaeological information just doesn't exist - masts and spars are the first things to go. A few notable exceptions - the Black Sea wrecks which have been preserved by an anoxic environment, and some in (I think) the Great Lakes from the War of 1812, similarly preserved. 

 

Which means we have to fall back onto contemporary pictures (and use our judgment - allowing for artistic licence. But it also means nobody can tell you you're wrong (unless they have a time machine, of course!)

 

Steven

Link to comment
Share on other sites

   Louie,  I've checked out your link to images of carracks (and also have poured through artwork of ships in the 1520 - 1620 range) - and a very common (by a large majority) depict a relatively tall first part of the mainmast having a relatively large main sail ... then a much shorter second section with a MUCH smaller topsail, and either a short third pole to fly a pennant from (sometimes only on the main mast) or a diminutive top gallant on the pennant pole (so small compared to the main sail that it is quite puny).  All these artists were seeing much the same thing, and trying to depict it in 2-D.  Now there are varying degrees of 'artistic license' as well as scale issues, but the 'preponderance of the evidence' is that ships in that era DID look much like that.  The small hight of the masting above the large main sail may well be related to the evolution of rigging methods to enable the eventual increase of mast height and sail size by 1650.

 

  In deciding how I'm to mast my version of the (dated) 1:100 Billing Wasa model (as sold circa 1970 - so I have to make substantial modifications to based on current knowledge).  Their elevation drawing has masting that appears entirely too tall relative to the hull.  I took a picture to put on my build log - and due to the camera angle, the image 'foreshortens' the masting quite a bit ... but seeing that makes it appear much like the aforementioned contemporary artwork.  Now the picture I took is perhaps a little too foreshortened, but the 'lightbulb' went on that I could 'scale back' on the masting above the mainsail, as the 1628 Wasa can be considered a 'transitional' ship ... the order came after the keel was laid and construction started to lengthen the ship by about 30 feet (and add a lot more guns) - so the builders had to do what they could to comply - and we know the outcome.

 

  As has been said, the masting and spars are 'the first things to go' on a wreck - and that may be one reason (apart from housing concerns) that the restored original in Sweden only has the first mast sections.  One could also just model that to be 'safe', but without a time machine (or time portal that one could look through without having to go there) who can say just how the upper masting was configured?    Johnny

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Johnny, I agree about the upper masts on carracks. It took quite a while before the topmast reached a respectable size, and by that time carracks were being superseded by galleons to a large degree.

 

As you are aware, there are a large number of contemporary pictures of ships from the same time period as the Wasa which would help as a guide. I would also recommend Anderson's book for the Wasa's period. It's VERY thorough and VERY detailed, and covers just about every source of information available and every detail of masting and rigging, and even goes into the differences between the ships of different nations.

 

Steven

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  Louie,  I've just seen the Papegjan (1627) build, and all my questions are answered ... she is a 'smaller Wasa', and the masting/rigging can be used - with  the addition of diminutive top gallant yards.  What a build, with setp-by-step pictures of how to rig !     Johnny

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...