Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Okay I pose the question to the forum: Has anyone built a plank on frame model with as designed scantlings but in the Harold Hahn method? The downside is the extra wood required. The upside is that the hull while under construction, remains stable and protected. This alone is a big plus since I might get to work on it constantly. If there is a build log that to which one could direct me that would be great.

Edited by Essayons

Current Builds:

1/200 Arizona (Trumpeter) using Eduard  PE with extras  FINISHED!!!

1/48 USS Oneida 1809 DLumberyard "kit"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's been several builds using the Hahn method.  As for the scantlings... I don't think so.  For the most part, those of us who did a  Hahn build used his plans with minor mods as needed. 

 

I really don't see a problem doing one using the scantlings and the Hahn method.    His method was introduced to help make things "easier" for model builders, not to dictate style.

Mark
"The shipwright is slow, but the wood is patient." - me

Current Build:                                                                                             
Past Builds:
 La Belle Poule 1765 - French Frigate from ANCRE plans - ON HOLD           Triton Cross-Section   

 NRG Hallf Hull Planking Kit                                                                            HMS Sphinx 1775 - Vanguard Models - 1:64               

 

Non-Ship Model:                                                                                         On hold, maybe forever:           

CH-53 Sikorsky - 1:48 - Revell - Completed                                                   Licorne - 1755 from Hahn Plans (Scratch) Version 2.0 (Abandoned)         

         

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, mtaylor said:

 

I really don't see a problem doing one using the scantlings and the Hahn method.    His method was introduced to help make things "easier" for model builders, not to dictate style.

mtaylor, I fully agree. The style keeps the model very sturdy, much more than the traditional "shipyard" configuration. It seems to me that making a framing jig would be the largest hurdle. 

Current Builds:

1/200 Arizona (Trumpeter) using Eduard  PE with extras  FINISHED!!!

1/48 USS Oneida 1809 DLumberyard "kit"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I built Kate Cory using the method.  The scantlings are a minor detail. 

 

Davis used all bends and room= space because that was how large wooden hulls from around 1900 were built and that was where he came from.   It had nothing to do with how wooden hulls were framed before

iron and steel took over and the old ways were lost.  The last 50 years has been a long and difficult rediscovery of the older methods - at least as it applies to ship modeling.

Hahn stood on Davis' shoulders, but he was focused on a narrow slice of time in his subjects to model.  For the ships in his era of interest =If the station intervals are combined with the then current published scantlings - there is very little space between the floors and F1 timbers.  If a hull is framed as built, it would be a solid wall of timber with 1"-2" air gaps between them.  A display of this sort of framing would not be visually interesting and to my eye sort of ugly and pointless.  When compared to early Navy Board style framing the esthetic differences are stark.  Hahn solved this by using Davis style framing - all bends and room= space.  It is just wrong for the period and the over large spaces look like poor dental hygiene.  But that is just my opinion and it counts for nothing.

My point is that the nature of the frame timbers and the spaces is independent of Hahn's upside down method.  The framing came be anything.  I will point out that singleton frames, which rely solely on end grain to end grain bonds are a nightmare as opposed to a bend which is really strong.

 

Now with the Hahn method you are going to waste a lot of expensive wood.  You willing to spot that.  If you PVA bond deadwood at the keel between every frame, the hull will be stronger.  If you intend to plank over everything from the main wale on up, you can PVA bond wood where the space would be and it will be really strong.  If you use a temporary and easily reversible adhesive, wood can be used to fill the spaces.  This makes the hull a solid and it self protects against aggressive  shaping and faring - until the space fillers are removed.

 

Take a look at my Renommee build for an alternative way of frame assembly.  It is about as efficient in wood as it gets. Needs no baseboard or any other sort of support.  Is about 10 times faster to loft if you must do that.  I did not have open framing on Renommee because my purpose with it was to show an alternative to the awful looking POB with all all filling between the molds.  You have to use your imagination to see how spaces would be included.  If and when I post my Centurion log, open framing will be shown as well as a more complete explanation  of the lofting method used.

NRG member 45 years

 

Current:  

HMS Centurion 1732 - 60-gun 4th rate - Navall Timber framing

HMS Beagle 1831 refiit  10-gun brig with a small mizzen - Navall (ish) Timber framing

The U.S. Ex. Ex. 1838-1842
Flying Fish 1838  pilot schooner -  framed - ready for stern timbers
Porpose II  1836  brigantine/brig - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers
Vincennes  1825  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers assembled, need shaping
Peacock  1828  Sloop-of -War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Sea Gull  1838  pilot schooner -  timbers ready for assembly
Relief  1835  ship - timbers ready for assembly

Other

Portsmouth  1843  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Le Commerce de Marseilles  1788   118 cannons - framed

La Renommee 1744 Frigate - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It might be the big hurdle.   What Hahn did was extend the frame tops in the straight line such that the keep and jig base were equally spaced at both ends.   Use the keel bottom as your reference and go from there.  His jig was pencil and paper.... once he had that, he just did all his framing drawings.   From there, the he could drawing the jig itself with the notches for the frame tops.   

 

Like many other things, this is probably easier said than done as I've not seen anything on how he did his drawings, only on using his jig.

Mark
"The shipwright is slow, but the wood is patient." - me

Current Build:                                                                                             
Past Builds:
 La Belle Poule 1765 - French Frigate from ANCRE plans - ON HOLD           Triton Cross-Section   

 NRG Hallf Hull Planking Kit                                                                            HMS Sphinx 1775 - Vanguard Models - 1:64               

 

Non-Ship Model:                                                                                         On hold, maybe forever:           

CH-53 Sikorsky - 1:48 - Revell - Completed                                                   Licorne - 1755 from Hahn Plans (Scratch) Version 2.0 (Abandoned)         

         

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many years ago, I built a POF Model of the New York Pilot Boat Anna Maria using the Hahn Method.  I used Howard Chapelle’s drawings purchased from the Smithsonian, and lofted the frames.  It produced a model that I am pleased with.

 

It can be argued that Hahn himself built a model like you are contemplating.  One of his last models, the Ship of Line Alfred, featured the more complex bent frame, filler frame type construction.

 

While you could use the Hahn method to build a model that from outward appearance features correct scantlings  is not suited for building the highly detailed POF models that replicate exact Admiralty construction practice as these models require details such as chocks within the frame structure.

 

Keep in mind that when you wander from British or French ships builtin Royal Dockyards, ships were often not built with Hahn Style framing.  Many vessels were built with widely spaced heavy frames to define hull shape with lighter frames or frame segments added in between.  These lighter frames and segments  were fastened to planking but not always to the keel.

 

Roger

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When we contemplated the swan class build I asked designer David Antscherl to loft the jig for the Hahn style method. But even for a sixth rate the jig was very complex for properly lofted frames and I decided to build upright. Having built several Hahn style models I actually found building upright just as easy and more fun (I suppose because it followed actual building practice and you don't have to wait for the jig to be chopped away before you truly appreciate the lines of the model). Another alternative that is popular among French builders is to build upright using a jig below the toptimber line. Not too difficult to make if you have the framing plan.

Greg

website
Admiralty Models

moderator Echo Cross-section build
Admiralty Models Cross-section Build

Finished build
Pegasus, 1776, cross-section

Current build
Speedwell, 1752

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Essayons said:

mtaylor, I fully agree. The style keeps the model very sturdy, much more than the traditional "shipyard" configuration. It seems to me that making a framing jig would be the largest hurdle. 

Keep in mind what Roger says as Hahn did go for artistic on the framing not actual practice.  A

 

s for the base board, you'd need a set of lines drawings and from that, the bulwarks and all the framing could be drawn to set up your build board.

 

Jaager is also right about wood waste unless you drew the frames in segments, cut them out and assembled them.  Hahn mentioned that he was given a large amount of wood and if he hadn't got the wood he would have build the frames up using segments.

Mark
"The shipwright is slow, but the wood is patient." - me

Current Build:                                                                                             
Past Builds:
 La Belle Poule 1765 - French Frigate from ANCRE plans - ON HOLD           Triton Cross-Section   

 NRG Hallf Hull Planking Kit                                                                            HMS Sphinx 1775 - Vanguard Models - 1:64               

 

Non-Ship Model:                                                                                         On hold, maybe forever:           

CH-53 Sikorsky - 1:48 - Revell - Completed                                                   Licorne - 1755 from Hahn Plans (Scratch) Version 2.0 (Abandoned)         

         

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/27/2021 at 6:12 PM, mtaylor said:

It might be the big hurdle.   What Hahn did was extend the frame tops in the straight line such that the keep and jig base were equally spaced at both ends.   Use the keel bottom as your reference and go from there.  His jig was pencil and paper.... once he had that, he just did all his framing drawings.   From there, the he could drawing the jig itself with the notches for the frame tops.   

 

Like many other things, this is probably easier said than done as I've not seen anything on how he did his drawings, only on using his jig.

Yeah Mark that's what I was contemplating; extending the frame tops but still building the frames in the conventional manner to reduce wood waste..Also looking at the way DVM 27 describes some French builders..  The main reason as I already mentioned is that the Hahn frame can be put down in the box to protect it if work gets interrupted and that it stays relatively stable... just pondering my options!

Edited by Essayons

Current Builds:

1/200 Arizona (Trumpeter) using Eduard  PE with extras  FINISHED!!!

1/48 USS Oneida 1809 DLumberyard "kit"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, and without ever building a hull Hahn-style, but definitely studying it carefully and at length, my own conclusion is that building a hull as in full-size practice, with shortcuts permitted by scale, is less work by far. For those who haven't tried it, I can attest that the use of temporary battens to hold the frames in place creates a very stable hull framing structure in short order. Only a relatively small number of frames need be set up to establish the run of the battens and it is then easy to place the rest of the frames within the "basket" created by the battens, which can be fastened to the frames by lashing them with twisted wire, If memory serves, both Underhill and Davis describe this method in detail in their books. Once the battens are attached to a minimum of the frames, the battens spring a fair curve to the hull shape and the structure becomes very rigid. Once all the frames are in, the battens are removed as the planking progresses and the hull is free of external attachments that interfere with the planking process, making the planking task much easier. Or at least that's how it seems to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago I built my French 74 gun ship upside down, mounted in H. Hahn's building base, following his method (sort of). I remember, I had to add (draw) the remaining frames, since J. Boudriot only has shown in his books the so called, station frames. The hull turned out OK, not perfect though, but - for the first scratch built, Admiralty type model, - acceptable.

Right now I am starting to install the running rigging on it.

Thomas

001.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I have been giving thought to doing another Licorne, but this time for me.  I won't send a model off to be deconstructed again.  If were to do it, I would build up my frames from segments and not use Hahn's method of making framing which is very wasteful. But I would use his upside down method.

Mark
"The shipwright is slow, but the wood is patient." - me

Current Build:                                                                                             
Past Builds:
 La Belle Poule 1765 - French Frigate from ANCRE plans - ON HOLD           Triton Cross-Section   

 NRG Hallf Hull Planking Kit                                                                            HMS Sphinx 1775 - Vanguard Models - 1:64               

 

Non-Ship Model:                                                                                         On hold, maybe forever:           

CH-53 Sikorsky - 1:48 - Revell - Completed                                                   Licorne - 1755 from Hahn Plans (Scratch) Version 2.0 (Abandoned)         

         

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Dziadeczek said:

I built my French 74 gun ship upside down,

Thomas,

 

First, now ANCRE is providing plans with an exposition of the frames at 1:48 and 1:72 of the Sane 74.

At first when I looked at your photo, I was guessing that  your model was a click larger than 1:48 - since your hull is  larger than my framed hull of Commerce de Marseille -  then I remembered that I build at 1:60  and that yours is about twice the 3D size - so 1:48?  Fully masted and in a case - it will be interesting in how much habitat volume it occupies.

 

We seem to have a definition confusion here.   There is no definitive meaning for what is meant by Admiralty.

I used to think it referred  to POF - open frame - 17th century style framing.  But now I use Navy Board framing to define that style.

Then - from use here on the forum - I thought it meant a POF, open frame with no masts or short stubs for them.

With you calling your hull Admiralty,  well - your framing looks to be all bends with ~20% space,  which would match how these 74 were actually built.  But you intend to fully mast it? 

 

I cannot recall a definitive name for the current style of leaving the decks mostly open and most of the usually hidden guts present and most of the upper works outside and inside planking left off.  What was once a virtuoso exercise in fully following a monograph inside as well as outside  seems to have become a sort of standard.   Why that is, has me banging my head to get the water out of my ears.  I wonder if the additional complexity of adding more to a POF than what would be seen if it was a fully planked above the wale  and decked model of a vessel as it actually sailed might frighten off some who would otherwise build POF?

NRG member 45 years

 

Current:  

HMS Centurion 1732 - 60-gun 4th rate - Navall Timber framing

HMS Beagle 1831 refiit  10-gun brig with a small mizzen - Navall (ish) Timber framing

The U.S. Ex. Ex. 1838-1842
Flying Fish 1838  pilot schooner -  framed - ready for stern timbers
Porpose II  1836  brigantine/brig - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers
Vincennes  1825  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers assembled, need shaping
Peacock  1828  Sloop-of -War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Sea Gull  1838  pilot schooner -  timbers ready for assembly
Relief  1835  ship - timbers ready for assembly

Other

Portsmouth  1843  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Le Commerce de Marseilles  1788   118 cannons - framed

La Renommee 1744 Frigate - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jaager said:

I cannot recall a definitive name for the current style of leaving the decks mostly open and most of the usually hidden guts present and most of the upper works outside and inside planking left off.  What was once a virtuoso exercise in fully following a monograph inside as well as outside  seems to have become a sort of standard.   Why that is, has me banging my head to get the water out of my ears.  I wonder if the additional complexity of adding more to a POF than what would be seen if it was a fully planked above the wale  and decked model of a vessel as it actually sailed might frighten off some who would otherwise build POF?

I believe it's become a test of one's ability and craftsmanship.  And perhaps artistry.

Mark
"The shipwright is slow, but the wood is patient." - me

Current Build:                                                                                             
Past Builds:
 La Belle Poule 1765 - French Frigate from ANCRE plans - ON HOLD           Triton Cross-Section   

 NRG Hallf Hull Planking Kit                                                                            HMS Sphinx 1775 - Vanguard Models - 1:64               

 

Non-Ship Model:                                                                                         On hold, maybe forever:           

CH-53 Sikorsky - 1:48 - Revell - Completed                                                   Licorne - 1755 from Hahn Plans (Scratch) Version 2.0 (Abandoned)         

         

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2021 at 4:16 PM, mtaylor said:

I believe it's become a test of one's ability and craftsmanship.  And perhaps artistry.

And I fully concur with that being the purpose.  And, indeed, it mostly seems to be fulfilled by the builder.   But it takes so much longer.   It also leaves a lot of abandoned builds.   It takes so long to reach a stage where a sense of positive feedback can provide the fuel to push on.  It has metastasized to a point where it seems to have becomes almost the expected option.  I have perspective enough that I can plod on on my own path.  I wonder if someone whose skill level has exceeded the challenge and limitations of kits, would look at this current fad in POF, see the (unnecessary) complexity,  and decide " nope, I am not going there.". 

Edited by Jaager

NRG member 45 years

 

Current:  

HMS Centurion 1732 - 60-gun 4th rate - Navall Timber framing

HMS Beagle 1831 refiit  10-gun brig with a small mizzen - Navall (ish) Timber framing

The U.S. Ex. Ex. 1838-1842
Flying Fish 1838  pilot schooner -  framed - ready for stern timbers
Porpose II  1836  brigantine/brig - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers
Vincennes  1825  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers assembled, need shaping
Peacock  1828  Sloop-of -War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Sea Gull  1838  pilot schooner -  timbers ready for assembly
Relief  1835  ship - timbers ready for assembly

Other

Portsmouth  1843  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Le Commerce de Marseilles  1788   118 cannons - framed

La Renommee 1744 Frigate - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Jaager said:

I have perspective enough that I can plod on on my own path.  I wonder if someone whose skill level has exceeded the challenge and limitations of kits, would look at this current fad in POF, see the (unnecessary) complexity,  and decide " mope, I am not going there.

Im having a hard time following this conversation.   What current fad?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points.   Even the new kits seem to populate the lower decks with items that will never be seen.   

Mark
"The shipwright is slow, but the wood is patient." - me

Current Build:                                                                                             
Past Builds:
 La Belle Poule 1765 - French Frigate from ANCRE plans - ON HOLD           Triton Cross-Section   

 NRG Hallf Hull Planking Kit                                                                            HMS Sphinx 1775 - Vanguard Models - 1:64               

 

Non-Ship Model:                                                                                         On hold, maybe forever:           

CH-53 Sikorsky - 1:48 - Revell - Completed                                                   Licorne - 1755 from Hahn Plans (Scratch) Version 2.0 (Abandoned)         

         

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Justin P. said:

Im having a hard time following this conversation.   What current fad?  

Filling the lower decks with details.  

Mark
"The shipwright is slow, but the wood is patient." - me

Current Build:                                                                                             
Past Builds:
 La Belle Poule 1765 - French Frigate from ANCRE plans - ON HOLD           Triton Cross-Section   

 NRG Hallf Hull Planking Kit                                                                            HMS Sphinx 1775 - Vanguard Models - 1:64               

 

Non-Ship Model:                                                                                         On hold, maybe forever:           

CH-53 Sikorsky - 1:48 - Revell - Completed                                                   Licorne - 1755 from Hahn Plans (Scratch) Version 2.0 (Abandoned)         

         

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mtaylor said:

Filling the lower decks with details.  

I see.   Well I cant say that Ive been drawn to these sorts of design choices (seen or unseen).   On a POF model though, I had assumed that the lower decks should be framed out properly.   Or is this the level of unnecessary detail we are talking about?   I would think where a modeler may choose to plank above the waterline, half the upper deck and the majority of the details appropriate for the scale on the upper deck (I dont know what style this is) - that they would at least fully-frame the lower decks.   No?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right... the hull framing is a good thing.  Hahn left off much of the planking on one side and cut away the framing (not all, he left some as support) so one could see inside the hull.  He even added crewman.   Nothing wrong with that, IMO.   It's if full planking..... why bother? 

 

I'm not fan of leaving off deck planking but I can see leaving off some of the hull like Hahn did.

 

I see nothing wrong with your viewpoint.   We all work to our abilities and what we want to see in the model.  

Mark
"The shipwright is slow, but the wood is patient." - me

Current Build:                                                                                             
Past Builds:
 La Belle Poule 1765 - French Frigate from ANCRE plans - ON HOLD           Triton Cross-Section   

 NRG Hallf Hull Planking Kit                                                                            HMS Sphinx 1775 - Vanguard Models - 1:64               

 

Non-Ship Model:                                                                                         On hold, maybe forever:           

CH-53 Sikorsky - 1:48 - Revell - Completed                                                   Licorne - 1755 from Hahn Plans (Scratch) Version 2.0 (Abandoned)         

         

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess that what I am sort of  suggesting is that it may prove helpful if

:

Admiralty style had a definitive and commonly agreed upon meaning.

 

The sub section of POF where the hidden internal parts - hooks, riders, knees, temporary rooms, magazines etc. are modeled had a specific name.

NRG member 45 years

 

Current:  

HMS Centurion 1732 - 60-gun 4th rate - Navall Timber framing

HMS Beagle 1831 refiit  10-gun brig with a small mizzen - Navall (ish) Timber framing

The U.S. Ex. Ex. 1838-1842
Flying Fish 1838  pilot schooner -  framed - ready for stern timbers
Porpose II  1836  brigantine/brig - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers
Vincennes  1825  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers assembled, need shaping
Peacock  1828  Sloop-of -War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Sea Gull  1838  pilot schooner -  timbers ready for assembly
Relief  1835  ship - timbers ready for assembly

Other

Portsmouth  1843  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Le Commerce de Marseilles  1788   118 cannons - framed

La Renommee 1744 Frigate - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jaager said:

Admiralty style had a definitive and commonly agreed upon meaning.

Completely agree.  I find the constantly variable definitions a little confusing.   I’d like in the future if I could accurately describe a model I see or made as one or the other such style….  Yet find becoming knowledgeable in this area a little mysterious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Jaager said:

Thomas,

 

First, now ANCRE is providing plans with an exposition of the frames at 1:48 and 1:72 of the Sane 74.

At first when I looked at your photo, I was guessing that  your model was a click larger than 1:48 - since your hull is  larger than my framed hull of Commerce de Marseille -  then I remembered that I build at 1:60  and that yours is about twice the 3D size - so 1:48?  Fully masted and in a case - it will be interesting in how much habitat volume it occupies.

 

We seem to have a definition confusion here.   There is no definitive meaning for what is meant by Admiralty.

I used to think it referred  to POF - open frame - 17th century style framing.  But now I use Navy Board framing to define that style.

Then - from use here on the forum - I thought it meant a POF, open frame with no masts or short stubs for them.

With you calling your hull Admiralty,  well - your framing looks to be all bends with ~20% space,  which would match how these 74 were actually built.  But you intend to fully mast it? 

 

I cannot recall a definitive name for the current style of leaving the decks mostly open and most of the usually hidden guts present and most of the upper works outside and inside planking left off.  What was once a virtuoso exercise in fully following a monograph inside as well as outside  seems to have become a sort of standard.   Why that is, has me banging my head to get the water out of my ears.  I wonder if the additional complexity of adding more to a POF than what would be seen if it was a fully planked above the wale  and decked model of a vessel as it actually sailed might frighten off some who would otherwise build POF?

 

I know, I bought that brochure from Ancre. But, it was only AFTER I drew the remaining frames by myself, so, for me it was like a proverbial  "mustard after dinner".

You are right, my model is in 1:48 scale. I intend to build it fully masted and rigged, with sails, if my endurance will permit.

Whether it is built strictly in Admiralty style or not, is of less importance to me. I used this name remembering all those models with unplanked lower hulls and partially planked decks. OK, perhaps the better name is - a Navy Board ship model! It is some kind of hybrid, I think.

What I wanted to show here  is the way I built it - in the H. Hahn's method, upside down, mounted in a flat base board, with those extensions of frames (later on to be cut off). Yes, that way is a lot more wasteful of wood than shaping individual futtocks and faying them together and assembling the hull right-side up. But, at that time I was less experienced and fell that the Hahn's method was better suited for me. I also used American walnut for frames (which I wouldn't do today). Some fruitwood would be better...

Overall, my model represents largely my own artistic license and not necessarily some rigid convention, Admiralty or Navy Board, or such... The principal reason for my build was to learn all those intricacies of historic ship building practices - in this case French ones. Just reading Boudriot's books was very educational, but later on building a model after them, was an entirely different quality...     😄

 

Best regards,

 

Thomas

Edited by Dziadeczek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2021 at 9:57 PM, Dziadeczek said:

OK, perhaps the better name is - a Navy Board ship model

Thomas,

Navy Board is a particular style of framing,  It is not what you built.  It is the framing with spaces in line with the timbers and in alternating frames depending on altitude above the keel.   Almost no one builds using this style.  It was dissected and explained in early issues of Model Shipwright and by Robert Bruckshaw -there is a PDF of his out there somewhere. ( Later, there was of course NAVY BOARD SHIP MODELS by John Franklin. )  I explored using it the frame St.Philippe.  The method requires that the floor and F1  be much longer than the actual timbers would have been.  The round up is so much that a wide plank is needed - worse than Hahn.  The very significant waste is not acceptable to me.   The original models had their frames sawn out of large thin boards.  It must have been nice to have Pear and Boxwood stock that was that large.  My guess is that it came from luxury carriage makers.  

 

I did my first framing using Black Walnut also.  I also would not use it again.  The pores are just not right.  I  built it in the attic of a poorly AC house during a Kentucky Summer.  The fingers were continuously stained purple.   It is a beautiful wood to be sure, but it not suited to our needs.

 

Your hull looks spectacular.   Since the term  has no exact meaning, you might as well call it Admiralty style.  Are you going to use full planking above the wale?

 

Personally, I enjoy the curves of open framing below the wale.  I also think the framing above the wale is too ugly to show.   The French ships are not as ugly, because they did not narrow the top timber widths very much if at all.  The narrowing and jogging of RN ship top timbers have all the visual appeal of showing the 2x4 framing of a house.

Edited by Jaager

NRG member 45 years

 

Current:  

HMS Centurion 1732 - 60-gun 4th rate - Navall Timber framing

HMS Beagle 1831 refiit  10-gun brig with a small mizzen - Navall (ish) Timber framing

The U.S. Ex. Ex. 1838-1842
Flying Fish 1838  pilot schooner -  framed - ready for stern timbers
Porpose II  1836  brigantine/brig - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers
Vincennes  1825  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers assembled, need shaping
Peacock  1828  Sloop-of -War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Sea Gull  1838  pilot schooner -  timbers ready for assembly
Relief  1835  ship - timbers ready for assembly

Other

Portsmouth  1843  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Le Commerce de Marseilles  1788   118 cannons - framed

La Renommee 1744 Frigate - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jaager said:

I guess that what I am sort of  suggesting is that it may prove helpful if

:

Admiralty style had a definitive and commonly agreed upon meaning.

 

The sub section of POF where the hidden internal parts - hooks, riders, knees, temporary rooms, magazines etc. are modeled had a specific name.

Perhaps the term "Admiralty style" is the sort of uninformed lay misnomer that creeps into the lexicon, much like the silly term "tall ship." (Granted, the term, "Tall Ship" is now a registered trademark of Sail Training International.) If a model looks to the untrained eye like a contemporary Navy Board or "Admiralty" ship model, but isn't, it's "Admiralty style." 

 

Somebody with more knowledge of the English period models known as "Navy Board" or "Admiralty Board" ship models will be able to provide a more authoritative explanation, but the term "Navy (or Admiralty) Board ship models" generally refers to those models of British naval vessels built circa 1650 through 1750, primarily by the British Admiralty shipyards . John Franklin provides a detailed explanation of the "type" in his book Navy Board Ship Models  1650-1750. Here, we're talking about the "Faberge eggs" of ship models. 

 

I think "Navy Board" or "Admiralty" style models are simply plank on frame models which resemble the "unplanked below the waterline plank on frame" models of various framing and construction styles which mimic the dominant appearance of the true contemporary Navy Board models. In fact, as Franklin explains, the stylized framing of the true contemporary Navy Board models evolved over time with characteristic "early" and "late" period styles and there is actually a variety of "types" and 'styles" among the true Navy Board models.

 

The Hahn Method is simply a modern day construction method and framing style that mimics the unplanked contemporary Navy Board models, a "faux Navy Board" style, if you will. 

 

What for want of a better term I'd call "scale scantling construction," where each piece is a scale version of full-size construction (nearly always a matter of pure conjecture, BTW) is a style made popular by present day French modelers. "Scale scantling" construction has nothing in common with true Navy Board models other than some stylistic conventions, such as the omission of decking and planking, which in this instance is required to expose the extremely complex workmanship of this style of model.

 

At least, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. :D 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/27/2021 at 2:55 PM, Essayons said:

Harold Hahn method

I think some of us would like to see a clear definition and examples of this method.  I'm getting some hints from the comments, but examples (pictures and build logs) speak louder than words sometimes.

 

It's worth pointing out that web searching is telling me he was a great artist and creator of prints as well as a model maker.  I assume you're not talking about his direct art print creation methods?

Edited by Tim Holt

Tim

 

Current Build:  Swift Pilot Boat 1805 (AL)

On Deck: Triton Cross Section, Harvey (AL), Falcon US Coast Guard (AL), Flying Fish (Model Shipways)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tim Holt said:

I think some of us would like to see a clear definition and examples of this method. 

His presentation in the NRJ is reprinted in:

Ship Modeler's Shop Notes, Vol. I

  • $3500

NRG member 45 years

 

Current:  

HMS Centurion 1732 - 60-gun 4th rate - Navall Timber framing

HMS Beagle 1831 refiit  10-gun brig with a small mizzen - Navall (ish) Timber framing

The U.S. Ex. Ex. 1838-1842
Flying Fish 1838  pilot schooner -  framed - ready for stern timbers
Porpose II  1836  brigantine/brig - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers
Vincennes  1825  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers assembled, need shaping
Peacock  1828  Sloop-of -War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Sea Gull  1838  pilot schooner -  timbers ready for assembly
Relief  1835  ship - timbers ready for assembly

Other

Portsmouth  1843  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Le Commerce de Marseilles  1788   118 cannons - framed

La Renommee 1744 Frigate - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jaager said:

$3500

 

Yea, sorry no that's not a good answer :)

 

Some of you are talking about exposed frames and / or hiding / showing interiors, but google is also telling me it's about building it upside down.

Edited by Tim Holt

Tim

 

Current Build:  Swift Pilot Boat 1805 (AL)

On Deck: Triton Cross Section, Harvey (AL), Falcon US Coast Guard (AL), Flying Fish (Model Shipways)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not going to confirm this, but I am reasonably sure that a search of the scratch build forum using the proper key word will turn up several demonstrations in various logs.

 

The price for the shop notes is reasonable and helps support the guild and probably this site,

Edited by Jaager

NRG member 45 years

 

Current:  

HMS Centurion 1732 - 60-gun 4th rate - Navall Timber framing

HMS Beagle 1831 refiit  10-gun brig with a small mizzen - Navall (ish) Timber framing

The U.S. Ex. Ex. 1838-1842
Flying Fish 1838  pilot schooner -  framed - ready for stern timbers
Porpose II  1836  brigantine/brig - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers
Vincennes  1825  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers assembled, need shaping
Peacock  1828  Sloop-of -War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Sea Gull  1838  pilot schooner -  timbers ready for assembly
Relief  1835  ship - timbers ready for assembly

Other

Portsmouth  1843  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Le Commerce de Marseilles  1788   118 cannons - framed

La Renommee 1744 Frigate - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Jaager said:

I am reasonably sure

 

I'm sorry but saying "just search or spend money" is not an answer. I have been searching. I'm seeing various styles specifically credited to that person.

 

@Essayons what is it you mean by the method?

Tim

 

Current Build:  Swift Pilot Boat 1805 (AL)

On Deck: Triton Cross Section, Harvey (AL), Falcon US Coast Guard (AL), Flying Fish (Model Shipways)

 

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...