Cutty Sark by bcochran - Revell - 1/96 - PLASTIC

[LeoM]

You are doing a great job and thank you for the beautiful pictures. I also wish to thank you all for the inspirational comments.

[shipman]

'Who is who in the picture?'

 

Left=you; has that swarthy confidence most Americans like to think they have.

 

Center=Kevin; a very British character, like most of us looking a little weary of the world.

 

Right=Bruma; that vaguely exotic appearance of your average Mediterranean chappie.

 

Only joking, I just thought a little levity can be good medicine.

[bcochran]

4 hours ago, shipman said:

#235

 

That's a good photo of you, Kevin and Bruma when you visited the ship to compare notes, the black and white treatment gives it that period flavor 🤓

 

'bulleyes?

 

Deck height bogey... I'm sure you've all noticed the outside of the bulwarks have a good depiction of the wash port lids, the bottom edge would give a datum for a properly lowered deck. These panels are rarely featured in photos.

 

Anchor chain deck run... If I ever get my finger out (next winter/) my solution which would satisfy me at least, would re build the hatch in front of the winch and take the liberty of making it narrower!

I may even consider iron deck plates for the chain to travel on.

That whole anchor chain paradox continually 'bugs' me.

The anchor chain when being taken in or out rode on the hawser reel and the windlass (using Revell terms) which would raise it above the hatch.  Still any slack would drag on the hatch I would think. 

 

In all the pictures I have seen of Cutty Sark models, I think I could pick out any number of discrepancies.  The wood models from kits (which seem to me to have a special reverence) are the worst.

Edited May 13, 2022 by bcochran

[bcochran]

2 hours ago, shipman said:

'Who is who in the picture?'

 

Left=you; has that swarthy confidence most Americans like to think they have.

 

Center=Kevin; a very British character, like most of us looking a little weary of the world.

 

Right=Bruma; that vaguely exotic appearance of your average Mediterranean chappie.

 

Only joking, I just thought a little levity can be good medicine.

Levity is good medicine.

[Ian_Grant]

7 hours ago, bcochran said:

What do you think we should use for bulleyes?  I was thinking about using Revell's by drilling them out and replace the plastic rope with real.

You are referring to the bulleyes/lanyards on the forestay and bowsprit guys? I can't tell looking at my old CS whether the bulleyes had a groove around them. If not, it might be hard to tie lines to them. I'm not impressed by the big knots my teenage self used to tie these on. Sheeesh!

 

You can buy wood bulleyes, just so you know.

 

Keep up the great work!

[Kevin-the-lubber]

I read, in either Hackney or Campbell, that there were iron plates on the deck for the chain. Likewise, that the fore hatch was much smaller. I also read that when first built, there was only one deck cabin, the second was added a couple of years later, though Hackney didn’t mention which one.

[Bruma]

8 hours ago, shipman said:

'Who is who in the picture?'

 

Left=you; has that swarthy confidence most Americans like to think they have.

 

Center=Kevin; a very British character, like most of us looking a little weary of the world.

 

Right=Bruma; that vaguely exotic appearance of your average Mediterranean chappie.

 

Only joking, I just thought a little levity can be good medicine.

What a nice idea! Thank you! 

Here I am, on board, with my two mates.

 

Did you spot Mr. Bruma?

 

 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

And I'll happily be Mr man-in-the-middle. Clearly the boss (he gets to sit down), and you wouldn't want to meet him in a dark alley :-). Though in reality I'm probably more that chap lurking in the background.

 

It's a fantastic photo though, isnt it.

[shipman]

#246

'I also read that when first built, there was only one deck cabin, the second was added a couple of years later, though Hackney didn’t mention which one.'

 

Yes, the fore deck-house wasn't there originally.

 

Nice to know I was thinking along the right lines about the anchor chain/hatch arrangements. Though I have most if not all of the significant books, I don't recall mention these details specifically.

 

Delighted you all enjoyed the photo 'game'.

[bcochran]

4 hours ago, shipman said:

#246

'I also read that when first built, there was only one deck cabin, the second was added a couple of years later, though Hackney didn’t mention which one.'

 

Yes, the fore deck-house wasn't there originally.

 

Nice to know I was thinking along the right lines about the anchor chain/hatch arrangements. Though I have most if not all of the significant books, I don't recall mention these details specifically.

 

Delighted you all enjoyed the photo 'game'.

I remember there being disagreement on whether there were or were not two deck houses originally.  I'll have to look up my source. IIRC the plans called for one, but two were built in what I read. I'll get the source for us.

 

On Campbell's plans near the forecastle, he has "The original design was for 22 men as shown but with no after deck house.  The latter existed in 1871, if not when launched, and it is likely that the forecastle accommodation was only partly used with spare bunks."

 

The aft deck house was where the apprentices bunked along with the bosun, cook, sailmaker and carpenter.   If it wasn't there, then they would have to bunk with the ABs in the forecastle I would imagine.  The fore deck house had the galley and bunks for 12 seamen.

 

I added my picture, so you can see how much I resemble the chap on the ship.  That is Santa Barbara harbor behind me. 

Edited May 13, 2022 by bcochran

[Ian_Grant]

You asked in Kevin's log about how the stays are attached to the masts.  For the lower masts, they are usually double, looped around the mast head and seized together close to it. Also seized near the bottom, close to the rigging screws or whatever each side of the mast ahead. Those on topmasts are double, seized together too. For topgallants, they are single and a tight eye is formed and seized and forced over the masthead.

 

If the Revell instructions show a loop with a knot at its neck, they are correct. They're not meant to be tight to the mast, except in the case of topgallants/royals.

 

You seem to be a guy who wants to produce an accurate model. I recommend "Masting and Rigging the Clipper Ship and Ocean Carrier" by Harold Underhill. Excellent book, many many diagrams.

[bcochran]

1 hour ago, Ian_Grant said:

You asked in Kevin's log about how the stays are attached to the masts.  For the lower masts, they are usually double, looped around the mast head and seized together close to it. Also seized near the bottom, close to the rigging screws or whatever each side of the mast ahead. Those on topmasts are double, seized together too. For topgallants, they are single and a tight eye is formed and seized and forced over the masthead.

 

If the Revell instructions show a loop with a knot at its neck, they are correct. They're not meant to be tight to the mast, except in the case of topgallants/royals.

 

You seem to be a guy who wants to produce an accurate model. I recommend "Masting and Rigging the Clipper Ship and Ocean Carrier" by Harold Underhill. Excellent book, many many diagrams.

I have been reading Underhill's book in preparation to work on rigging.

[bcochran]

Shipman,

 

This is for you from Campbell's plans.

[shipman]

Thank you.

 

I'm not a big fan of Campbells' plans.

 

To me they seem dubious.

Employed by the London County Council, he was tasked to produce them when the ship was first displayed at the Festival of Britain (she was moored in the Thames at that time, with no public access).

 

Beat me to a pulp, but I feel his plans were part of the promotion of the ship at that event, as a tourist take away.

I know my opinion won't be popular, indeed I expect derision, but to me the Underhill plans are more reliable; he knew his ships and produced books and plans well before Campbell.

 

Give me any other maritime contribution Campbell made?

 

Thanks also for your profile photo,

;what a handsome well preserved chap you are. You could have been in the movies!

Edited May 13, 2022 by shipman
New paragraph

[Kevin-the-lubber]

5 hours ago, shipman said:

the Underhill plans are more reliable

Which book are these in, or site? Although I do find the campbell plans a tad sketchy (literally), in his defence he seems to have published a fair bit on clippers, leastways I have his book 'China Tea Clippers' which goes much wider than the Cutty Sark.

[LeoM]

Speaking about deckhouses. It seems that the aft deckhouse was originally 20 ft and later became 24 ft. Has anybody details when this change was made, if at all?

[shipman]

Are you sure that is the same Campbell?

That's a book I have, unfortunately not to hand.

 

The first edition of Longridge has the Underhill plans as seperate fold-outs, tipped in.

Larger scale plans (though the same) can still be purchased.

https://www.skipper.co.uk/catalogue/item/clipper-ship-cutty-sark-sail-and-rigging-plan

 

You may find a source for these your side of the pond.

 

Leo, hi.

You may well be correct, though it seems a lot of trouble adding 4 feet.

I'm not sure of the dimensions, but could that be a reference to one or other of the deck-houses?

At first glance they may look identical, but as sure as I am, sitting on my Penny Farthing, they arn't.

 

 

[bcochran]

3 hours ago, shipman said:

Are you sure that is the same Campbell?

That's a book I have, unfortunately not to hand.

 

The first edition of Longridge has the Underhill plans as seperate fold-outs, tipped in.

Larger scale plans (though the same) can still be purchased.

https://www.skipper.co.uk/catalogue/item/clipper-ship-cutty-sark-sail-and-rigging-plan

 

You may find a source for these your side of the pond.

 

Leo, hi.

You may well be correct, though it seems a lot of trouble adding 4 feet.

I'm not sure of the dimensions, but could that be a reference to one or other of the deck-houses?

At first glance they may look identical, but as sure as I am, sitting on my Penny Farthing, they arn't.

 

 

I read there was a change in size somewhere.  The problem is I have read many references, I don't know which one has it.

Edited May 14, 2022 by bcochran

[bcochran]

Does anyone understand Hackney's description of how to tie down the boats?

 

I have an extra boat and want to do this modification on my ship.  I understand the drilling of holes in the boat skids, but weaving the ropes makes no sense to me.  Airfix shows the booms parallel to the ship sides and Revell has the booms athwart the ship.   Airfix also has boat masts which look like walkways to me. See Airfix instructions attached.

Edited May 14, 2022 by bcochran

[shipman]

Hi,

agree, at first the instructions are a little confusing.

Until I did a thumbnail sketch from above, and proceeded to draw the lines.

Even at a first and only attempt the result indicated what Hackney had in mind.

That revealed the booms held by up and over loops and the boats held by diagonal crosswise threads.

Surprisingly neat. Once the principle is understood it is clear how logical the process is, using the minimum of thread and attendant clutter.

Give that a go!

 

Looking at your boat placement, compared to boat storage on the actual ship reveals some proportional differences.

For instance the inner edge of the lifeboat crutches is directly over the sides of the deck-house, ie moving the boats further apart, resulting in plenty of room between for the dinghy and booms of your choice.

I recall similar advice I gave Bruma many moons ago; for which he was happy.

 

Out of curiosity, I'd love to see film of the apparent palaver necessary to launch such boats sideways between the cranes which are always separated within the length of the boat.

Edited May 14, 2022 by shipman
added paragraphs

[bcochran]

50 minutes ago, shipman said:

Hi,

agree, at first the instructions are a little confusing.

Until I did a thumbnail sketch from above, and proceeded to draw the lines.

Even at a first and only attempt the result indicated what Hackney had in mind.

That revealed the booms held by up and over loops and the boats held by diagonal crosswise threads.

Surprisingly neat. Once the principle is understood it is clear how logical the process is, using the minimum of thread and attendant clutter.

Give that a go!

 

Looking at your boat placement, compared to boat storage on the actual ship reveals some proportional differences.

For instance the inner edge of the lifeboat crutches is directly over the sides of the deck-house, ie moving the boats further apart, resulting in plenty of room between for the dinghy and booms of your choice.

I recall similar advice I gave Bruma many moons ago; for which he was happy.

 

Out of curiosity, I'd love to see film of the apparent palaver necessary to launch such boats sideways between the cranes which are always separated within the length of the boat.

I don't want to move the boat skids.  So I think I will look for a picture of the actual boats and lashings.

[shipman]

Yes, a wise move.

You'll find the boats have a chain, due to the covers, appear to go over each end of the boat, attached  to the skids by lashings

[Kevin-the-lubber]

11 hours ago, shipman said:

Are you sure that is the same Campbell?

It seems unlikely there'd be two GF Campbell's, both writing about clippers, but who knows! I picked up somewhere in my recent reading that he was a naval architect.

[shipman]

Thanks for that

 

Without some serious upheaval, these books aren't close to hand.

 

Honestly I never associated the CS plans with the books before.

Tell me, are there drawings in the books that share the character of the CS ones, which are entirely hand drawn.

That could be the clue as each artist has a unique style.

[bcochran]

The boats, boat boom, bowsprit, jib boom, spare  spars and all eyelets are complete.  I need to start rigging the bowsprit.  I ordered 3.5 and 2.5 bullseyes from Model Expo, so I'll wait on those to rig bowsprit.

Edited May 16, 2022 by bcochran

[rwiederrich]

Very clean and neat.   
 

Rob

[bcochran]

My next work will be to rig the bowsprit and jib-boom.

 

I have several references that I am going to try to read and compare.  It is important to know what piece of rig you are working with, thus it is important to know their names.

 

I show two sets of Revell instructions.  The yellowed one is the oldest copyright in 1964  Venice, CA. The other is from 1987.  The older one has the names, the newer one does not, but it gives the order to follow when rigging. 

 

I show the others I have.  I find Revell easier to follow, but it has no dialog. Underhill and Hackney both have dialog.  Hackney is written as instructions to follow.  Underhill is more technical, which you have to apply to your model using your understanding of the text.  Underhill's figure 8 is almost the same as Revell's plan.

 

So my plan is to compare each.  I will most likely follow Revell and Underhill.

I completed the bob stay without bullseyes as Underhill shows. I think I'll do it over when my bullseyes arrive.  I've had quite a few do overs since I started. I'm sure to have many more.

 

 

 

Edited May 16, 2022 by bcochran

[bcochran]

I lashed the boats down. Probably not prototypical, but it's what I came up with.  I looked around and didn't find any ideas, so I made my own. Lubbers who see my model will think I know what I am doing.  I am not going to make boat covers, though they were on the real ship.  I have not seen any really convincing way to make them that I'd be comfortable with.

Edited May 16, 2022 by bcochran

[bcochran]

I think the Revell bumkins are very fragile.  The instructions say to use thread to represent the chain that the real ship has attached to the bumkins. I could have used chain, but that would not have strengthened the piece.  I used music wire, painted black, which is stiff, to make the bumkins more rigid and to represent the chain. It also will handle the tension of the running rigging attached to them.

 

 

Edited May 16, 2022 by bcochran

[bcochran]

I am pretty pleased with my build so far.  There are places where things got a bit messed up, but they aren't too noticeable. 

 

I just keep adding more parts as it takes shape.

 

I ordered some bullseyes this morning, so rigging the bowsprit is on hold until they arrive.

 

I got lucky and bought a copy of Longridge's book with the pocket in the back holding the large folded plans.

Edited May 16, 2022 by bcochran