HM Bark Endeavour by KJackson - OcCre - 1:54

[KJackson]

The HM Bark will be my second model ship; a birthday present from my partner and significantly more complex than my first build, the Bluenose II from AL.

 

As an Australian, the Endeavour holds a close place in my heart and I have visited the replica on my trips to Sydney countless times. The Endeavour is also much more widely available and built than other well-known ships of Australia's maritime history, like the Batavia, James Craig or Duyfken. A good place for a newbie to the hobby.

 

 

 

I opted for the OcCre kit after much research, choosing this kit as it appears somewhat more detailed and accurate than the AL, but not as much as a ramp up as the Caldercraft. One day I would like to complete the Caldercraft Endeavour, but want to learn more and hone my skills first.

 

Before opening the box, I ordered two resources to help me make updates to the kit to make it more accurate: Parkin's HM Bark Endeavour (1995), which is still in print, and Marquardt's Anatomy of the Ship (AOTS) HM Bark Endeavour, which appears out of print and proved a touch more difficult to find... but I was nonetheless able to secure a good secondhand copy.

 

I also purchased a good bit of various sizes of wood from Bud Nosen, including Bass, Cherry and Walnut to upgrade the kit supplied materials where needed, and restock my spares drawer.

 

TAKING STOCK

The first thing I noticed about the Endeavour is that she sure is chonky. Fat and short compared to the Bluenose schooner. The kit is also very large. My hand for scale... the Admiral is getting worried!😂

 

 

Before lifting a scalpel, I read through the instructions.

 

The OcCre kit did not come with pre-numbered laser cut parts, with the reference map instead provided at the back of the instruction booklet.

 

I carefully numbered each of the laser cut pieces for future reference. This will make it easier to find the pieces I need when I'm knee deep in build mode in the months to come.

 

 

 

 

FIRST CUTS

I replaced my scalpel blade with a fresh one, and carefully extracted the keel pieces, which are to be reinforced with two square blocks.

 

I lightly filed the off-cut tabs to ensure each part is flush (without distorting the shape), then glued the keel together with a touch of Titebond wood glue.

 

 

 

 

 

With one block pressed into place, I then clamped the keel to a flat board of basswood to ensure that the keel dries straight. This is a tip I found in Mastini's Ship Modelling Simplified.

 

 

 

My next step will be to carefully extract each bulkhead, dry fit and square in place on the keel, before glueing into place - potentially with some blocks to support alignment and rigidity. Any advice moving to this stage is welcomed!

 

[KJackson]

HISTORIC ANECDOTE:

As I sink my teeth into this hobby, I am reading more about maritime history. Half the fun for me is the research. I'm currently reading this fascinating book, The Ship Asunder, by Tom Nancollas. It helps me understand why the hull shape between the Endeavour, launched as the Earl of Pembroke in 1764, is so substantially different to the Bluenose II.

 

 

As a bark ship, the Earl of Pembroke was designed with rounded bows and a flat bottom as she needed ample carrying capacity, being used for coastal sailing transporting coal. This carrying capacity was one reason why, in 1768, she was purchased by the navy for South Sea exploration and renamed Endeavour.

 

FITTING BULKHEADS

After a cuppa (giving a good hour or so for the keel to set), I proceeded to cut out the bulkheads - 10 in total.

 

 

I then marked where each bulkhead would sit against the keel in pencil. These lines will help guide how I position the bulkheads to ensure they are straight.

 

 

 

I then dry fitted the bulkheads to the keel to test their fit. Compared to the AL model I built previously, the OcCre bulkheads slid on easily, with ample wriggle room; no filing was necessary to fit.

 

 

I am careful to ensure each bulkhead sits flush to the keel. The exception is piece no.4, the first bulkhead from the stern, which sits 5mm lower by design.

 

 

Following Mastini's recommendation, I then dry fit the false lower deck to the model to help square and align the bulkheads. While Mastini recommends pinning this deck, I leave mine free as I need to remove this deck later for planking in the next stage.

 

 

Using my square, I align each bulkhead and then run wood glue down the bow and stern side of each frame. I then add a touch of CA (I use Roket rapid) to help "grab" straight off the bat, ensuring capillary action.

 

 

 

Et voila, now to let this sit with deck in place for a good few hours. I'll remove the deck to go onto planking as the next step, but it's important that I don't touch the keel or frames for the next 24 hours.

 

 

My next step is planking. I'll be double checking how long and wide the planks on the Endeavour are, and rechecking the trenail pattern.

 

I will likely use my own wood supply for the decks... perhaps use Tung or Orange oil for the stain. Thoughts and recommendations on ideal dimensions and recommended oil are of course welcome!

Edited April 21, 2022 by KJackson

[shipaholic]

Hi KJ now is the time to consider one small modification, that’s if you want to. This Occre model does not have a deck camber, as all ships do. It’s very simple just glue an extra strip of wood on top of the deck supports and sand to a curvature before fitting. Don’t worry about the lower deck because you can’t see that except through the hatches.

[allanyed]

Shipaholic

The rounding (camber) is an extremely valid point, good that you pointed it out.  Each deck usually had a different amount of rounding from orlop to the upper most decks, do you know if the other decks on the model have any camber at all or are they flat as well?

Allan

 

[shipaholic]

40 minutes ago, allanyed said:

Shipaholic

The rounding (camber) is an extremely valid point, good that you pointed it out.  Each deck usually had a different amount of rounding from orlop to the upper most decks, do you know if the other decks on the model have any camber at all or are they flat as well?

Allan

 

All the decks are flat on this model. When I built mine I only put camber on the weather decks, the others can’t be seen except through the main hatch if you don’t put a cover on it.

[KJackson]

42 minutes ago, allanyed said:

do you know if the other decks on the model have any camber at all or are they flat as well?

 

Thank you, shipaholic - great point and I'll make note as I move into decking.

 

On inspection of the following section in the instructions and related componentry, none of the decks appear to have camber.

 

While the lower deck is no worry as it won't be especially visible, I'll need to add camber following shipaholic's suggestion to all other decks.

 

I'm going to do some digging to see if I can't find out what camber variations there may have been for the Endeavour (or equivalent ships of this period) between these decks. A rabbit hole to scurry down!

[allanyed]

I have no idea if these figures apply to Endeavour but for a 24 gun ship, (374 tons) the 1719 Establishment gives the following:

Upper deck to round 6.75"

Forecastle to round 5.5"

Quarter deck to round 6.5"

 

 

Scantlings from the Shipbuilder's Repository, 1788 gives the following for an 18 gun sloop of war (392 tons)

Upper deck to round 6"                                     

Forecastle to round 6"         

Quarter Deck to round 6.5"   

 

Allan   

 

                                

 

 

 

[shipaholic]

So if I interpret Allan correctly the centre of the deck is 6” higher than where it meets the gunwales. Which is about 15cm so at the scale of this model (1:54 which I reckon is closer to 1:51) you need to raise the centre of each deck 3mm. Seems right, can’t remember how much mine was (that was 10 years ago) but yeah about 3mm

[KJackson]

Thanks for these figures, Allan -

 

I had started research and stumbled upon (across multiple sources, including the NRJ) the rule of thumb as the round camber (X) in inches for every foot of the ship's maximum beam.

 

So I ran some calculations (converting to my scale and mm) as such...

 

The formula = camber (max beam / foot)

= x(y/f)

 

HM Bark Endeavour maximum beam (y)

= 30.4'

= 171.59mm at my 1:54 ratio

 

1 foot (f)= 304mm

 

Quarter deck camber

= 6.5" / max beam (y)

= 6.5 / 30.4

= 0.21"

X = 5.33 mm

 

Therefore X(y/f)

=5.33(171.59/304)

=5.33(0.56)

=2.98 mm, or 3mm

 

Upper and forecastle deck camber

= 6 " / max beam (y)

= 6 / 30.4

= 0.197" 

X = 5.0 mm

 

Therefore X(y/f)

= 5(171.59/304)

=5(0.56)

=2.81 mm

 

So, the camber for the upper and forecastle decks is 2.8mm and for the quarter deck 3mm.

 

I then drew the max beam, cutting it a touch to reflect the distance from deck to deck rather than max beam (to 144mm), and cut it in half to 72mm.

 

I then created a temporary jig to hold both ends and measure cambers for 3mm (quarter deck) and 2.8mm (upper and forecastle decks) respectively.

 

To get the curve, I used a flexible piece of scrap wood between the three points.

 

 

And I now have two templates for the different cambers!

 

 

When the time comes I'll sand down pieces of wood as required to fit these templates.

Edited April 18, 2022 by KJackson

[KJackson]

48 minutes ago, shipaholic said:

So if I interpret Allan correctly the centre of the deck is 6” higher than where it meets the gunwales. Which is about 15cm so at the scale of this model (1:54 which I reckon is closer to 1:51) you need to raise the centre of each deck 3mm. Seems right, can’t remember how much mine was (that was 10 years ago) but yeah about 3mm

 

It's lovely when the calculations add up! Always good when multiple people converge on a single number.

[allanyed]

Looks good to me.  The contemporary figures I gave and the NRG figures are very close.

FWIW, the contemporary figures at 1:54 are as follows:

 

1719 Establishment

Upper deck to round 6.75"/54= 0.125"=3.75 mm

Forecastle to round 5.5"/54= 0.102" = 2.6mm

Quarter deck to round 6.5"/54=0.120" = 3.06mm

 

 

Scantlings from the Shipbuilder's Repository, 1788 gives the following for an 18 gun sloop of war (392 tons)

Upper deck to round 6"/54=0.11 = 2.82mm                                    

Forecastle to round 6"/54=0.11 = 2.82mm                  

Quarter Deck to round 6.5"/54=0.120" = 3.06mm  

 

 

 

Edited April 18, 2022 by allanyed

[KJackson]

Thanks, Allan -

 

I've just quickly Googled and Endeavour's gross tonnage is reported at 397.

 

Given this is closer to Shipbuilder's Repository 392 tonnes, I'm going to use these figures.

 

I could argue either set of figures is accurate. The 1719 figures may still have been in place when the Earl of Pembroke was launched in 1764. Or they could have already transitioned to the 1788 figures. I imagine it may have been somewhere in between.

Edited April 18, 2022 by KJackson

[KJackson]

ADDING BLOCKS TO THE BULKHEADS

I added some wooden squared blocks to help add rigidity and ensure the keel and bulkheads remain aligned.

 

To do so, I used some spare wooden 30mm cubes I had in the drawer, and divided them up into parts.

 

 

 

I used my coping saw to cut them to size. I am preparing my argument to the Admiral for the need of a good table and scroll saw.

 

 

I sanded down the pieces using my mini lathe, modified to act as a disc sander. I wasn't too particular with this as these blocks will be covered.

 

 

Then I clamped them at regular intervals on both starboard and port sides and left them to sit overnight.

 

 

Edited April 19, 2022 by KJackson

[KJackson]

PLANKING THE LOWER DECK

I visited the Endeavour's virtual tour to check the decks. I captured the 4 butt shift and treenail pattern for reference, and counted how many planks there were laid across the width of the ship at its widest point (totalling 31).

 

 

The lower deck is widest at 160mm, so 5mm per plank is close enough for me to totalling 31, with some wriggle room.

 

I opted to cut each length to 150mm; I'm not sure (and despite searching could not find) what the Endeavour's specific deck plank length was. 26' is usual, which translates at 1:54 to 146mm. Given the OcCre kit is probably closer to 1:51, I rounded up to 150mm length.

 

I followed the 4 butt lay, adopting the 1-3-5-2-4 pattern. To do this, I broke the length of the plank into 5 sections (each 25mm long), testing before gluing to the false deck.

 

 

I simulated caulking by running a 3B pencil over each edge of each board, including the ends.

 

I then brushed on Titebond to the false deck and laid each plank, starting from the centre.

 

 

I've completed the port side of the lower deck for now. I still need to complete the starboard deck and then develop a method for simulating the treenails.

 

 

 

Edited April 20, 2022 by KJackson

[shipaholic]

For the tree nails I used a sharp pencil. Just put it in place and twist a couple of times. The lower deck is a good place to practice your planking skills because not much of it will be seen 

[KJackson]

9 hours ago, shipaholic said:

For the tree nails I used a sharp pencil. Just put it in place and twist a couple of times. The lower deck is a good place to practice your planking skills because not much of it will be seen 

Thanks, shipaholic - I'll have a stab (pun intended) tonight.

[KJackson]

I experimented with some treenail types on some scrap wood, and after some thought decided to go for the bamboo skewer approach.

 

 

MAKING A DRAWPLATE

Not having a drawplate, I quickly manufactured my own (ugly but utilitarian) tool. It should do the trick and if not I'll buy a ready-made drawplate.

 

 

To do so I cut a square of brass plate. I then drilled progressively larger holes into this plate, which I'll draw bamboo skewers through to even up thickness.

 

 

Making treenails will be a slow and methodical process over the next however long.

 

Edited April 20, 2022 by KJackson

[allanyed]

Hope yours works out, but if the time comes to buy a draw plate, avoid the cheap ones.  The best one many members have found is the Byrnes plate which goes down to  0.016" (0.86" at your scale for the Endeavour.)   

Allan

 

 

 

 

[KJackson]

1 hour ago, allanyed said:

Hope yours works out, but if the time comes to buy a draw plate, avoid the cheap ones.  The best one many members have found is the Byrnes plate which goes down to  0.016" (0.86" at your scale for the Endeavour.)   

Allan

 

Noted with thanks, Allan -

 

Jim Byrne's tools are great, and I've read amazing things about his table saw on this forum. It's a wishlist item. I'm tempted to bite the bullet and get the drawplate alongside this machine, given it'll take a bit to get to Aus anyway.

 

What are your opinions of the Byrnes ropewalk? I have a cheapy Model Shipways model that (like my ugly drawplate) will get the job done ... laboriously

[KJackson]

FINISHING PLANKING THE LOWER DECK

Today I finished the starboard side of the deck following the same process as the port side.

 

Before starting, I made sure to align the start of the plank pattern to the existing section of planking.

 

 

 

This ensured that, when these two halves come together, an even 4 butt pattern is maintained across the whole.

 

 

NEXT STEPS - TREENAILS & STAIN

I'll start production of treenails next - give my DIY ugly tool a whirl and see how my patience holds! 😄

 

I'll also play around with some decking oils / stains. I have both Tung and Orange oil but nothing with a more prominent stain. The replica has very light decks, so Tung oil may work.

 

Keen to hear what your choice of deck stain has been for this ship?

 

 

[allanyed]

KJ

The only other Byrnes tool I have is the thickness sander which I have been super happy with for MANY years now.  I have yet to make rope so I have not given any thought to buying his.   My wish list does include his table saw once my oldie finally gives it up.

 

Allan

[shipaholic]

I just used clear satin varnish on my deck planks. Deck planks on ships were frequently scrubbed with water and stones (called holy stones) so they would have resembled raw wood.

[KJackson]

9 hours ago, allanyed said:

KJ

The only other Byrnes tool I have is the thickness sander which I have been super happy with for MANY years now.  I have yet to make rope so I have not given any thought to buying his.   My wish list does include his table saw once my oldie finally gives it up.

 

Allan

 

I have a feeling I'll eventually end up with his whole catalogue! 😂

 

And now you've got me researching the thickness sander... This hobby is a slippery slope lol.

[KJackson]

9 hours ago, shipaholic said:

I just used clear satin varnish on my deck planks. Deck planks on ships were frequently scrubbed with water and stones (called holy stones) so they would have resembled raw wood.

 

Ah, this is great - thanks a tonne. I'll ressurect the satin clear varnish spray I've got hidden in the shed.

[Gregory]

21 hours ago, KJackson said:

What are your opinions of the Byrnes ropewalk? I have a cheapy Model Shipways model that (like my ugly drawplate) will get the job done ... laboriously

Give the Syren Rope Rocket a look..   It is the same rope maker that powered Chucks very successful model rope business.

 

Many MSW members have graduated from  buying model rope to making their own with the Rope Rocket.

[KJackson]

MAKING TREENAILS

Before starting treenail production I double-checked some measurements. This forum continues to be a great source of information!

 

From what I read, treenails appear to usually be around 1.1-1.3" in diameter. At 1:54 that's 0.020", or 0.5mm.

 

I used a ruler to keep a line against which to drill the treenail pattern. And carefully pre-drill the pattern across both decks.

 

 

Then I pulled some bamboo skewers I stole from the kitchen through my makeshift drawplate. I found that going through multiple times and at different angles helped shave off excess to downsize.

 

 

 

 

Finally, I pricked the treenail into some wood glue and pushed them gently with tweezers into each drilled hole, snipping off at the base. I've left these ones to cure and will cut down after a couple days.

 

[Gregory]

Very nice!  Looks like the DIY drawplate is a winner...

Edited April 21, 2022 by Gregory

[KJackson]

1 hour ago, Gregory said:

Give the Syren Rope Rocket a look.. 

 

Chuck's stuff is amazing, I had a Syren order arrive this arvo (cannons, blocks, etc.)

 

I will need to make another order anyway as I'm two cannons shy, so I'll add the ropewalk too. Thanks for the recommendation!

[allanyed]

Hi KJ,

According to Goodwin the treenails were from to 0.75 to 2".  The smaller ones were normally found on the deck planking.   Yours look to be on the smaller size of the range you give which is great.  There a lot of models we see here at MSW with huge treenails, especially on the decks,  looking really obtrusive.  On the actual ships the trennals were often covered with diamond shaped cover pieces thus not visible at all.  Note that contemporary models rarely, if ever, show treenails on the deck so at smaller scales better left out.   Then there is the matter of when iron dumps or bolts or nails came into use on the deck planking.   

 

If anyone knows of treenail size information for the deck planking based on contemporary sources, that would be great.   They are addressed as to material in contemporary contracts that I have seen but sizes are not given.

 

Allan

[KJackson]

2 hours ago, allanyed said:

Yours look to be on the smaller size of the range you give which is great [...] Note that contemporary models rarely, if ever, show treenails on the deck

 

Great insights, Allan -

 

In your opinion, is it too much (that is, would they look out of proportion?) on the top decks?

 

I'm playing with the lower deck which, as shipaholic has pointed out, will be barely visible except through grates. This means that I can stop before doing the other decks if needed.