Sloop-rigged packetboat by Strelok - 1:35 - based on Chapman plans - POB

[Strelok]

I had a revelation today *facepalm*

 

With the help of modern technology and a little bit of magic, I don't have to draw all plans a second time. I just need to put them onto a copier, rescale them to 109% and print them! I think, it's just as easy as it sounds 🤪

[wefalck]

However, be aware, the copiers often distort images and that the scaling factors may not be exactly equal in x and y. It is a good idea to draw a not too short scale for both axes onto the drawing and check, while in the copying office. Also lines will be 9% wider then.

 

A better way may be to scan or to have them scanned and print them out scanned. The advantage is also that you can print at home blow-ups of details as working drawings, e.g. for adding measures etc.

[Strelok]

Today I practiced with my dremel tool. Both the wing and face were done without any drawings or sketches. So, for a first time, I'm very satisfied. 

Concerning the face: I was surprised, how DECISIVE the cheek bones are. Before I cut them, there was just an oval blob with a bump in the middle, but after this - a face. Not a pretty one, but a face

 

 

[Strelok]

The day of New Year's Eve has started (it's about 7 a.m. around here) and it's tradition to think about the past year and its decisions. 

I've made some modeling decisions and I want to share my thoughts about them, if you may. 

 

1. Finish all other projects, before starting a new one.

That's definitely a good decision, but it's so hard to follow 😅 new ideas almost every day. A long time, I was able to withstand, but my "will wall" is crumbling. 

 

2. Shelve the projects of the Berlin and the Friedrichsburg, in order to build the easier Packet sloop. 

Yep, also a right move. Many, many small steps in order to improve, not a big one for the risk of a "fail" or disappointment. 

 

3. Build the Packet BIIIG.

I've found this decision to be one of my bad ones this year. As Merriadoc Brandybuck said, if the model is bigger, it needs to be more detailed and I don't have A) the knowledge, how each detail looked and where it needs to be and I don't have that much space! The Packet would be almost 70cm long and its longest yard around 50cm long. If I want to build a few ships, I need to build them smaller. This also helps with the details and learning curve. Furthermore, I don't have some of the tools, to build the Packet to a good looking finish - like a mill or a lathe. 

 

So my new plan is

1. Finish at least the most of my current projects. 

2. Decide on a new scale for the Packet and simplify my plans (that means not drawing 20+ new bulwarks)

3. Build another Golden Yacht, but a bit bigger 

 

Concerning this last point: it's more of an exercise. I'm familiar with the Yacht, as I've already built one from the same plans. I know the challenges, these plans come with and I'm already working on eliminating them. I enlarged the plans by 75%, so the hull will be about 25cm long. This gives me some opportunities for detailing. I don't know, if I create a thread for the Yacht, but I will work on the Packet's plans in parallel, so there will be updates. 

 

I also think about changing the plans for the Yacht, so that the result looks more like the HMY Mary II of 1677, but have not yet decided, as the Mary has 1m deeper draft and is around 5m longer. So the changes on the bulwarks and backbone would be big.

 

I'm also considering starting to work with a free 2D-CAD-software, but haven't decided yet, which one to choose. 

 

[Strelok]

Hi guys,

 

Today I can present you some real progress and not just some theoretical thoughts. 

I cancelled the whole Golden Yacht project, because in the end, I don't really like the look of her, but wanted to use her as a base for the Mary II. Bit as she was 5m shorter and had 1m less depth, there were just too much opportunities to mess up. But I found the hull plan for HMY Fubbs, a ketch rigged Yacht and the two ships looked quite similar except for the rigging. So I will use these plans as a base. But that's a story for another day. Before that, I will build the Packet. 

I will go for 1/60th scale, because I want to build both (Packet and Mary) in the same scale to show their size compared to another. But the Mary is almost twice as long. In 1/60th scale, the Packet is not too small (hull around 20cm long) and the Mary not too big (just a bit longer than 33cm).

 

Concerning the CAD-issue:

I tried some free software (LibreCAD), but found it uncomfortable to work with. So I decided to use the SEMA program, that I work at my job with. It is originally intended to design and plan wooden houses, but you can also draw lines and circles and so on AND I know, how to use it. That's a big plus. Fortunately, there is a free try-and-learn-version, that doesn't run on a time limit. They just warn you to not use the T&L-plans in a professional context, which I do not intend. 

 

Here are my first results: 

Here I copy-pasted a scan of the original plans into SEMA in 1/1 scale. 

I drew all plans, that I thought, I might need:

Top left: the cabins

Top mid: stern gallery 

Right: side view to measure something like wales and so on

Lower left: the backbone

 

Upper picture:

mid: deck plan

Lower: outlines of the bullwarks

I entered another layer and started drawing the rigging. The mast has its final length, the bowsprit/jibboom will be a bit longer. Height from keel to top is around 29 m, length (from the gallery to the jibboom-top) around 28 m.

 

When all plans and parts are drawn, I will scale them down (automatically... I just enter the scale), convert them into .pdf-files and print them at work. 

[Strelok]

I got a bit of the rigging plan done, while my Junior is taking a nap.

 

This is the current stage: All mast and yard dimensions were taken from my Excel-sheet, I mentioned above. Measured from tip to toe, she is 29,198 m high and 29,767 m long (that's 95,794 foot and 97,661 respectively). Essentially, she is a triangle in a square - viewed from the side. I don't know any specifics, but this feels like good proportions.

 

While drawing this, I procrastinated the drawing of the individual bullwarks. That's my next step. After that comes the standing and running rig. I'll make a seperate plan for each. I'll use the rigging plan of the golden Yacht as a template, because the packet's rig is basically the same like the Yacht with the addition of the gaff boom, another sail and the jib boom. So the number of "loose ends" is manageable and for the most part, I already have a rough idea, where these ends need to go.

[wefalck]

Are you sure, you got the proportions right? I know that some of these later 18th century vessels had very lofty spar-plans, but here the mast appears to be rather tall. The packet would have required a large amount of balast to remain stable ...

[Strelok]

Yes, I'm quite sure. I took the sloop Mediator and several sloops from the Danish archive and took their mast and yard lengths in relation to the vessels breadth. Their respective diameter was put into relation with the part's length. These relation numbers were added for each part and divided by the number of vessels. This way, I got an average dimension for each part. These average numbers were applied to the Packet.

[wefalck]

OK, I see.

 

Perhaps, as a reality check, you could take the loftiest (relative to hull lenght) sail-plan in those archives and compare it to your reconstruction - this should give you the enveloppe in which to develop your sail-plan. If you work with average dimensions for each part and add these together, you may arrive at an overall too lofty plan.

 

Another cross-check would be to graphically determine the centre of gravity of your sail-plan and compare this with that of other sail-plans. This then can also be compared to the centres of gravity of the hulls. This is what designers such as af Chapman would have done in order to see, whether hull and sail-plan balance.

 

Edited January 20, 2023 by wefalck

[Strelok]

Can you describe the process of graphically determining the CoG for a basically irregular shape like a ship's hull? The CoG of the rig should be no problem for me 

[wefalck]

The most primitive way would be to print the drawing on paper, cut the shape out and suspend it from several points at the edges from a thread, then draw a line in prolongation of the thread across the shape - where these lines intersect is the centre of gravity. This can be done for individual sails, whole sail plans, and longitudinal sections of the underwater-hull.

 

There may also free-/share-ware computer-programs that do that from various graphics inputs. Some CAD-programs have such a function.

[Strelok]

Today I made good progress on the bullwarks. All are drawn. The last things missing are the slits for the backbone and the mast. They will be added in he next session 

[Strelok]

Today I finished all bulkheads.

 

The left group will be done with 4mm thick plywood and the right group with 2mm thick stuff. The next step on this front will be the backbone and its separation from stem post, stern post and keel.

 

Furthermore I separated the decks and cabin roofs from another to plan the planking.

 

[Strelok]

The time, where I can work on the Packet in order to procrastinate my other two modelling projects will be over in the foreseeable future. Many plans and detail sketches are done and grouped together, so that they fit onto a DIN A4 sheet of paper (297 x 210mm or 11,693" x 8,268").

 

 

The lower left plan will include all parts, that have a diameter.

I have a list of parts, that stillt need to be drawn. This list includes a dozen items. After they are done, I will take care of the oversized rig. My plan is to delete the toppgalant mast, but keep the yard. Once the rig is drawn and placed on the plan, I will stop working on the Packet and finish my two other projects. Once these are done, it will be the Packet's turn. I'M really looking forward to it. I'm really proud of how the plans look.

[Strelok]

I must admit, that I'm a bit lazy. Instead of doing as I planned and start the many small parts (where I have to think!! 😥), I redrew the rig with its new and final dimensions.

 

 

The gaff boom seems a bit long. Maybe I'll shorten it later by around 2m (it's now around 12m long)

[Strelok]

Another milestone is reached! The planning of the rigging is done. 47 ropes of different names are drawn and their beginning, their end and purpose defined.

I'll keep the gaff boom with its original length

The next step is drawing all remaining small parts like anchor crane, pumps and so on.

 

PS: I just realised, that I maybe don't need Nr. 24 and 25 as the gaff will be raised to set the main sail and the lower edge of said sail is tied to the gaffboom and not to the mast

Edited February 20, 2023 by Strelok

[wefalck]

I am not so familiar with 18th century rigging practice, but brails on the mainsail (no. 24 and 25) are definitively needed to reduce sail area quickly.

However, you need to decide, whether the vessel would have had a standing or a lowering gaff. If the boat has a lowering gaff, it probably does not make much sense to lead an other running rigging, such as bulins or topgallant braces towards it.

I would also doubt that there have been bulins (21/22) or even topgallant braces (10). On British cutters of that period the topgallant braces were led towards the end of the jibboom and belayed at the spill. The topsail- and topgallant yards may not have had braces at all, as the were set flying (at least the topgallant) and would come around together with the main yard.

Aren't there any backstays for the topmast? Just having a stay would not be enough to steady it, as the main force is from behind and sideways.

[Strelok]

The final rigging plan is done! I basically redrew my sketches in the CAD-programme and altered them in a few places.

 

The main difference lies in the runs of the toppsail and topgallantsail braces.

 

Edit on the last day of February:

I've finished all drawings for the bigger and smaller parts, that were still missing. The last thing remaining to be done is the calculation of the size and diameters of the parts of the standing and the running rig. I  will do this manually. 

After that, I can make a list with all materials, that I need to buy before I can start building and before the building, I will finish my two other modelling projects. 

 

This thread will therefore fall silent for a while, but I will resume posting updates as soon as there are any.

 

Thank you all for your support and feedback! 

Edited February 28, 2023 by Strelok

[Strelok]

A small update from me:

One of the two modelling projects, I was working on in the last months has reached its conclusion for now.

 

I've built two wargaming armies for the rule set Crossfire. It's a German motorised Grenadier company from late 1943 - so the generic German infantry, that fought in Normandy - and a British rifle company. 

The Germans have additionally a Pak 40 and two light field howitzers. Both sides have also five tanks (WH: a panzer 3, 3 panzer iv and a Panther | UK: two Shermans, a Cromwell, a Churchill with the 95mm mortar and the captured Panther "Cuckoo" from the Coldstream Guards). 

That's the Tommies

That's the Krauts

 

The are not painted yet, but that's a matter of secondary importance. 

For my other project (the diorama from post #1): the tracks are assembled and ready to paint - so that's also almost done. 

 

Therefore I've ordered the wood and parts for the Packet sloop. I'm very excited!

I aquired a piece of staghorn sumac from my parents. It has a soft and brittle wood according to Wikipedia, but a nice orange core with green coloured lines through it. It also glows yellow under UV-light. That sounds interesting and I will take a look at it. I'm tempted to carve the figurehead from it. That could be a nice eye-catcher if it works.

I'll keep you posted 

 

 

[Strelok]

It has begun!

 

The first cut is cut and the first glue is shed. 

Here are some pictures of my progress

 

the parts for decks and cabins that are finished 

 

Some things, that still need some fine-tuning

 

Bulkhead B is already in place 

 

In two weeks, I'll have plenty of time to finish the bulkheads and to start working on the deck-planking.

 

A learning, that I'll take with me to the next project - Her Majesties Yacht Mary II - will be, that the width tolerances of the bulkhead's slits may be greater than 0mm 😅 maybe 0.5mm or something in between. 

[Strelok]

Quick update:

 

 

most of the bulkheads are sanded in shape but not yet tapered. I lost bulkhead E somehow... I mean, it has to be somewhere near my workbench as I hadn't left my workshop 🙃 

[Meriadoc Brandybuck]

4 hours ago, Strelok said:

I lost bulkhead E somehow

Did you check the fridge?  It must be hiding around your desk somehow. 

 

I like how you work. Clean design, well thought out ahead of time. Gives me ideas. 
 

I think I detect an error in your rigging plan though. The upper masts and spars look okay but the lower mast is almost certainly far too tall. You said you cross referenced other sloops, but the mast lengths listed in tables are notoriously confusing for modelers as they often include (and don’t always specify) the entire length from the step (on the keel) to the hounds (a difficult term to find a definition for) or the cap. Or the top. 
A common mistake is to forget to subtract the height of one’s spine/false keel, for example. 
Another point is that the smaller the ship, the less proportional sail area it can safely carry due to to the math of volume decreasing faster than area, so scaling down rigging plans or formulas that work for larger vessels doesn’t work, while this sloop is almost the smallest ship in Chapman’s book. You might try to compare sail area of similar sized vessels to inform your mast and spar figures. 
I hate to say all this as I know you’ve done an extraordinary job planning your rigging!  However, I’m quite sure your lower mast has fallen victim to an error somewhere, either in the historic fuzziness of what is meant by lower mast dimensions in any particular record, or by forgetting to subtract for your model’s structure, or perhaps both. 
 

Loving how this build is progressing!

-Meriadoc

 

[Strelok]

Hi Meriadoc Brandybuck,

 

thank you for your kind words and input. As long as no cut on any part of the rigging is made, it's not too late to talk about it and alter it. So don't be afraid to mention anything that you find worth mentioning. We can talk about it and I can explain my thought process, but in the end, it's my task to think about your points and mine and alter stuff - or not. But input is always appreciated as this is my very first modell developed from a plan drawn in a time long gone. 😁

 

Concerning your points: Not only did I crosscheck with other sloops, but also consulted literature like Chapman, zu Mondfeld or Marquardt. The common theme was, like Chapman said, "the whole of the main-mast ought to be thrice (three times) their breadth". Chapman gives the breadth of this sloop with 13 1/4 feet, which brings the main-mast's length to 29 3/4 feet. I used a foot length of 33,192 cm (I can't recall why why... Stockholm foot measures 29,69 cm), so the breadth measures 4,398 m and the length of the main mast 13,19 m. BUT I didn't just used Chapman as reference, but, as mentioned, also the other sloops. This raised the factor from 3 to 3,3345 and the mast length to 14,665 m. The length of a foot chosen doesn't matter, though, as it is only a number, a factor that affects each length, width, breadth,... The ratio between the several individual parts stays the same.

This leaves the question "What is 'the whole of the main mast'?" I looked into the literature and asked fellow modellers and came to the conclusion, that in the majority of cases, this meant the length from the deck to the mast topp. And this answer I went with and built my further measurements around as all other diameters and lengths take the length and/or diameter of the main mast (which are connected.. the latter is around 2,5% of the former) as a point of reference.

[Meriadoc Brandybuck]

Of course in the end, the difficult decisions are yours to make. 
I however don’t believe historical sources consider mast length to be deck-top. Usually it is from the step on the keel or whatever position to the hounds or what have you.  Deck-top is a more useful measurement for us modelmakers, but shipwrights thought differently. 
I did two quick case studies to demonstrate this. Hopefully they are clear. The easiest is right out of Chapman, the Bermuda sloop on plate LVII, no 15. It shows the actual mast right next to the lines of the ship. 

Here you can clearly see that the mast from step to top of hounds is about 120mm, whereas the breadth molded is visibly about 42mm. Close to 3 times but clearly that’s from the step to the hounds, where your top or cross trees would fit. The location of the step can be seen in the draft. 
I also looked at the Mediator sloop from Chapelle (Search for Speed Under Sail). 

 

The mast length hounded corresponds to 104 mm (63 ft at scale of ~1/185). If I measure from about the deck level to the hounds or top, I get 88mm (check above). 104mm does approximately agree if I guess about where the step should go:

 

If you consider that these sloops were both speed demons and considerably larger (~60 plus ft length and ~21 ft beam) thus more stable based on internal volume per sail area, this represents an extreme upper limit to the mast proportions one might expect on a very small mid-18th c. packet sloop. 
I hope these examples help. The picture in Chapman finally helps me understand what “hounded” ought to mean. 
Now I’m wondering how over-proportioned my sloop ended up 😕

Whatever you decide to do with your rig, finish it and enjoy the process! 

 -learning bit-by-bit Meriadoc

[Strelok]

I had some time in my workshop recently and did some cleaning up. Ast time, I told you, Bulkhead E had gone missing, but also that it could not have gone far. Look, where I found it:

 

That was a real facepalm moment, let me tell you this.

 

I also discovered that the deck line on bulkhead D was too high - about 3 or 4 mm. So there is some work left to do. 

 

I received a shipment of basswood for the filler blocks.

[Strelok]

Hi guys,

 

it's been a very busy time for me. Life has been kicking a bit. I had not much time on the workbench and won't have for a bit, I think. Also, comparing myself with you guys and the pressure, I put myself under, to get some good pictures to post another update, killed my mojo almost completely.

 

Nevertheless, there is some progress. I changed the rig of the Packet almost completely. She looses the outer jib and both square topsails and gains a topgaffsail. This almost halves the number of ropes (From over 30 to 18!), therefore can be handled with less crew - more profit per voyage from Stralsund to Göteborg 😉 I plan to build another sloop at some point, which will be an armed one and will get the square sails.

 

Also I reduced the length of the mast by around 2m.

Don't expect any further updates in the near future or updates everytime I had benchtime, but I will share the big milestones with you (hull done, rig done, finishing line).

[Strelok]

Hey

The packet sloop project is not dead. As one of my new year resolutions I decided to carry on working on her. For once I have to thank all those people who burnt their money during new year's eve pyro show, because I collected a lot of sticks from rockets. I cut them to length and used them as filler between the bulkheads.

 

 

This picture was taken yesterday. Today I've completed the next four sections, so only two to go and then there will be a lot of sanding. I'm pretty hyped now and as I'm currently unemployed, I have a good amount of time to work on her.

 

See you next time!

[wefalck]

That's what is called by the EU 'circular economy'  😉

[Strelok]

Fillers are all done.

 

Wow, now that I see this picture on a large screen, I am amazed about how sharply focused those clamps in the background are and how blurry the hull is as if my camera wants to say "Yeah, don't look to closely. It looks weird."

 

I also testfitted the decks.

I need to rework the cutouts for the bullwarks on the sides of the decks. For now it's a pretty tight fit, but I like the general look of it.

[Strelok]

Good progress was made.

 

I've sanded the hull and used a new tool that I got for christmas. It's a small band sander. The left side of the hull was sanded by hand with a grater, the right side was sanded with the band sander and only small adjustments were made with the grater and sanding paper. The left side took me 2,5 hours to finish, the right side only 45 minutes! I know, which method I will use from now on.