Thermopylae by My Fathers Son - or as near as I can get it

[rwiederrich]

In your view what do you suppose the forward capstone does in the forecastle? I suspect its part of the anchor chain retention mechanism.  The chain was then lowered down into the hold from there.  The forecastle also acted as crews quarters. 
During this period , windlasses were being replaced by capstans in general use.  Since both T and CS were composite ships, and iron and new technologies were replacing older wooden constructed older designs…… it is not a stretch to assume these upgrades were added to T.    
This is where good deduction comes into play. 
 

To  paraphrase Spock; “When all impossible things have been eliminated whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truth”.

Here are some examples of capstans driving below decks winches for anchor use. 

 

Rob

[Keith Black]

17 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

what do you suppose the forward capstone does in the forecastle?

 Rob, it could well have been used to lower and raise the fore's main yard should it have needed repair or replacement. 

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

1 hour ago, rwiederrich said:

To  paraphrase Spock; “When all impossible things have been eliminated whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truth”.

Here are some examples of capstans driving below decks winches for anchor use. 

 

  Actually, Spock was paraphrasing a Sherlock Holmes quote written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.  Of course Spock said, "Logic is little bird tweeting in meadow. Logic is a bunch of pretty flowers - that smell bad."

[rwiederrich]

3 hours ago, Keith Black said:

 Rob, it could well have been used to lower and raise the fore's main yard should it have needed repair or replacement. 

True, it could have been used for a number of heavy load tasks……..but, I’m trying to use deduction to answer some questions addressing the forecastle of the antique model I presented.  
 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Sorry Keith for confusing you.   I have to admit that an explanation is in order if the model I posted is correct.  

[My Fathers Son]

Still working on planking but thought I would just post a couple of images of T so you can see where I am at. 

That yaught profile. 

Both sides are equal in progress. Forecastle is locked in, just sanding to the final shape. 

Temporary stand just to sit her on while working on her. 

 

Simon

[My Fathers Son]

So work was early start late finish today but dinner is over a d I am enjoying the cool evening on the edge of outside. 

I am short of planks now and will have to replenish my supply of coffee sticks. In the mean time I have trimmed of the tops of the frames flush with the deck. I can then run channels around the perimeter of the decks. 

The forecastle is done and I have edged and laid a few centred deck planks in Cherry vaneer. I won't be edging the planks, at this scale I don't think it appropriate 

.

I am losing the light and it's been a tiring day so will be putting her away for the evening now. 

 

Simon

 

[Keith Black]

 Nice job, Simon. Hurry up and drink more coffee! 

[My Fathers Son]

Just a little bit of planking while waiting. 

Simon

[My Fathers Son]

I have just checked by dimensions and think I might have made a boo boo. T was 6" shorter than CS at 215 ft. My model is 32" in length. That is Not 1:96, more like 1:75. Do'h. 

 

I will have to check the beam before I go any further. 

 

Simon 

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  215' x 12 (inches per foot) = 2580" full scale hull (O.A.L. as opposed to 'between perpendiculars' ... a different bugaboo).  2580 divided by 32 (your hull) = 80.625 ... call it 1:80.  You may be better off with a slightly larger model to work on.

 

EDIT: - additional info.  'Seems the T (according to a public source) was 212'  "between perpendiculars" (Wikipedia states the CS as 212 1/2' registered length, implying between perpendiculars) Three other sources note these same distances as being between perpendiculars.  ... This is an interesting point, sometimes misunderstood (as I had done before).  The "perpendiculars" (used as a standard concept of registered vessel length) consist of a vertical line where the cutwater at the bow meets the waterline (not sure whether this is laden or unladen, as it would make a difference depending on the angle of the cutwater), and another vertical line that is the centerline of the steering post. 

 

  The distance between these vertical lines ("perpendiculars" meaning 90 degrees to the waterline) is measured.  I took out the Revell 1:96 T hull half and measured about 25 1/2" along the point where the exposed planking meets the molded copper plates from the cutwater to the sternpost.  Hmmmm, if multiplied by 96, I get 2448", which is only 204'.   So something is wrong.  If I multiply the 25 1/2 inches by 100, I get 2550" full size. Divide by 12 to get ... 212.5' (the model hull was made for CS), or about 1:100 scale between perpendiculars.

 

  Now if the kit designers (Revell CS & T) were using the "length on deck" (stern to the forecastle point, which does not include the bowsprit, which if added to the length on deck would give the O.A.L.) to figure the model scale, 212.5 x 12 = 2550, divided by 96 = 26.56".  So I measure their model hull's 'on deck' dimension to about (here it comes) ... 26 1/2 inches !  This is an "Ah-ha" moment.

The Revell kits are 1:96 if the registered length is taken for an "on deck" measurement.  Ok, one can quibble or niggle over the difference between 1:96 and 1:100 ... I actually use 1:100, since its easy to do the math for fittings: e.g. an 8" block (about 200mm) is 2mm at 1:00 - and blocks most often come in millimeter sizes.  Working with 2mm blocks is a pain, and many modelers get go a bit oversize here and there so a 3mm block can 'pass' for an 8" block on a 1:100 model.

 

  I digress ...  IF Simon's model is about 32" stern to the knight head (more or less the 'on deck' measurement), so deduct 1/2" to be safe to get 31.5", and the difference between on deck and between perpendiculars is about 96% (25.5 divided by 26.5 = .962), then the between perpendicular value on his model should be about 30 1/4" (30.72).  The full size is 212' x 12 = 2544", then  divide by 30.25 to get ... drumroll ... 84.1  So my guess of the model scale is about 1:84, which is still a good scale.

Edited July 7 by Snug Harbor Johnny

[My Fathers Son]

K7

10 hours ago, Snug Harbor Johnny said:

  215' x 12 (inches per foot) = 2580" full scale hull (O.A.L. as opposed to 'between perpendiculars' ... a different bugaboo).  2580 divided by 32 (your hull) = 80.625 ... call it 1:80.  You may be better off with a slightly larger model to work on.

 

EDIT: - additional info.  'Seems the T (according to a public source) was 212'  "between perpendiculars" (Wikipedia states the CS as 212 1/2' registered length, implying between perpendiculars) Three other sources note these same distances as being between perpendiculars.  ... This is an interesting point, sometimes misunderstood (as I had done before).  The "perpendiculars" (used as a standard concept of registered vessel length) consist of a vertical line where the cutwater at the bow meets the waterline (not sure whether this is laden or unladen, as it would make a difference depending on the angle of the cutwater), and another vertical line that is the centerline of the steering post. 

 

  The distance between these vertical lines ("perpendiculars" meaning 90 degrees to the waterline) is measured.  I took out the Revell 1:96 T hull half and measured about 25 1/2" along the point where the exposed planking meets the molded copper plates from the cutwater to the sternpost.  Hmmmm, if multiplied by 96, I get 2448", which is only 204'.   So something is wrong.  If I multiply the 25 1/2 inches by 100, I get 2550" full size. Divide by 12 to get ... 212.5' (the model hull was made for CS), or about 1:100 scale between perpendiculars.

 

  Now if the kit designers (Revell CS & T) were using the "length on deck" (stern to the forecastle point, which does not include the bowsprit, which if added to the length on deck would give the O.A.L.) to figure the model scale, 212.5 x 12 = 2550, divided by 96 = 26.56".  So I measure their model hull's 'on deck' dimension to about (here it comes) ... 26 1/2 inches !  This is an "Ah-ha" moment.

The Revell kits are 1:96 if the registered length is taken for an "on deck" measurement.  Ok, one can quibble or niggle over the difference between 1:96 and 1:100 ... I actually use 1:100, since its easy to do the math for fittings: e.g. an 8" block (about 200mm) is 2mm at 1:00 - and blocks most often come in millimeter sizes.  Working with 2mm blocks is a pain, and many modelers get go a bit oversize here and there so a 3mm block can 'pass' for an 8" block on a 1:100 model.

 

  I digress ...  IF Simon's model is about 32" stern to the knight head (more or less the 'on deck' measurement), so deduct 1/2" to be safe to get 31.5", and the difference between on deck and between perpendiculars is about 96% (25.5 divided by 26.5 = .962), then the between perpendicular value on his model should be about 30 1/4" (30.72).  The full size is 212' x 12 = 2544", then  divide by 30.25 to get ... drumroll ... 84.1  So my guess of the model scale is about 1:84, which is still a good scale.

It's the Admirals birthday tomorrow so I might not get the chance to look at this in detail. I did a rough and ready calculation this evening and the beam seems to be in proportion with the length. 

I will take some physical measurements and post them soon. 

According to the plans, it is 764mm between perpendicular but I will have to check. 

 

Simon

[My Fathers Son]

Forgot to mention I finished planking the forecastle. 

Simon

[Keith Black]

 That looks nice, Simon. 

[Baker]

Indeed, nice planking.

And happy birthday to the admiral. 

[My Fathers Son]

Thank you guys for the likes and comments, the veneer cuts easily and the prep work on the deck paid off. 

I have measured her today and let's keep it metric to make it easier for all. 

She is 720mm between perpendiculars, 125mm across the beam and 100mm from the main deck to the foot of the keel midships. 

I am not sure we're the draft is measured from but the gunwhales will be 15mm from the main deck. So from gunwhales to keel she will be 115mm.

212ft is 63.6 metres which at 1:95 should be 670mm. So the actual scale is about 1:88 

Beam is reported at 36ft so 10.89m. At 1:88 that should be 12.37cm so at 125 that is pretty much on the mark. 

Depth of 6.4m or 20.9ft is 7.2cm, but I am not sure where that is measured from. 

That might account for her sleak lines. 

 

Simon 

[My Fathers Son]

Nor much progress the last few days. Had to correct three strikes on the starboard side as they were out of alignment. Fine tuned the frames adjacent to the stern deck ready for planking and started marking out where the aft deckhouse is to be located. Rough it out on FreeCAD and transfer to a card template. 

Once I am happy with the layout, I can transfer this to the actual deck.

This morning I have been using up my supply of coffee sticks advancing the hull planking on the Starboard side and looking at how I will be planking the stern. 

You can see from these images that the gunwales are not flush with the aft deck.

Rather a sad ending for the old girl.

The 1937 model has gunwales about 50% up of the height of the aft deckhouse so i will emulate that and compare to the 1896 profile above to see if it makes sense.

 

Simon

[My Fathers Son]

Have been wearing the old thinking cap trying to figure out how i am going to plank the stern.

One piece in and it was a son of a gun to get it to stick. I havent had to steam or soak any timbers till now but i have come to the conclusion that this has to change or i am not going to get the finish i want. Also, getting clamps on that last corner is next to impossible and had to resort to the universal clamp, a rubber band, or in this case, multiple rybber bands. There were two pieces here but one broke and i removed it.

Also, you can see that I had to fill the void where the transition is the most complex curve, this will be a good test of my patience. 

The rest of the planking is coming along but I am not rushing this.

There are a couple of places where I will overlay some 1/32 basswood and apply judicious sanding. 

I am not aiming for a perfect finish. I want to be able to see individual planks through the paint.

Going to have to start shopping for accessories such as portholes, blocks and deadeyes soon.

 

Simon

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  I've thought about this problem, and imagined planking the stern above where the major rub wale (extra thick, thin strake?) by first making paper templates of the shape of each successive plank - starting with the highest plank (just under the gunwale).  It would be shaped something like a 'horseshoe', and the exact shape determined by successive trial fittings of the paper template (modified and re-made as needed).  Then a plank would have to be cut out by jig saw from flat stock, soaked/heated and then bent around.

 

  Then planking would proceed from the top down, staggering butt joints.  The planking would be from the top down the entire length of the hull, but only going down as far as the rub strake, which could then be fitted (if not already done) - then the top so-many scale feet of the hull would be done, and the rest of the hull is considered 'separately planked', with the planks going fore-and-aft and bending up to but against the rub strake is what might be considered a pseudo-round tuck ... not unlike one of the photos you posted.

Edited July 15 by Snug Harbor Johnny

[My Fathers Son]

On 7/15/2024 at 7:55 PM, Snug Harbor Johnny said:

  I've thought about this problem, and imagined planking the stern above where the major rub wale (extra thick, thin strake?) by first making paper templates of the shape of each successive plank - starting with the highest plank (just under the gunwale).  It would be shaped something like a 'horseshoe', and the exact shape determined by successive trial fittings of the paper template (modified and re-made as needed).  Then a plank would have to be cut out by jig saw from flat stock, soaked/heated and then bent around.

 

  Then planking would proceed from the top down, staggering butt joints.  The planking would be from the top down the entire length of the hull, but only going down as far as the rub strake, which could then be fitted (if not already done) - then the top so-many scale feet of the hull would be done, and the rest of the hull is considered 'separately planked', with the planks going fore-and-aft and bending up to but against the rub strake is what might be considered a pseudo-round tuck ... not unlike one of the photos you posted.

I started from strikes 3, 4 and 5 from stem to stern. There is no tapering on these strikes. The fore section is a gentle curve into the knighthood. Aft is another story. Still very little tapering but there are compound twist and curve. The later section had to use hot water to soften the basswood and this has given me a result I am content with.

The top strake is no 2 and is not glued yet, i am just gentle persuading it that it might like to become that shape.

The Basswood strip behaves quite well in these circumstances. 

I did intend to put no 1 strake on to forn the shape but I think I will leave that till tomorrow, I am on the late shift for today and tomorrow  so won't get much if any done tonight.

 

simon

[My Fathers Son]

Another start late, finish late day and won't be home till 20:30 at the earliest so I doubt I will do much tonight.

I have managed to do some planning this morning and have cut out a few strikes from 1/16 basswood. 

I have temporarily clamped these in place on the Starboard hull. 

What coffee sticks I have left I will use on the port side for a bit of continuity but plan to use the basswood to finish the planking. As there is only one joint in each strake, I will use a knife tip or scribe to imitate joints to match the other wood.

 

Simon

[My Fathers Son]

This popped up in my Facebook feed.

Foochow harbour 1869.

[My Fathers Son]

The next two pieces glued up and clamped in. This has been easier now I have accepted that I need to use linger lengths of timber. Clamping is an issue and have had to think outside the box more than once.

I have had to bow to the wishes of the wood as far as the cutwater is concerned. 

Frames 2 to 14 all have concave curves. 3 is all but straight with 2 having a convex curve. I just can't get a clamp to hold in this area so have surrendered to the wood and allowed it to set the curvature. 

This may be the lazy way out of this issue but it has created a gentle, smooth transition from forest to keel. I have a little bit of infill to sort at the top were I tried to insist but I am content with how she is turning out.

Simon

[davyboy]

Hi Simon,

 

It's a long and winding road but the journey will be worth it. Looking good so far.

 

Dave 

[My Fathers Son]

Long and winding is about right. It takes time to persuade the wood thar it really does want to assume that shape . Still, not too far from closing up the Starboard side.

There Is something about the shape of the hull that stopped me from tapering each strake and I have a small section midships that I need to shape and blend in. After sanding, I will take stock of whether I need an outer 1/32 layer of planks.

 

 

Simon

Edited July 21 by My Fathers Son
Autotxt error

[My Fathers Son]

I had hoped to close of the Starboard side this evening but was defeated by drying time and the weather. 

Just one small infill and then two full strikes for the gunwhales and can safely move over to the port side. Lots of sanding to do.

 

Simon

[My Fathers Son]

In between working on the port side planking I have been working on the lifeboats.

 

I decided to make a solid plug this time. I cut out the flat shape and frames from 1/32" basswood and then filled the spaces between with balsa, yes that really expensive wood as soft as a sponge.

The idea being that I could soak the ribs, stretch them over the plug and pin them in place while they dried. Almost worked but had to resort to rubber bands and spring clamps in the end.

 

So after that I glued on the garboard strikes and Gunwhales and when the glue set up overnight, removed the frame from the plug. Bleeping CA seeps through on every joint and end up having to use a craft knife to ease it away.

 

Have then been planking it and as they are clinker built, I have overlapped the boards and filed of the excess. 

two more strakes and the basic boat is done. Just the internal fittings to do then. That will be one down, one to go as i have already made the jollyboat.

 

Simon

 

 

[My Fathers Son]

OK, I completed it and made a few internal bits.

Don't like it. 1/32 wood is too thick and ruins the scale. The transitions from Bow/Stern to midships are too severe, she is too broad in the beam and to cap it all she is asymmetric. 

 

Checked the plug and yes, that is were the fault lies. I used a more accurate compass and straight line to equalise the shape and used 60 grade paper to adjust it. I have then used 600 grade paper to smooth it out. Lastly, I have given it a generous coating of coloron was in the hope that the CA will stick less to the plug.

I use a syringe with a very fine needle to apply CA, it's the only way I can control the flow. This does have the advantage of being able to clamp a piece in place and then inject the glue into the joint instead of gluing up and then rushing to get the piece into place.

 

Simon 

 

Edited August 8 by My Fathers Son
Spelling

[My Fathers Son]

Continued with the lifeboat.

So that was the frame and provisional stem/stern posts and keel.

This is how far I have taken the planking this morning. I don't wet the boards as I want the tension in the board. You will note the syringe I use to run a bead across the bottom edge of the board where it overlaps the board below. Then I inject a little glue into the intersection of each rib and post.

There is only a small amount of tapering needed.

 

Simon

[My Fathers Son]

Finished planking the first lifeboat. Still a bit to do, add seats and footboard, bend and mount the rest of the gunwhales  and I will be happy with this one. Reducing the timbers to veneer made all the difference.

Simon