Great Henry 1536 by Snug Harbor Johnny - Sergal - major 'bust' of 1975 kit re-scaled from 1:65 to 1:88

[Louie da fly]

Looks like a bit of trial and error with scrap wood should enable you to work out the right shapes for your castle sides, but I think you're on the right track.

 

Your swivel gun mounting sounds good (subject to experimentation, of course). Here's a modern diagram of a swivel mount, and the real thing in the next pic,

  

 

Regarding that "Holbein" painting - I don't know how his name got attached to all these pictures of the Great Harry (oh, alright, Great Henry) - it's possible that someone thought "paintings - Henry VIII's time - must be Holbein". As far as I know there's no evidence of any sort that he did any painting of the Great Henry, except later speculative labelling. Here's another pic supposedly of the same ship, also ascribed to Holbein, even though its' obviously from considerably later (maybe as late as 1620). 

And that engraving above, as far as I'm concerned it's pretty obviously just taken directly from the "Embarkation" painting, with a few Victorian era alterations and additions.

 

Steven

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  Thanks again, Steven ... you have certainly blazed a trail with the beautiful job of your 1:200 GH - something so intricate as to be beyond my ability as a miniature.  The Sergal kit has swivel gun components that are good enough for my purposes, as well  as a couple other cannon kits (representing different calibers) with carriages/barrel supports ... and also 2/3rds length 'half barrels' of the largest ordnance for the lower gun decks.

 

  I have a couple other 'parts kits' - AL's San Juan (which I'd never build) and a vintage Mamoli Golden Hind ... having beautiful multi-page plan sheets/visual how-to (one can get images of these very plans on the HIS Model website).   I'm treating the Sergal sheets - even larger and more impressive - as visual aids only.  The AL kit was marked down in a hobby store and I bought it for materials only.  The GH was inherited, and I didn't agree with their interpretation of Drake's flagship - for reasons that might be discussed in a yet to be conceived log.   The kit's nominal 1:54 scale (one can still buy a more recent version of this kit still listed as 1:54) is not correct, and the hull measures nearly identical to the Airfix 1:72 plastic model - which I bought at a low price just to PROVE the Mamoli kit was 1:72.   The Airfix configuration seems more likely (with the gun deck below the weather deck), but not the 'Captain's walk'.

 

  Some parts I want to use for the GH are pictured below.  On the left are some metal surrounds from the Mamoli kit for the tear-shaped deadeyes to be fabricated ... not sure if I want to use as many as seven threaded holes in the deadeyes, although that is what was found on the MR.  The other bits above may not apply since the MR had actual chain from the deadeye surround to where the chain was secured to the hull ... guess that is the origin of "chain plate".  To the right are some small cannon from the Al kit that may come in handy, as I like the simple bases that go with the turned barrels.

 

  There are also 30 gunport surrounds from AL with hinged lids that could save me a lot of trouble, but there are not quite enough of them.  There are some unhinged port surrounds on the far right.  BTW, the AL claim of 1:30 is way off ... more like 1:72 or so (I may try calculating some time).

 

  There has been a lot of re-working/re-making my GH frames, so I used the pieces as they have evolved to hold against my initial 'rough' drawing to get the deck levels as they are now - and thus correct the drawing.  I also wanted to start fixing location for the lunettes, initially considering 1/2" (as I have some forstner bits in 1/8" increments).  The call is to use 7/16" and not have them semicircular, but to stand a little higher than just a semi circle would be - having short vertical lengths near the bottom of the opening.  That would represent about 38"wide and 24" high, enough to have some windage and elevation control for the swivel guns.  The revised drawing is pictured below:

 

  Still, not everything is decided - but the evolution is looking good.  Mast positions T.B.D.  The lowest gun decks will have hinged square ports.  A gun port nearest the rudder should be eliminated to allow for proper operation of the tiller.  The weather deck at the waist should have side planking to the rail just above the lunettes, which serve as 'scuppers'.  The deck will have camber.  Above the lunettes the posts extend and there is a top rail - shields can be affixed to the posts.  I imaging there can be some desk grating amidships.  There will be access doors to the castles on the weather deck.  An elevated gangway is imagined running down the center to castle doors on either end at the next deck level.  In action, there would be anti boarding netting running from either side of the elevated gangway to the waist top rails, but I don't plan on including them (unless rolled up on either side of the gangway).  OK, lets have a closer look at the stern castle:

 

 

  I'm strongly influenced by the GH on the Anthony Roll, and there are decorated horizontal members indicated, and no sign of vertical stiffening.  Now the MR did have vertical members (at least at the base of the castle that was recoverable), yet the GH was a larger and much heavier version built after the MR and  may have used different and/or modified techniques.  One can't know whether lapstrake was used on the castle as it seems was the case on the MR, and I'm leaning to carvel all the way, with strong horizontal stabilizers that can be painted as seen on the A.R.  Besides, even a 2" thick lapstrake plank would only stand .022" proud at the overlap in the scale I'm building ... we'll see.

 

  The first deck in the castle has lunettes for lesser caliber cannon than the lower gun decks.  The lunettes above permit a standing man to fire an anti-personnel  swivel gun from each.  The second castle deck is similarly configured, but that deck has much higher headroom than the deck below.  While the guns would be manned in action, they would otherwise be secured as this level would have housed the Captain and officers ... and the King on the rare occasions he'd be present.  I imagine that luxurious curtains or tapestries would cover the lunette openings and suitable furnishings would be provided for the King.  What appears to be 'blank space' above the lunettes on the second castle deck is a wider planked area that shows clearly on the Anthony Roll, having wider diagonal stripes painted.

 

  Above the overhead of that second deck I'm strongly considering having a few lightweight guns in lunnete/scuppers with half-planked railing similar to the weather deck below at the waist.  Shields on the posts are an option (though not appearing on the A.R.).  Once again, I'm not fond of adding netting as it would not have been in place in port (the way I'm going to place the model - sails either furled or taken down entirely).  A single line of ridge poles to support netting would likely have been stowable anyway.  Not shown in a side view are any weapons directly astern, or those that may be on the sides of the castles facing the waist deck.

 

  Now to the fore castle.  I'm drawing it with a distinct curve, as opposed to a flat face.  Once again, the artists impression shows this curve on the A.R., and it must have made quite an impression.  Many previously built carracks have such a curve.  Note also that the fore castle is higher than the reduced stern castle of the 1536 re-build.

 

 

 

  The first model to be on view at the MR museum was built (rather conservatively) with a 'galleon' style fore castle, and this is the model that the Caldercraft MR kit emulates.  The MR museum has been admitted that the MR had a much larger fore castle (not sure if they've switched out the display model at the museum) - the sort dramatically depicted in recent books.  The curve approximated represents something that I haven't attempted to draw/design from any other viewpoint.  It will have to be engineered and built right on the model when I get to that point.  The way it will work into the bow area and still resemble the A.R. depiction will be done at that time and photographed.

 

  What I'm doing is much like designing a kit.  This one (thank goodness) has no carvings, other than the beast figurehead supplied in cast metal by Sergal, as well as the metal King's crown (seen in the A.R. image, so they must have seen that) and the grappling gear for the end of the bowsprit.  Oh yes, they have included the 'rigging cutters' cast in metal for the yard ends (ref. A.R. image).

 

 

 

 

 

[Louie da fly]

That all sounds very good. You've thought through the interior in regard to positioning the lunettes, which I never did when I was 17, and had to bodge the openings when they interfered with the big thick balsa frames. Ah, if I'd known then what I know now . . . for a start I wouldn't have built in 1:200!!

 

I still have my doubts about the curving face of the forecastle, but that's a matter of interpretation anyway, and is pretty minor issue compared to the great job you're doing overall.

 

12 hours ago, Snug Harbor Johnny said:

The other bits above may not apply since the MR had actual chain from the deadeye surround to where the chain was secured to the hull ... guess that is the origin of "chain plate"

And also "channels" (= chain wales).

 

The guns look very good - very appropriate to the time and place.

 

Any chance of a photo of the "beast figurehead"?

 

Steven

[GrandpaPhil]

This is a very cool build!

 

The breech loaders aren’t too difficult to make.

 

I made mine from toothpicks, with the banding done in thin strips of normal printer paper.

 

I made the handle for the breech out of thin annealed wire bought from a Habitat For Humanity Re-Store.

Edited June 27, 2023 by GrandpaPhil

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  The castings were unwrapped for a picture, and the bits of white plaster on them appears to be left over from the matrix of 'lost wax' casting of the brass alloy.  They will clean up nicely. The size of the bits appear OK when held next to the framework I have so far.

 

 

  Now as for the curved inner face of the fore castle, we've all seen the distinct forecastle curvature on period artwork of earlier carracks, as well as moderate curvature on many ships around the same time as the GH - and a few that look flat.  Since I've decided to favor the A.R. depiction for the model, the amount of curve employed may be a reasonable 'interpretation'.

 

  I've read-up on Henry (the eighth of that name) and his reign ... seems he was VERY security conscious, as many Kings were.  He kept a secure sleeping chamber equipped with a door lock only he had a key to, so he'd lock it from the inside and guards were posted outside the door.  When traveling on a 'progress', the King would have the largest room in whatever noble's mansion he was to stay at.  A special locking mechanism had to be installed ahead of time that only Henry would have the key to.

 

  So I imagine that when the GH was ever readied for use by Henry, the back part of the officers' deck in the stern castle was partitioned off with linenfold paneling as the private chamber or 'closet' (with lock).  There was probably a chamber ahead of that for the noblemen who served the King's person, then another area where the King might confer with the Captain, envoys, etc.  There is much interior detail that survived on the Vasa (seen on links in another MSW thread) where the interior had a 'forced perspective' making the the more important person seem larger to anyone positioned at the forward end of the area.  'Wouldn't surprise me if there was something like this inside the GH - and no expense would have been spared for the King's comfort and grandeur.

[Roger Pellett]

6 wives; 2 beheaded, two divorced, and he almost had #6 killed. There was no shortage of people who would want to do away from him.  He had reason, of his own making, to be concerned with his security.

 

Roger.

[Louie da fly]

One of his servants was the Groom of the Stool (look it up!). Apparently a very desirable appointment as it meant you had the King's ear (well, something of the King's, anyway).

 

Steven

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  There is a mnemonic for Henry's wives:  Divorced, beheaded, died - divorced, beheaded, survived.

 

  Anyway, the discussions of scale here and elsewhere had me consider the difference between knowing the exact hull length of a ship (therefore being able to calculate the scale of its model) versus when one does not know the 'true' hull length, and is using an approximation.  My estimation of 165' on the GH hull was based on the estimations of tonnage (and there are several published) difference between the MR and GH.  We know the hull length of the MR sue to what has been recovered (and that much is remarkable for such an old ship).

 

  So my stated scale of the GH being developed is based on an approximated length, and another builder might have settled on a different hull length before drawings are made for another model of the same ship.  The key is that both models are using the MR lines as a basis (and that is both reasonable and logical) they will have about the same hull proportions regardless of model size.  Now if by some miracle as much of the GH were found as was found for the MR, we'd know the actual hull length of the GH ... and from that 're-calculate' the nominal scale of the models already built.

 

  Thus its not the estimated scale that matters, but the proportions of the model.  In other words, does it 'look' the way it should (with allowances for construction decisions/appearances made for some features subject to interpretation).  The GH lines I've developed are not 'exactly' those of the MR, since the larger ship does not quite 'scale-up' the same and still be practical and seaworthy.  But they are still close enough the the GH is 'big brother' to his sister MR.  The stern castle as depicted on the Anthony Roll flows right out of the hull form.  There have been (and shall yet be) some decisions made on the appearance of the fore castle, with the A.R. as an inspiration.

 

  The GH is getting my attention now because of its novelty, and also that the work done already on the Vasa was mostly aimed at trying to correct the deficiencies inherited from an old kit built too far to go backwards very much.  Yet when further work is eventually done, it will have an adequate 'stand off' impression of the original - recognizable to anyone familiar with the subject.  Fortunate is the builder with a contemporary kit (yes, there ARE a great many carved figures on the original) and, of course, many photos of the original in the state of restoration practical as she sits.

 

  A project like the Golden Hind (and there have been many interpretations of it) presents far greater challenges, given the lack of naval archeology on that ship and the lack of contemporary specific artwork for the Golden Hind.  I've recently posted some considerations for omitting a  "Captain's walk" on the Hind, since the builder's excellent hull construction had not yet reached a commitment point for that feature.  Decoration of the exterior is completely 'up in the air' for any version of Drake's flagship, whereas there is something to go on for the painting of the Great Harry based on the Anthony Roll.  Ok, maybe I'll try an 'pimp it' a bit here and there ... as the Sergal kit does have small brass fleur-de-lis that could go on open gun ports (like the lion heads on the Vasa gun ports).  English Kings of old maintained a claim on the French Crown as seen on Royal heraldry ... and the fleur-de-lis on some of the shields seen on the 'embarkation' painting.

Edited July 3, 2023 by Snug Harbor Johnny

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  I found that Artesania Latina sells various kit replacement parts, and there were three sizes of gunport surrounds w/lids; 7mm, 9mm and 13mm.  The 13mm are not the ones I have from the San Juan (different and more detailed castings), but it is unclear WHICH dimension of the remainder is being cited; the size inside the surround (between liners), the lid size or the O.D. of the surround.  So I ordered 2 sets (4 ports ea.) of the 7mm and 2 sets (3 ports ea.) of the 9mm. - and they weren't expensive.   One of sizes should match what I have on hand.

 

  There was a problem ordering from Spain by credit card, but PayPal worked alright.  The Admiral noted that the same was true when she's ordered needlework supplies from overseas - so PayPal is always used, and credit cards are for domestic ordering.

[Louie da fly]

On 6/30/2023 at 12:19 AM, Snug Harbor Johnny said:

English Kings of old DID maintain a tenuous 'claim' on the French Crown as seen on Royal heraldry

TENUOUS???? Zounds, sirrah, them's fighting words!

 

(Check the first scene of Shakespeare's Henry V to find the basis of the claim. Complex but fascinating - the French dismissed the claim of the king's daughter on the basis that she was a woman and "No woman shall succeed in Salic Land" - see https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2012/04/happy-birthday-william-shakespeare-henry-v-and-salic-law/ )

 

Steven

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

9 hours ago, Louie da fly said:

TENUOUS???? Zounds, sirrah, them's fighting words!

 

(Check the first scene of Shakespeare's Henry V to find the basis of the claim. Complex but fascinating - the French dismissed the claim of the king's daughter on the basis that she was a woman and "No woman shall succeed in Salic Land" - see https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2012/04/happy-birthday-william-shakespeare-henry-v-and-salic-law/ )

 

Steven

  Sorry, mate ... 'never meant to cause a stir (I'll have to study history more) or get anyone's knickers in a twist.  So I've edited the post to simply say that English Kings maintained a claim to the French Crown.  Hmmmm, my mom comes from a long line of Brandons descending form the John Brandon who married Henry VIII's sister.  So I suppose I might claim to be in line for the English Crown, although I dare say that there are a LOT of people in the queue ahead of me.  It was also said, "When Adam delved and Eve span, who was then a Gentleman?"

[Louie da fly]

My post was written with my tongue very much in my cheek. The fact that Edward III had already previously paid homage to the "usurping" French king rather tends to invalidate his - and every other English monarch's - later claim to the throne of France, doesn't it?

 

10 hours ago, Snug Harbor Johnny said:

"When Adam delved and Eve span, who was then a Gentleman?"

Well, you know what happened to THEM, don't you?

Death of Wat Tyler, leader of the Peasants' Revolt during a "negotiation" with King Richard II. https://www.wattylercountrypark.org.uk/peasants#:~:text=Kent rebels led by Wat,He died an agonising death.

 

Steven