RRS Discovery 1901 by gak1965 - 1:72 - First Scratch Build

[gak1965]

Thanks Gary!

 

That's my assumption as well,  but I still find it amusing in landlocked Wyoming. But, heck, Idaho (!) has one of the larger seaports in the form of Lewiston, more than 450 miles from the ocean on the eastern side of the Cascades, so I shouldn't be so amused I guess.

 

Regards,

George 

[gak1965]

Well, some paint going on the hull.

 

So - the first decision was what color to paint below the load water line. In the end, I decided to use the Tamiya "hull red", which I realize is an IJN color, but it represents a reddish brown lead paint color. And because it is darker, it seems more consistent with the relatively small difference in shading we see on those black and white photos, for example, this one:

 

 

Here is the model with just the hull red to the load waterline. You will note that I have painted the bulwarks white - not because they are going to end up that color, but because that way I sealed any gaps so when the black paint goes on it will not leak through to the inner bulwarks which are white. Second, you will see that I have painted a 1/8" white stripe just below the bulwarks. As you see in the above photo, there is a white stripe, but that stripe is below a wale on the hull. That wale is going to be made with black painted 1/16 inch square stock that will be attached at the top of the hull stripe, leaving a 1/16 inch (4.5 inches at scale) white stripe as shown above.

 

 

And here she is with the black paint.

 

 

You can see that the stripe at the stern is wider. I need to soak and pre-bend a 1/16 strip to go around the stern, and then I will paint the remainder of the bulwark in that area once I can no longer drip onto the lower part of the stripe. Bottom line is that it needs some touchup, but the stripe is in place and I think that the colors are at least a reasonable, defensible choice even if it turns out I am wrong.

 

Thanks for looking in and the likes!

 

Regards,

George

 

[gak1965]

Okay, another brief update. The outer hull is painted. It needs a bit of touch up, but otherwise is in pretty good shape.

 

 

I've subsequently started the deck. Annoyingly, the main deck needs to be 24.5 inches long, and I can primarily find 24 inch long lumber. So, the question is whether to do a proper, stepped set of planks or to find some alternative. Ultimately I remembered that the last couple of inches of the main deck are covered by a monkey poop and won't really be visible (as seen here):

 

 

So, bottom line is that I'm just going to join them all at the stern. It's not as neat as staggered joints, but it will be hidden, so, no matter. The forecastle is closed on the Discovery, so the deck only needs to extend a bit forward of the third bulkhead.

 

 

As always, thanks for looking in and the likes!

 

Regards,

George

 

 

[Jared]

It's looking really nice George.  You are making a lot of  progress. 

[gak1965]

19 hours ago, Jared said:

It's looking really nice George.  You are making a lot of  progress. 

 

Thanks Jared. It's coming along slowly, but is starting to look like a ship.

 

Regards,

George

[Rick310]

Really very nice George!!

Rick

[gak1965]

On 11/13/2024 at 8:05 PM, Rick310 said:

Really very nice George!!

Rick

Thanks Rick!

 

Well, a bit of an update. 

 

I've put the main deck planking on. As I mentioned, the junction at the stern is basically in a single joint, but it's going to be covered by a monkey poop, so no one is going to see it at the stern. First, mostly done:

 

 

 

And complete:

 

 

 

Eagle-eyed observers will note that I fitted a subdeck on the forcastle. I will glue that in place once I've set up the mounting point for the bowsprit and a couple of anchor points for the lower main forestays (which annoyingly mount inside the closed forecastle), and then will put the forecastle deck in place. As an aside, there are two doors into the forecastle from the main deck, which I will not be installing until after the standing rigging is in place, as that is how I intend to get to the forestay anchor points.

 

Given the ship's current state, I thought I would share this one picture from Dundee Heritage Trust. It's of the Discovery in 1923, as she was going in for a refit prior to becoming an oceanographic vessel (and in many ways becoming the ship she is today). I'm pleased that there is a certain resemblance here to the model.

 

 

I've started thinking about the deck furniture and this has got me deep into questions about how much to trust various sources, and specifically the current ship. As I've shown before, the plans have two deck houses in the stern that butt up against the monkey poop. Between the deck houses are the access port so that you can repair the prop, and the rudder post.

 

Here is a picture of the starboard deckhouse (and a giant albatross) (from the Scott Polar Research Institute)

 

 

Note a couple of things here. The deckhouse runs right up to the main rail and has doors on the forward side. You will note the officer standing on a rectangular metal conduit - that is the path for the chains that operate the tiller. You will also note that there is a lot of open space. By contrast, here are some pictures of the ship today (all from Wikipedia). Looking forward:

 

 

And looking aft:

 

 

 

 

The deck houses are smaller, have no forward doors, are closer together (it's jammed up against the access point for the screw, and the steering chains go to the outside of the deckhouse, not the inside) and do not touch the main rail. Bottom line is that as nice as it is to have the real ship around, about the only thing that can be trusted is what is shown in that reconstruction photo above - the hull. Everything else is going to have to come from plans or photos (and ones from 1901-1904, not ones after the 1923 refit). Which is okay, I just need to keep reminding myself.

 

As always, thanks for looking in and the likes.

 

Regards,

George

 

[Keith Black]

It's nice to see correctly scaled planking. Well done, George. 

[gak1965]

On 11/30/2024 at 1:53 PM, Keith Black said:

It's nice to see correctly scaled planking. Well done, George. 

Thanks Keith!

 

It's hard to judge exactly, but my read is that the planks in the photo above are between 4 or 6 inches wide (depends on how big the sailor's feet are). As a result, it's probably a bit small as the planks are 1/16 which is to say 4.5 inches at scale. The next commonly available size was 3/32 which is 6.75 inches at scale, and I prefer to err on the small rather than the large side.

 

Regards,

George

[Keith Black]

 The narrower the width the less shrinkage so 4.5 inches sounds perfect for deck planking. 

[druxey]

Reconstruction is part fun, part frustration! At least your subject was in her prime in the days of photography.

[gak1965]

On 12/1/2024 at 4:36 PM, Keith Black said:

 The narrower the width the less shrinkage so 4.5 inches sounds perfect for deck planking. 

 

And where they were going, shrinkage would be an issue...

 

On 12/1/2024 at 5:21 PM, druxey said:

Reconstruction is part fun, part frustration! At least your subject was in her prime in the days of photography.

 

Yep. What I have been finding is that you need to be really careful. I was looking at a web page I recently found with a listing of the ship's crew, and some photos.

 

https://www.coolantarctica.com/Antarctica fact file/History/antarctic_whos_who_discovery.php

 

In theory this was about the 1901-1904 voyage. There was a signed photo of the ship included, and I had a start, because it looked like the bowsprit was not the single pole shown in the plans, but the two piece bowsprit/jibboom on the current ship. But, looking more carefully at the signatures, the people that signed were from the 1929-1931 BANZARE expedition, that also used the (post-refit) Discovery. Stuff from Dundee Heritage is much more careful, but they seem to have much more information on the refitted (i.e. current) ship than the original. Incidentally, if anyone actually wants to make the current ship, Dundee Heritage has been digitizing the refit plans - they are there for the asking.

 

An update. I decided to tackle the forecastle next. It turns out I needed to repair a broken chunk of the forecastle first, but simple to do. There are two things that need to be in the forecastle (which is sealed off): a resting place for the bowsprit and an anchor point for the lower main forestays. The latter is here:

 

 

And here are the two of them mounted in the forecastle. 

 

 

The clamps were holding a couple of planks I was pre-bending to become the edges of the deck planking on the forecastle. I then installed the sub deck (first cutting a convenient path for the bowsprit in one of the supports built into the subdeck, and then planked it.

 

 

A couple of the planks took the stain way more than the others, but, it is what it is. I bought them at my local hobby shop, I wonder if maybe they were a different batch. Here is the ship as a whole from two slightly different views.

 

 

 

Next up is going to be the bulkhead that closes off the forecastle (minus the doors), rudder and prop, the decorative work on the prow, and then the main rail.

 

Finally, here is your historical Discovery photo for the entry. This is the crew looking forward, sitting between the main and foremasts. The structure on the left (aft) is the above deck portion of the engine room and one of two reels attached to that structure. Good views of the primary boat frames. We learn several things from this photo. 1) The main mast also has tied ratlines, rather than the slats on the current ship (a previous photo indicated that the foremast was similar. However, I think that the shrouds are wire as indicated in the plans, as opposed to the foremast whose plans (and another photo) indicate are hemp (no metal within 9 meters/30 feet of the magnetic observatory). The modern ship has a bulge in the main rail to accommodate the chainplates that are not shown on the plans and that don't seem to be present here. Finally, the modern ship has the metal engine room structure painted white, and that is definitely not the case here. It's not black/navy blue - compare the color with the sailor's uniforms - maybe just raw steel? But I would assume you would want some kind of protective coating on anything going to sea - some kind of gray? Will have to noodle on that a bit.

 

 

This is probably my last update for a couple of weeks. My wife and I just turned or are just about to turn 60, so we are taking a bucket list trip, flying to London on Wednesday, and taking the Queen Mary 2 from Southampton to New York. It's surprisingly affordable this time of year (perhaps because the North Atlantic is rough and cold?), so we figured what the heck. We've both spent plenty of time at sea in rough weather, including a winter storm (40 ft seas and 75 MPH winds) off Alaska on our honeymoon and the ability to disconnect will be good.

 

As always, thanks for looking in and the likes. 

 

Regards,

George

 

 

[Ian_Grant]

Remember the advice seasoned crossers gave to newbies at the start of the Ireland-New York voyage in the great movie "Brooklyn":

 

"You musn't eat!!"

[gak1965]

13 minutes ago, Ian_Grant said:

You musn't eat!!"

 

To heck with that!

 

We both intend sail the Atlantic on a sea of wine and meals prepared by someone else.

 

I take your point though. The morning of that storm in Alaska (on the 1950s SS Rotterdam) breakfast was much less well attended than usual, and while we were eating, a wave hit one of the portholes just right and blasted it in. We lifted our feet as water rushed under our table, the crew plugged the hole, and we moved to the other dining room.

 

And hey, Dramamine is OTC.

 

Regards,

George

[vaddoc]

Just finished going through the pages George, nicely done. Really interesting ship and a very enjoyable log - you clearly are having a lot of fun! I think your choice of color for the hull works well.

 

Best wishes

Vaddoc

[Rick310]

Really well done George!!

Great job on the research!

Rixk

[druxey]

I think the varying degree of stain looks fine; it shows that the deck is made of separate planks. The difference in tone will probably even out over time.

 

Enjoy your North Atlantic crossing!

[Jared]

Nice progress George.  Bon voyage!

[gak1965]

Well, we are (almost) back (sitting in the train hall in NYC. A couple of images for you all. First, a Santa bike ride at London Waterloo on our way to Southampton.

 

 

A bit of sea:

 

 

A model of the QM2 (large, scale uncertain):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Homer a Simpson in one of the bas reliefs:

 

 

And two photos of the more things change. Nibbed deck planks:

 

 

And wooden deck gratings

 

 

It was a nice trip until Thursday when I wound up with a norovirus infection, which is not recommended.

 

Regards,

George

[Rick310]

Feel better George!  Looks like a nice trip!

Rick

[Kevin-the-lubber]

Cruise ships seem to currently be havens for nasties like norovirus, probably (I guess) because they have such a huge number of people in a relatively small space and an awful lot of sites such as stair bannisters that lend themselves. Anyway, aside from the norovirus, what was the QM2. Asking for a friend, who likes cruises… 

 

The model is looking great, I’m enjoying watching you bring this together. Happy Christmas, hope 2025 is a great year for you.

[gak1965]

On 12/22/2024 at 7:59 AM, Kevin-the-lubber said:

Anyway, aside from the norovirus, what was the QM2. Asking for a friend, who likes cruises… 

 

As they say, "apart from that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play" 😀

 

Actually, it was very relaxing. Because I'm job hunting right now, and my wife and I both have elderly parents, we didn't want to completely disconnect, so we paid for basic internet for one device. However, it was actually pretty easy to ignore the outside world, which was our goal. We were still in the bottom 10% of the age distribution on the ship (there were some families with kids, and one or two newlyweds), but this is definitely a more mature crowd. It's Cunard, so more about lectures, trivia, and ballroom dancing than hardcore partying as you might see on a lot of the other ships. And although they weren't overly fussy about it, people dressed nicer for more events, which was kind of fun. I mean, I brought and wore a tuxedo two of the nights - I think the last time I put one on was for my sister's wedding in 1999, and, like I said, it was fun. The stabilizers worked well, the ship was busy without being overly crowded, and I could run on the promenade deck without much trouble.

 

The negatives: We began to find the food a bit boring. It was British, all the time. I don't know why they didn't bring say Indian food, or Italian food into the main dining room occasionally (they had specialty restaurants for both of those cuisines). And if you are really prone to seasickness the ship rolls more than say a cruise ship in the protected waters of the Caribbean. But those are mostly nits if you are just doing a one way trip. A lot of the people were on for a 28 day cruise (Southampton -> Caribbean -> New York -> Southampton), and I think those nits would start bothering me more by that point.

 

Bottom line is that if you have the time to spare, the cost isn't radically different than an economy plus airline ticket, and it is a lot less hassle than an airport (although I will say that the terminal in Southampton is a bit of a dump). If my 88 year old father and his 85 year old girlfriend got a yen to go to the UK, I'd send them this way - cheaper, more fun, and less stressful - no jet lag, for example. And it is a classic journey, one that our grandparents took. I didn't get to see the Statue of Liberty coming in (I was in quarantine and we were on the wrong side of the ship to see it from our cabin), but my wife did, and that's a pretty iconic experience.

 

Regards,

George

 

PS - We booked a "sheltered balcony" cabin, which I can't recommend enough. They are lower in the ship (we were on deck 5), the common areas, in contrast to most ships were on very low decks (generally 2 and 3) so that the dining room and show venues don't roll too much, and the main promenade is on deck 7.  We wound up not taking a lot of pictures of this, but your cabin has a double wide glass door, so lots of natural light, and a small balcony with two chairs and a table. But unlike the balconies on the higher decks (basically open, and separated only by glass partitions, these balconies are cut into the outer part of the ship's hull. This is the only picture we took that shows it well - we were already docked in Brooklyn:

 

 

Basically, if the wind is howling (and we had 40 knot headwinds + 20 knots of ship speed some days) you don't get nearly as blown around as if you are in the open balcony, but can still step out and get some nice air directly from your cabin (and when I was quarantined I really appreciated that). The visibility isn't as good sitting in the chairs, but in December we weren't likely to be doing that for long anyway, and the sea remained the sea. It wasn't like we were in Alaska or Norway and would be viewing many sights from the ship.

 

 

[Rick310]

George, an unrelated question.  How did you determine what size rigging line for the standing rigging to use?  When I check line close to the given sizes given on the plans, it looks awfully big.  
Thanks,

Rick

[KeithAug]

George - Nice progress on Discovery and thank you for the insights into Cunard. Not as good as it once was seems to be the conclusion.

[gak1965]

6 hours ago, Rick310 said:

George, an unrelated question.  How did you determine what size rigging line for the standing rigging to use?  When I check line close to the given sizes given on the plans, it looks awfully big.  
Thanks,

Rick

Rick,

     I assume that you mean on the Flying Fish, not the Discovery? The problem I ran into was that the line sizes (e.g. 8.5 inch shrouds) on the plans were inches circumference, not diameter. So divide by 3.14 to get the actual diameter and then divide by 96 to get the right scale size. I came to the same conclusion - that they were using aircraft carrier mooring lines as shrouds, until someone explained this to me. That made a huge difference, those 8.5" shrouds went from 0.09 to 0.028 which seemed a lot more reasonable.

 

If that isn't the problem - my apologies.

 

Regards,

George

[Rick310]

George, I understand how the sizes work for the standing rigging, what I was asking was how many different sizes of rigging line did you use and how closely did they approximate the sizes given on the plans for the FF at 1 to 96 inch scale?

Rick

[gak1965]

12 hours ago, Rick310 said:

George, I understand how the sizes work for the standing rigging, what I was asking was how many different sizes of rigging line did you use and how closely did they approximate the sizes given on the plans for the FF at 1 to 96 inch scale?

Rick

Oh. My bad.

 

I think I used 4 (+1)sizes of thread for the standing rigging. They were 0.035, 0.030, 0.025, and 0.020 and some standard mercerized cotton thread for the ratlines. I kinda followed the size guidelines, matching the listed sizes to those 4 diameters, but making sure that things got smaller as I went up, and if something looked too big (or too small) I adjusted accordingly. I don't have a list, I just did what (approximately) matched the listed size and looked right.

 

Hope that helps,

GAK

[Jared]

I followed sheet 3.  It states the line sizes in the plans are the curcumference measurement.   The table then converts it to scale dia. size.   The kit did not provide black thread for the 10.5" shrouds (scale dia. 0.035) so I bought some.   I measured  the diameters of all of my rigging lines with a micrometer scale under a microscope.  

 

 

[Rick310]

George, Jared, 

Thanks for your responses!  Looking ahead, it looked to me that the given sizes looked really large on the model.  On both of your builds,  the rigging looks really good!  Therefore I’ll follow the plans, adjusting where it looks appropriate!

Rick