Lynx 1812 by SaltyScot - Manuta-Panart - 1:62 - building as Mosquidobit

[Ronald-V]

That's indeed a nice "scratch" upgrade! Well done 👌

[Jolly Jo]

Nicely done, Mark. So much better than the plywood piece (plywood, why on earth...?)!

[SaltyScot]

6 hours ago, Jolly Jo said:

plywood, why on earth...?

 

Right? You can't shape it at all. it just falls apart. A lot of the fittings are the same and will be scratch built as well. Fun times!

[Coyote_6]

2 hours ago, SaltyScot said:

A lot of the fittings are the same and will be scratch built as well. Fun times!

At least you have a large amount of raw material!!  Holy cow that was a small part from that big ol' block.

 

 

[SaltyScot]

26 minutes ago, Coyote_6 said:

At least you have a large amount of raw material!!  Holy cow that was a small part from that big ol' block.

 

 

 

Actually, I have two of them Steve. A friend of ours wanted a felled black walnut tree out of her yard and asked around if anyone wanted some. I have two bowl blanks like this and some more off-cut pieces. So yes, plenty of raw material. I just love the smell of black walnut sawdust when you are working the wood!

[SaltyScot]

Today was mast and spar day. While it was still comparatively cool this morning (82F 🤨), I decided to sand down the masts and bowsprit on my lathe. I also wanted to sand down the yards and boom while I was over in the wood shop. After measuring, cutting and labeling the yards, I took them over to be worked on:

 

 

The more astute amongst you will notice that some of the labels are not correctly named. I have since resolved that issue after talking to @Dr PR and clarifying the correct terminology for a few of the pieces (thank you again, Phil!).  The masts and bowsprit were sanded down on my lathe:

 

 

 

And checked with a set of calipers adjusted to the corresponding width:

 

 

For the smaller yards I used a slightly different method that worked just as well as long as I did not let the wood "run free". I had to keep the sandpaper in contact with it so that it didn't flex:

 

 

Once the temperature got just too unbearable and reached the forecasted 93F I shut down the shop (which has no a/c .... yet), and came back inside to the comfort of my shipyard to get on with other small tasks. Among other things I made the hawse hole covers that will be fitted to the hull tomorrow:

 

 

A WORD OF WARNING TO THOSE FOLLOWING THIS AND BUILDING THE SAME KIT:

 

The plans on the second sheet show the rigging for this model. @Dr PR was kind enough to point out a flaw in these plans when I shared them with him regarding a separate issue. Below is an image of the plans with the parts in question outlined with a red ellipse. Underneath the image is what Phil said about them:

 

 

The drawing you posted has a peculiarity - probably a mistake. It shows studding sail booms at the ends of the upper yard. But these booms were fitted only on the yards at the bottom of the studding sail. Since there is not a fourth yard above the topgallant yard (the royal yard) there would not have been a studding sail above the topgallant yard. Therefore there would not be a studding sail boom on the topgallant yard.

 

The foot of a studding sail was attached to the studding sail boom. The head of the studding sail was attached to the studding sail yard. This yard was raised with the studding sail halliard through a block on the end of the yard (yard arm) above. There was no studding sail boom on the highest yard.

 

For your model there should be studding sail booms on only the lower two yards.

 

I am truly grateful for his insight and willingness to help out us newbies  

 

 

 

 

[Keith Black]

48 minutes ago, SaltyScot said:

I am truly grateful for his insight and willingness to help out us newbies

 That's the great thing about MSW. The willingness of of nearly everyone to share information with one another. We are the Collective. 

[Kenchington]

3 hours ago, SaltyScot said:

The foot of a studding sail was attached to the studding sail boom. The head of the studding sail was attached to the studding sail yard.

A week ago, I would have agreed absolutely and firmly declared that there could be no other way.

 

However, after having all four volumes taking up shelf space for more than 20 years, I am finally working through Jean Boudriot's remarkable "74-Gun Ship" (the English edition).  In Volume 3, he presents French practice of circa 1780 as spreading the head of each stuns'l to blocks on the boom on the yard above, as its foot was spread to the boom below.

 

Boudriot did not footnote every little detail and a few of his claims are surprising, so I'll not swear that he must have been right. Besides, what was done in France in 1780 may never have been done in the US during the War of 1812. (Why drag around the extra windage of stuns'l gear on the t'gans'l yard when the stuns'l is very rarely set and the alternative of hoisting a short yard for the head is being used successfully by your neighbours?) So if it was my model, I would follow @Dr PR . I just wouldn't be as dogmatic about it as I used to be!

 

Trevor

 

[SaltyScot]

1 hour ago, Kenchington said:

I just wouldn't be as dogmatic about it as I used to be!

 

Great to hear from you, Trevor! Yes, I will be following Phil's sound advice (I have already laid those two extra booms aside that I cut this morning). It is now my belief that one could take various tomes to hand and find conflicting ideas about any nautical subject in most of them. History is just like that.

[SaltyScot]

4 hours ago, Keith Black said:

That's the great thing about MSW.

 

Yes, Keith, it most certainly is.