HMS Montague 1779 by garyshipwright - 74-gun Alfred-class

[GRAVIOU Francis]

Bonjour, 

 

Super travail, magnifique modèle 

 

Francis 

[garyshipwright]

Thank you good sir. Gary

[Kusawa2000]

Gary: Good to see you back at it.. I have been working on my agamemnon on again... off again as well. life sometimes seems to get in the way.. Will be keeping a eye out on your progress lad.. 

 

Good to see you out there again

 

Mike Draper

[garyshipwright]

Hi Mike. Thank you and will do the same.  How is your Agamemnon coming?  If there is any thing I can do let me know sir. Seems like its been a long time. Gary

[Kusawa2000]

Hey Gary: Good to hear from you. Still plugging away on the Agamemnon. Finishing up the shrouds right now. slow progress but getting closer to completion. I will definitely look for ya if I have any questions I think you could answer.. keep the pics coming of your Alfred!

 

 

[Oskar24]

Searching to learn about ships modeling I noticed there are 2 build methods (perhaps there are more than two).

One is like what Gary did on this thread for the HMS Alfred, that’s sticking slices of the hall from one end of the ship to the other end.

Another method I have noticed is where they stick horizontal planks (strips) on each side of the hall

What is the difference between them and is one easier than the other?

Thank you

[garyshipwright]

Hi Mike and Oskar24. Mike will do on the photo's sir. Oskar If I understand right Alfred and a few others are building Plank on frame like the real ships back then and the other method I believe is plank on bulkhead,  which a lot of people  builded.  I believe that plank on frame is harder due to building up frames and other internal parts of the ship and plank on bulkhead is that the frames are plywood bulkhead installed on a keel and then planked on the outside once the bulkheads are sanded to accept the planks. There is a lot more to both types of building depending on were your interest ln the two. I have seen some really good Plank on bulkhead,  but my interest is trying to build them like they was. Hope this helps. Gary 

[Oskar24]

Thank you Gary for taking the time to give me a hand. I understand modeling takes time to understand the various ways of building a model and I have to choose a way that I feel more comfortable to work with.

Much appreciated

[AON]

Oskar24

If I may add, there is the detailed and then the simplified method of doing Plank on Frame.

The simplified method does not have scarph joints or chocks in the frames.  It might be simple butt joints or even no special joint at all.

As the builder you get to decide what you are comfortable doing or want to attempt to do.

 

 

[Oskar24]

Thank you Alan for your time, your help is appreciated.

I had a look at your HMS BELLEROPHON & 9 Pdr Naval Gun and indeed you have done a remarkable work.

I have long way to get there, if I ever, but for now I search on anything related to ships modeling and hopefully one day I will start my own build

Nicolas

[mtaylor]

Nicolas,

You might even think about building a model using Harold Hahn plans.   The frames are stylized as far as method and the spacing isn't true to the real ships as this was stylized also.  

[Oskar24]

Thank you Mark for the suggestion but where do I find Harold Hahn’s plans?

 

I looked at Licorne – 1755 from Hahn Plans (Scratch) Version 2.0 (98 pages thread) and although it’s an excellent build with many details I didn’t see any plans

 

Nicolas

[mtaylor]

You'll have to contact the The Lumberyard.  Here's the link:  http://www.dlumberyard.com/shipkits.html    As for plans, generally we don't show plans in our logs unless reduced in size.  Part of it is due to piracy and other is when you shrink the plans down to the size for image in log, nothing is legible. 

[garyshipwright]

Hi every one. Just a quick question. It has to do with the taffrail and its height from the top of the keel. Steel gives the height of the taffrail at the middle, of 50 feet 6 inches from the top of the keel, are they talking about the trim also that goes around the top of the taffrail ?  The  reason I ask is in Steel plate he shows the taffrail fiferail which is setting, guess wise 6 inches higher, is this included in that height. Where does the taffrail starts and where does it stop? Thank you. In the mean time I check a few more things to see what I come up with. Gary

Edited May 17, 2019 by garyshipwright

[Oskar24]

Sorry Mark I misunderstood and I understand the concerns about plans.

 

At this stage I’m not ready to invest any money on a hobby which I know very little. As my search for knowledge on this subject grows the time will come to decide what my next step will be and perhaps invest on the plans of a ship.

 

Many thanks

[mtaylor]

Oskar, I sent you a PM.

[SJSoane]

Hi Gary,

 

I just saw your post. I will look in a couple of places and see what I come up with. Interesting question!

 

Mark

[SJSoane]

Hi Gary,

 

I looked up Steel's dimension from top of keel to top of taffrail for an 80 gun ship, which is 53'-4".

 

I then measured 53'-4" against the drawing of the 80 gun ship in the folio of drawings. It comes up to the pencil mark pointed to by the pencil below. It looks 5" short.

 

And then I measured up the same point in the view of the stern, and it also comes up 5" short of the top of the taffrail. But this stern drawing also clearly shows that the open railing on top of the taffrail is above this 53'-4" dimension figure given by Steel.

 

So it answers one question; is the railing within or above the given dimension--it is above. But it doesn't answer why the given dimension in the tables does not match the actual dimension in the drawing. Maybe the 5" shortage is to the top of the rough framing, whereas what we are seeing in the drawing includes a railing installed on top of the rough framing, but below the uppermost open railing.

 

I hope that makes sense!

 

Best wishes,

 

Mark

[garyshipwright]

Hi Mark. Thank you sir for responding and does give one something to think about.  Doing my research on the stern I found that model's of the  Warrior and the Canada both 74's, have a taffrail fiferail. If you look at the plan its not there which doesn't mean much, that is untill you see the model which does show one. you will see that it has the fiferail but seems on the plan of Alfred her self doesn't show one. I do believe these plans are as build but not sure why the Warrior has one. Hahn didn't add one because it doesn't show up on her plan. Went through the plans and seems that there was more ships that had one then there was that didn'tll seems like there is a reason and hope to find out. . Gary

[druxey]

Alfred is a bit earlier than Steel, is it not? That might account for variance in dimensions.

[mtaylor]

Gary,

Alfred was "first of the class" so it stands to reason that while the rest of the class kept to basics like hull shape and dimensions, deck shapes, etc. there would be changes as they built more ships of the class.  This seems to apply from back then to the current day as new ships of a given class always seem to have some "improvements". With some ships those changes may have pretty radical.

[garyshipwright]

Hi Druxey and Mark. You may be right druxey. Does seem that Montagu dimensions are different which keeps one on one's toes.  Mark you are probably right  sir. When you look at it, the cove doesn't seem to exist, the part that's right above the upper window's, which looks like curtains that go all the way across and unlike others such as her sister's which had good looking stern's. Her's looks a little on the flat side. ;o} O well, at the moment am having a blast and its nice to hear from you guys. Thanks for your respone. Gary

[garyshipwright]

Hi Guys. Here is some photo's of Montagu at the moment with new items to help me get things square on her and to help with her stern and quarter gallery. Gary

[garyshipwright]

here is a couple more showing work on the Stern and its quarter gallery's

 

 

[42rocker]

Outstanding work. 

 

Later Tim

[garyshipwright]

Thanks Tim. Been working on the stern for the last couple of weeks and hope before to long to have  a update.  Gary

[garyshipwright]

Well good folks I have been working on Montagu stern,  probably on and off for the last couple of weeks and looking back seems that from the photo's it doesn't look like much as been made, that is untill you  look at the parts and pieces that have been discarded. Sorry but I didn't take any photo's of them but did want to make sure that I recorded this for others who might undertake the Stern of their own 74 with a balcony trying to figure out they parts that made up the stern.  It does at time's seem like a total up hill battle and lots of research on what is what on the stern which I am still trying to figure it all out but have some good builders that with out them my understanding would be a lot slower. Hope you enjoy the photos, just remember it a work in progress. Gary

 

 

 

 

 

[druxey]

The geometry looks very good so far, Gary!

 

 

[garyshipwright]

Thanks druxey. Seems good sir, that getting the geometry right and looking good is the most time consuming and seems one moves at a snail pace when building this part. Of course you already know this. ;o)  I thought building the head and its rails was a little on the hard side but working on Montagu stern has changed that. One has to have answer's to 50 question before shaping and cutting one piece of wood. Oops 30 pieces. On a question on the bottom lower stool that you and other good folks may be able to answer. The lower stool seems to set about 2 feet or so, have not measured it from the door but one would have to climb down in order to step on the stool. Is there a possibilty that a step was added? I looked in Boudriot 74 gun ship and its lower stool was just as low but didn't show a step for .  Thank you

[SJSoane]

Gary, looking great. And it looks very challenging! A lot of pieces having to float in the air before they all start connecting together...

 

Mark