HMS Vanguard by RMC - FINISHED - Amati/Victory Models - scale 1:72

[flyer]

Being a long time silent admirer of your Vanguard build I'm glad to offer some small help about the main braces.

The plans are correct but not easy to read. According to James Lees 'The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War' the standing part of the brace is made fast to the side of the ship by an eyebolt and the running part runs from the yard back through a sheave in the side of the ship to a cleat (or a post) on the inside.

Having just started on my own Bellerophon kit I hope to be able to occasionally shamelessly profit of your excellent build. Thanks and keep up the good work.

 

cheers

Peter

[RMC]

Peter: thank you VERY much for the information.  It would never have occurred to me.

 

Bob

[RMC]

Having more or less completed the rigging of the fore and main masts and yards, I had though the mizzen would be  ..er.. plain sailing.  Alas, it has turned out not to be so.  Avoiding lines fouling each other proved quite difficult - only after some lines were 'finally' tied off was it apparent that they had interfered with others ... It has been two steps forward two steps back. I am quite short-sighted, which in this application is an advantage, so good luck to those who are long-sighted.  I will post some photos in the next day or so, though really it's more of the same (ie: fore and main rigging) so I don't know if this will really help anyone. At least now it seems to be under control and it's time for a drink ... or two ....

[zappto]

Nice to see big war ship so detailed build. Sweet build. Does the life boats made of wood?

[RMC]

Zappto: Yes, the small boats are wooden.

 

On another topic. - I have had trouble with both Fire fox and Google in posting replies.  When I click on the reply button only the 'drag files etc' is apparently operative and will not allow any text to be inserted. Google chrome seems to work properly as does Microsoft Edge (but it has other problems).  Does anyone else have the same problem? 

 

 

[mtaylor]

I'm using Google Chrome for MSW and much of my other browsing.   Too many issues with Firefox (which is about to come off my PC due to those "issues") and IE has it's share also. I'll not upgrade to Win10 in this lifetime but probably switch to Linux in the near future.  Only thing holding me back is one small issue with an important application (to me anyway).

[CDW]

I had an almost identical problem as RMC described using Opera, just after the recent site update. I could not add any text to a post.

In Opera settings, I found a box unchecked that was evidently the cause of the problem. Once I "checked" that box, everything went back to normal. How or why the box got unchecked after the site update, I cannot explain. Everything was working fine, then all of a sudden it wasn't. 

Anyway, in Opera, the box that needs to be checked is: "Enable auto-filling of webpages". If that box is not checked (in Opera), you will not be able to add text.

 

[RMC]

Sorry for the delay in replying CDW. I don't have Opera and I can't find a box similar to the one you describe in any of the search engines to which I have access. I guess I'll have to stick with Microsoft Edge (when it works) or Google Chrome.

 

Thanks too Mark for your comment. The whole thing seems very odd.

Edited August 10, 2017 by RMC

[RMC]

As far as I can tell, all of the lines that should be belayed at or near the main mast are now been finished. The bowlines and braces are all but complete. Until doing all of this I had no conception of how complicated was the rigging of one of these ships. I'm not sure if the following photos are of help, but I have tried to show close-ups of some of the more difficult bits.

 

 

The bow lines go to belaying point 75 and 76.  Here are the bow lines to  belaying point 76.

 

 

 

 

 

The lines going into the two blocks shown below were a small nightmare to thread hidden as they were in all of the standing rigging.

 

 

I put off tying the braces to the main top yard shown below as long as possible.  I had left the lines tying the blocks to the mast a little short, and thought tying the running rigging above the blocks would be quite difficult. It turned out to be simple.  Make a noose, slip it over the block, then tighten the noose.

 

 

This may help those who must attach rope coils with some semblance of natural 'hang'. I first made circular coils in the way I described earlier using the plastic nozzles. To give the 'hang' I first wet to circular coil in situ (using a small paint brush) then used a paper clip and a light weight to draw the circular coil down.

 

 

 

Here the left coil has not yet been touched; the right is pulled don by the weight.

 

 

Here are some results, though I see some further adjustments need to be made.

 

 

 

I will be going away for a while in a couple of weeks and in the meantime will try to fit the driver gaff and boom.  (I have no idea why the preceding sentence is underlined.

 

 

Edited August 13, 2017 by RMC
additional information

[RMC]

The rigging of all but the mizzen mast yards is complete. This is how the poop deck looks at the moment.  Rather foolishly I overlooked three or four lines still have to be belayed on the bitts below the mizzen. So there is still work to retrieve that omission.  

 

Below is one of the main braces.  Thanks to Flyer for informing me how they should be belayed.  There is, in fact, a small hole already in the block mounted on the bottom of the rail ...

... the line is threaded through and belayed to the post on the deck shown below. (The line has not yet been finally tied off and a rope coil needs made.)

[flyer]

Hi Bob

 

The question about that 28 in your post on top of this side intrigued me. After all I will have to answer it for myself when I will reach the same stage of the build (in 10 years or so).

 

Again I looked for an answer in Lees' book. It seems that 28 refers also to the small inset in the plan marked 'Mizzen boom tackle detail' and shows in fact the boom sheet. Lees writes about that:

 

'...A double block was sized into a strap around the boom inside the taffrail; another double block was strapped to an eyebolt in the transom. The standing part of the sheet was made fast to the strap of the lower block and the hauling part belayed to a cleat in the deck.'

That cleat would be your 28. And obviously the 'eyebolt in the transom' is missing in the plan and could be in line with the other eyebolts behind position 28.

For the rigging of your next project I highly recommend that book The masting and riggging of English ships of war 1625 - 1860 by James Lees. It's a tremendous help with questions about rigging and also helps to correct mistakes sometimes even in building manuals as good as those from Caldercraft.

 

Cheers

Peter

Edited August 17, 2017 by flyer

[RMC]

Peter (flyer): sorry for my delay in replying.  Things are a little busy at the moment.

 

Since your post I have looked at Petersson - something I should have done in the first place.  It shows pretty well what you have gone to the trouble to describe.  Sorry about that.   I wouldn't have resorted to Petersson had I not had your suggestion.  Suggestions/comments are always helpful.

 

 

(Note the 'first place' next to the photo- I have no idea how to get rid of it.)

 

 

 

first place.

 

 

 

 

 

[RMC]

The driver gaff is now attached and so far has turned out quite nicely.  Keeping the gaff 'attached' to the mast was a bit tricky - it kept moving up and down as the lines were adjusted.  I understand a saddle was meant to slide up and down the mast to control this, but there is no reference to anything like this in the plans.  The only drawing I have been able to find is not practical at this stage of the build - so here, no saddle.

On the other hand, attaching a saddle for the driver boom looks to be comparatively easy.  

 

 

 

 

Here it is with the first coat of paint - sand back, another coat or two and some polyurethane will finish it. Then all I have to do is get it on the mast .....

I had hoped have the driver boom attached before I go away next week, but I have just run out of the Syren 0.47 thread that is needed. 

Edited August 22, 2017 by RMC
additional information

[flyer]

Hi Bob

I'm unsure if you want to use the saddle for the gaff (upper piece of wood) or boom (lower...).

The gaffs yaws vertical movement was controlled by the 'Gaff Throat Halliard'. If you don't have information about that in your Petersson, I could help.  

The saddle is used to support the booms yaws and was fixed to the mast.

Cheers

peter

[RMC]

The lower (boom) Peter. I have seen an illustration of what turns out to be the gaff throat halliard as you have described it, but there was no name to be found (or at least I couldn't find one).  Fitting one now isn't possible, and even if it were, it's probably not worth the trouble.  I hope to have the (lower) saddle fixed before I go away (to Barcelona) and if so, Ill post some photos.

 

All the best

 

Bob

[RMC]

Here is the saddle attached to the mast. It's shape is more or less a guess.  If it turns out to be wrong, at least the mistake won't be all that obvious.  In the photos below the boom is simply resting on it to give the general idea.  I have run out of 0.45mm thread (by about 20cm ) so I will have to order more and finish it when I return.

 

 

 

 

 

[RMC]

The braces are now finished. The driver boom(spanker?) is the only bit of rigging that needs to be done and it will have to wait until I receive a (very) little more 0.47 thread from Syren.  I have tried to show the rigging of the braces in the following photos, but I'm afraid it doesn't show up well.  They may be of use to someone though. One thing that may come across, however, is the complexity of the rigging of these ships.

 

 

 

[RMC]

Windows 10/Nikon software  is continuing to be difficult. This is an experiment to see if I can more easily load photos following an upgrade of the Nikon software. Joy - it works. The photo is of a model of the Santa (sp?)  Maria from a museum in Valencia.

 

Finishing off the rigging of the vanguard will have to await the arrival of the Syren thread in a couple of weeks.

 

Edited September 30, 2017 by RMC

[RMC]

A concern is avoiding the rigging of the driver boom fouling the lights. Exactly where the rigging is attached to the hull is far from clear. Actually installing the lights is about the last thing I will do as their attachments are very fragile indeed.   Protruding as they do is an invitation to disaster.  However to get an idea of the best place to attach the boom rigging I have dry-fitted the light supports - shown below.  This entails drilling holes in the decorative surface of the stern - something I was not keen to do.  However needs must ...  (With hindsight I would have drilled the holes before painting and off the model, but there your are.)

 

In the process however, I discovered that it is just possible to drill the appropriate holes without damage to the painted figures.  Obtaining the distance between the holes from the light supports, I used a pair of dividers to search places on the decorative surface where I could drill without damaging the figures. The only places are shown in the unfortunately rather unclear photos.

 

 

 

 

 

[Beef Wellington]

Those close up shots of the stern look great Bob, nice job on the lantern brackets.

[RMC]

Thanks Jason.  The photos show up every little fault, but in the flesh the decorations come up well.

 

I have now finished drilling the 1mm holes for the vertical light supports which again is a rather fraught business.  For those who have not yet mounted the decorations, I strongly suggest drilling the holes before painting and mounting.

[RMC]

While waiting for the thread necessary to complete the rigging I thought I may as well see how the lights fit.  This turned out to be what may have turned out to be complete disaster.  While playing around trying to fit the starboard light, the decorative panel partially delaminated from its backing.  This was not good at all.  Having said 'Golly gee' (or words to  that effect) I dropped medium CA and gel CA where I could into the gap, and held the two pieces together as best I could (clamping was not possible).  At this stage the repair looks to be successful, but I would have liked to have got far more glue between the two pieces.

 

The first and last photo below show the gap clearly. (I hadn't noticed it until I had taken the whole light assembly off the model and taken the following photos.)  The gap has now been almost fully closed, the remaining gap filled, and a coat of paint put over it. Another two coats of paint and a coat of polyurethane and I hope nobody will know.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sailor1234567890]

Write it off as battle damage repaired at sea. She's still a beautiful vessel you've built. 

[kier]

I have been following along with admiration to your build.

just one word that sticks_   'WOW'

 

kier

[RMC]

Thanks very much Kier for the kind words.  I thought at one stage your finger must have stuck on the 'like' button. 

 

I received the thread necessary to complete the rigging today, so I'll see how it goes. I also need to finish repairing the damage to the stern decorations. So far things look OK, but writing that is probably the kiss of death.

[RMC]

The repair has gone well - you'd never know ....

 

However mounting the driver boom proved to be a bit of a nightmare.  There are a number of traps and I fell into all of them. The main thing is to avoid the rigging fouling the lanterns and their supports. I didn't. I drilled the holes for the eyelets about 1.5 - 2mm too low. Fortunately the mistake is under the hook and the rigging and is not noticeable though I will probably try to repair it.

 

This shows more the chaos of my work table than the boom.

 

Make sure the driver boom clears the middle lantern.  Mine didn't.  The plans show the boom parallel to the waterline.  Best make it to be at a very slight angle.

 

 

 

Without the saddle, the whole process would have been far more difficult.

 

[flyer]

Hi Bob

 

You are making great progress on your wonderful build. To successfully correct a little mistake now and then is part of the fun - or so, I've been told...

Watching your Vanguard coming to live is always a motivation boost for my Bellerophon build.

 

A question, if I may:

I'm actually pondering about those triangular side gallery patterns. I had the idea to work those two, on each side, directly below the windows into frames instead of the closed triangle. That way I hoped to create an impression of an real side gallery with some depth. The whole construction would however lose some stability and it would be fidgety work. Do you think the difference between your way of building, according the manual, and a side gallery with some depth below the windows would be noticeable at all from the outside?

 

Happy modelling

Peter

[RMC]

Hi Peter

I'm not certain that I follow you, but here goes. I presume you are talking about the part labelled 420 in the photo below  (the quarter gallery balustrade), and perhaps the decorative piece labelled 441 in the following photo. You wish to bring these parts slightly away from the timber backing to provide the appearance of depth to the galleries.

 

At 1:72 scale I don't think what I understand you propose would make much difference. There is already a tiny gap between the pillars and the black backing giving some some appearance of depth as the pillars are not stuck on the the backing.  If you wish to accentuate the gap I would stick a very thin strip of copper along the top and bottom of part 420 (and 441?) which would make the gap a little bigger, thus giving a greater appearance of depth.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Bob

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[flyer]

Hi Bob

 

Thank you for the prompt answer. We are talking nearly about the same, only I was thinking of the inside of the side galleries. In the draft below You see the sections within the red marked areas on parts 58 (upper) resp. 60 (lower) which I would take out in order to create a side gallery which also has some depth below the windows. The question is now if you think you would see a difference -looked on from the outside of the finished stern- to your version where the 'floor' of the side gallery lies directly below the windows.

 

Instead of nibbling those two closed triangles into frames with a high risk of braking them during or after the process, I think the surface  could also just be painted black to suggest some depth.

 

What do you think?

Thanks

Peter

[RMC]

Sorry Peter. I completely misunderstood what you had in mind.  I have looked closely through the windows of my model (including shining quite a powerful light through them). You really can't see anything of interest. (I did paint the triangular pieces black.) I have not used the perspex for the windows that was supplied in the kit, but rather a MicroMark product (mentioned somewhere in my log) which I think looks far better, though not as translucent as the perspex. That may make a slight difference to what you can see, but really I don't think it's worth the trouble.

 

All the Best

Bob