HMS Lyme (1748-1760) by Landlubber Mike - bash of Corel Unicorn - Scale 1:75 (CLOSED TO START SCRATCH BUILD)

[ianmajor]

Mike,

 

I have been revisiting (yet again) the Lyme plans. I see something extra every time.

 

I now see that it shews the tiller above the quarter deck rather than between decks as depicted by Corel. That would be a really good feature and also another reason to ditch the flag lockers. Your Pegasus plans would help here  though the Lyme appears to have a curved beam in front of the tiller to guide the rope (an illustration in Lavery shews how this works). Sadly, in my case, taking the rear end apart to add this feature is perhaps a step too far.

 

It is sad the original Unicorn diagrams were "lost" - they would have had so much more detail than that produced by Chapman.

[Landlubber Mike]

I'm fairly certain that the Pegasus has the tiller on the quarterdeck.  Something to consider

 

It's interesting - this morning, when I did a search on the Lyme at the NMM site, I came up with four plans.  Now I only come up with two.  The second picture in my last post might not be the 1748 Lyme - the stern looks pretty different from the Unicorn stern.  This is probably the profile view for the 1748 Lyme:

 

 

Like Chapman's plans of the Unicorn, the quarterdeck seems to slope upwards as you move toward the bow, although the portholes dont open up like on the Unicorn.

Edited June 5, 2014 by Landlubber Mike

[Landlubber Mike]

A little present from Jeff at Hobbymill arrived at my doorstep this morning   Gorgeous wood and impeccable customer service from Jeff - thank you!  Now I just have to learn how to use my new power tools - safely of course!     The pear will be used for the hull planking, including the areas to be dyed black near the gunports and stern.  Boxwood will be for the deck planking and accents on the hull (rails, headrails, etc.).  I'm also thinking about trying to carve some of the decorations on the stern in boxwood.

 

 

I've been setting up my workshop, and studying plans to figure out how to modify the keel piece.  I am going to try building the stem and keel in parts, so I've been drawing things out on the plans (and made copies at my local Fedex Office).  Also have been comparing the Corel plans with the Chapman plans and plans for other similar vessels.  One discrepancy is that Corel's plans have you add two gammonings to the stem, whereas the Chapman plans and other vessels of that size from my research seem to only have one.  Guess one more thing to add to the list of changes.

 

I can't really start much building until my new order of plywood arrives.  I ordered two sheets from Micromark, which arrived even more warped than the Corel keel    To Micromark's credit, they refunded me the purchase price, and I ordered a stack of 6 pieces of plywood from Hobbylinc that should arrive on Friday.  Hopefully one of the six is flat.  So, I'll probably practice with my scroll saw and new table saw in the meantime so that I'm a little more skilled when I have everything I need to start the build.

Edited April 30, 2014 by Landlubber Mike

[ianmajor]

Mike,

 

Good point about the gammoning. I had already cut the prow and assembled the structure around it to take two lots of gammoning before realising that it was wrong.

[augie]

Nice looking wood.  Jeff does a great job.  Cut safely!

[Landlubber Mike]

Mike,

 

Good point about the gammoning. I had already cut the prow and assembled the structure around it to take two lots of gammoning before realising that it was wrong.

Hi Ian,

 

Yes, I think a ship like the Unicorn would only have one lot of gammoning.  My guess is that it would be more appropriate to keep the aft one.

 

I spent a few hours tonight drawing out how the various parts of the stem would be constructed.  In doing so, I noticed that the Corel plans differ from Chapman in not only the gammoning, but also in how the headrails (I think that is what they are called) are constructed.  In Chapman for example, the lowest headrail runs under the gammoning slot and into the figurehead's rear feet (Corel shows the lowest headrail running above the gammoning slot and curving upward.  The upper headrails seem to have a different run to them as well.  Another thing I noticed was that the figurehead on the Corel plans fits lower, and more forward, than the Chapman plans and the figureheads generally on other ships.  It seems like the figurehead should sit just under the bowspirit, but the Corel plans have quite a bit of space between the figurehead and the bowspirit.

 

Ian, just out of curiosity, how did you fit the figurehead to the stem?  Did you shape the stem to fit the figurehead, or did you cut a slot into the back of the figurehead to accommodate the stem?  I was a bit surprised that the figurehead is a solid piece.  If I remember correctly from the Pegasus kit, the figurehead has grooved slots in the back and bottom so that the figurehead could sit right on the stem.  I am thinking that it might be better to make any adjustments, cuts, holes, etc. to parts before they are on the model.  Too many times on the Badger I did the modifications once parts were fixed to the model, which led to logistical problems, or worse, other parts that were broken off. 

Edited May 1, 2014 by Landlubber Mike

[ianmajor]

Mike,

 

I agree with you on the headrails. I made them as per the Corel instructions with 3 x 3mm beech which (along with the Corel fanciful shape) makes them look far too clunky. The figurehead is too low and is positioned more like those on later larger ships. I did this part of the model a long time pre MSW resulting in a less than satisfactory piece of work.

 

I shaped the stem to fit the figurehead. A also filed of some of the detail down the rear of the figurehead. I fixed the figurehead with 2 part epoxy to ensure that it stayed in place and it also fills the slight gaps. I will paint the figurehead at a later date including covering up any exposed epoxy.

 

I have added a close up (groan) of what I did. The horn was snapped off when I first got the kit so I have yet to replace it.

 

I contemplated cutting a slot in the back of the figurehead but didn't for a couple of reasons. At that time I did not have the milling machine. A slot cut between the rear legs to suit the stem would leave the legs very thin. The figurehead neck is narrower than the stem.

 

 

I think if I was doing this part again I would:-

 

i) make a much finer set of rails which didn't protrude above the stem

ii) using a piercing saw cut the figurehead's head and neck off along a line below the crown (marked by the red arrow in the photo)

iii) either slot the remainder of the body or cut the body vertically in two then thin the two sides down

iv) fit the body either side of the top of the stem 

v) attach the head to the top off the stem

vi) only have one slot for gammoning!

 

Correction of this on mine was one of the items that I decided would take the model past the point of scrap and start again.

Edited May 1, 2014 by ianmajor

[Landlubber Mike]

Hi Ian,

 

For all the issues with the Corel kit, your stem and figurehead came out very nice.  I agree though that any modifications to this section would be very ambitious and quite in a different league from the scope of your other modifications

 

I took a look at the Pegasus practicum, and the way Amati does it, the stem for the kit is shaped like a seat (an "L" shape) where a slot in the back of the figurehead sits neatly onto the seat and the legs straddle the stem.  Then, you backfill the open area between the back of the seat and the back of the figurehead with wood so that there is no gap between the stem and the figurehead.  

 

It is a bit hard to tell on the Chapman plans whether there is an open area or not (probably not), but regardless, it looks like the figurehead area of the stem should maybe extend upward and more forward a bit so that the figurehead sits higher and further back onto the stem.  That's going to be a really complicated modification, as from what I recall, you are right that the figurehead in some areas is actually narrower than the stem.  I bought a spare figurehead from Cornwall Model Boats as I thought that I might paint one white and other colors and the other in "wood" to see which I liked better.  But, I might use the spare to figure out whether it's feasible to cut the figure in half, or cut a slot out in the back.  

 

I guess if that doesn't work I can always try carving or sculpting my own    The Corel figurehead is actually a nice model to work from for the general design, though it did strike me as being perhaps a tad small for the ship.  I could make it a bit larger and wider, and cut a slot in the back into which the stem could sit.  It was ambitious to think about carving the stern figures, but carving the figurehead would be a whole other ball game 

[Landlubber Mike]

While looking up figurehead pictures, I just so happened to come across this 1:48 scratch build of a Unicorn.  The builder carved the figurehead himself, which looks incredible.  He also made some modifications to the rest of the ship, including a completely different stern, an open waist, open portholes on the quarterdeck (connected by rails rather than a wall), and a crane-type setup off the stern off which a small boat is hung.  Very nice build.

 

http://shipmodeling.net/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=1318

 

 

Edited May 2, 2014 by Landlubber Mike

[ianmajor]

Mike,

 

That is a nice model that you have found. From that I think slicing the Corel Unicorn body in half then thinned and stuck on the sides of the stem might just work.

 

I like the open bulwark on the quarter deck which is what I intend to do by adding a rail. It will not be as high above the solid part of the bulwark as it should be but to me will look better. There are a lot of nice ideas that can be gleaned from his photos.

 

I am not sure about his davits at the rear. He also has a dolphin striker which according to Lees did not come in to use until 1794.

 

Did you notice that in one photo is shows a real compass in the binnacle!  I also notice he has the tiller above the quarter deck. Nice.

[Landlubber Mike]

Yes definitely some nice ideas.  I agree about the davits and the dolphin striker.  Not sure about the doors under the forecastle either - will need to research that.  The tiller is a nice touch

 

My new plywood arrived yesterday, and it looks very good.  I should be able to start actually working on the model now, rather than just thinking about it  

[riverboat]

     Mike, looking forward to you putting this together,  like all your new wood, I'll bet you can't wait to get started!! Happy modeling!!

Frank

[Landlubber Mike]

For a quick update, I finally got my workshop set up and new plywood in.  Thankfully I was able to find a plywood sheet that was flat  

 

I've been working through the plans for the Unicorn and using other reference material I have (e.g., AOTS books for Pandora, Blandford and Diana) to figure out what, if any, other modifications I should make to the keel now, so that I can build the model closer to the Chapman plans.  One thing I noticed was that the stern galleries on the Corel plans seem to fit fairly far back on the ship, whereas on Chapman's plans, they sit fairly close to the last gunport.  So, I'm thinking of shortening the keel a bit to move the last bulkhead closer in (probably, up to where the second to last bulkhead sits).  That should not only make it more consistent with Chapman, but other similar ships of that period as well.  One issue in looking at the plans is that the keel part is longer at the stern area on one of the plans and shorter on the other    Since the deck templates seem to fit the keel piece as is now, I'm going to work with the outline of the keel piece and just modify it a bit.

 

I'm realizing that I'll also have to modify some of the bulkheads a bit to change the angle of the quarterdeck so that the portholes gradually open up as you proceed toward the bow.  That's going to be fairly tricky I think, especially as other builders have had trouble lining up the quarterdeck portholes with the guns.  Wish me luck

[Griffon]

Hello Mike,

                      I really like the modifications you plan to make on this model and I can't wait to see this project started. I will follow it with interest !!

Ben

[ianmajor]

Mike,

 

I previously did some work comparing the various diagrams to see what I could do to improve the stern of my Unicorn. I abandoned the effort due to the mass destruction that would have been required at this point in time

 

I just tidied these up and thought you might be interested in what I produced.

 

First up is a composite image of the side view of the stern. The left of the image is the Chapman view, middle is Coral and right how it turned out on my ship.

 

 

As you noted the rear edge of the gallery sides line up with the front edge of the rudder in the Chapman view. Corel has the rudder front edge lying between the gallery windows.

 

The next thing that struck me was that the transom in the Chapman diagram was at a different angle to Corel. Measuring up using the bottom of the keel as a horizontal, the Chapman transom is 16 degrees off vertical, Corel has it only 11 degrees. This makes the Corel transom look a bit sit up and beg.

 

With the gallories being so far back this gives the problem of overhanging lower decoration - the red line in the image on the right indicates the amount of overhang (and that with a much reduced casting!)

 

Next up is the same comparison made on the rear of the transom.

 

 

I always felt the Corel galleries were too narrow and I think this demonstrates it.

 

On the model it is possible to make out the rear edge of the bulkhead which bisects the gallery rear window (indicated by the red arrow). The Corel diagram is the same. The (rather pixelated) Chapman diagram shews a wider transom which obscures the hull to its side (the Corel diagram has a lot of hull showing at the side).

 

On the model the gallery internally is just over a scale 1 foot wide. Now considering the captain's commode was in this space backing on to the rear window leads me to the view that the captain would feel a bit squeezed and rather upset when sat there.

 

Next is a bit I got wrong that is worth noting.

 

 

The transom should be curved. The instructions do say to shape the rear bulkhead to give this curve. As you can see in the photo my transom is pretty close to straight so that also pushed the galleries towards the rear.

 

There was a difference between the Corel deck plan (in the photo) and the Corel plan of the keel part. The raised part at the rear of the keel which determines the length of the lockers was much shorter in the keel plan than in the deck plan as can probably be seen in the photo. The early versions of the kit had a lot of errors of this type.

 

So I decided that:-

 

1) The Coral transom rake is wrong (or at least doesn't agree with Chapman). Correcting the rake pushes the lower edge of the gallery sides forward. This does skew the shape of the sides.

 

2) Each gallery is too narrow by about 6mm (ie the transom should be 12mm wider). Since the transom is curved (I worked out a radius at the top of the transom of 165mm) if the transom width is increased this also will push the gallery sides further forward.

 

I modified an extract of the Corel plan to illustrate this. (Click on the picture to get a better view of the detail).

 

 

I have marked the new position of the gallery sides with red lines and hatching and the windows with blue.

 

Changing the rake of the transom pushes the lower edge forward by 4mm. Extending the transom width pushes the sides a further 2.5mm forward. Actually with the extended transom this would probably result in the sides being lifted a couple of millimeters. All this would stop the lower decoration overhanging past the counter pane(?). 

 

However the sides are still 10mm further back than Chapman - which is not far off the length of those useless lockers.

Edited May 12, 2014 by ianmajor

[ianmajor]

I'll stop waffling now.      

[Landlubber Mike]

Ian, thanks so much for sharing the results of your research.  This is all very helpful!  I think you're smart in not making that modification as I think the renovation would have been a nightmare

 

Last night I was all good and ready to cut out the new keel, when I noticed the stern gallery issue.  I spent much of the evening last night agonizing about how to address it.  It looks like the newer kits have the stern galleries in a similar position, if not even slightly further back as shown with the bottom decorative piece:

 

 

 

I ended up using tracing paper to trace out the stern gallery, and used it to move the stern gallery forward until it matched up more closely with Chapman.  Interestingly, I got to a very similar re-design as in your last picture - I'm very glad that I wasn't too far off  The two things so far that I haven't accounted for are the rake of the transom and its width - thanks so much for sharing that with me.  When I moved the stern galleries forward, I came to the conclusion that Corel and Chapman differ probably by about the width of the flag lockers.  By moving the last bulkhead to just behind where the second to last bulkhead sits, the result seems to be a little more consistent with Chapman.

 

I'll post a picture later this evening of my markup of the plans to account for the modified keel.  Along with the stern, I've been plotting out the thicker wale and modification to the bow area with respect to the figurehead placement, headrail orientation and configuration, etc.

[Landlubber Mike]

Here are a few pictures of plans DM1 and DM2.  I made five photocopies of each to mark up and use as templates.  

 

To get to Chapman's plans regarding the stern galleries, they need to be moved forward so that they forward of the stern post, rather than sit over the rudder.  I took a tracing of the stern gallery from the plans, and moving it forward 10mm, it looks much more in conformity with Chapman.  Chapman, however, shows the stern gallery almost butting up against the last gunport (indicated by the arrow in the picture below).  So, not only would I need to move the stern galleries forward relative to the stern post and rudder, but I would have to actually reduce the keel length by probably another 15mm or so to move the full stern area closer to the last gunport. 

 

 

 

However, I have a slight problem in using the plans.  The kit supplied keel does not match either plan DM1 or plan DM2, and it's not due to creases in the plans.      In DM1, the keel is too short at the stern post (almost like it contemplates the addition of a stern post), but the keel matches the plans at the transom area:

 

 

 

 

In DM 2, the keel is too long relative to the plans:

 

 

 

What to do?  If I go with the keel as is, looking at DM1, the stern and stern galleries will hang even further out from the stern post and rudder than is shown in the plans.  That's the opposite result from Chapman where the stern galleries sit forward of the stern post and not over the rudder.  At this point, I'm thinking that the stern area of the keel is going to need a complete makeover.  It will need to be shortened a bit so that the stern gallery sits closer to the last gunport.  I will also have to shorten the extension  on which the transom will fit so that the galleries sit further forward.  Furthermore, since I'm not including the flag lockers on the quarterdeck I will need to modify the top area of the keel at stern and remove material from the last bulkhead just above the quarterdeck line so that the plywood is not visible.  

 

Too late in the evening to make any final decisions.  I'll sleep on it and come back to it tomorrow.  A bit frustrating that I haven't started building yet, but hopefully all this advance preparation will have been well worth it.

Edited May 13, 2014 by Landlubber Mike

[ianmajor]

Mike (I am back in waffling mode - oh dear!)

 

Measured up my plans and model keel. Mine show the same discrepancy - it hasn't been sorted since the early iterations of this kit  . The length of the straight part of the keel lower edge is 468mm on diagram 1 and the model but on diagram 2 it is 463mm.

 

However the part of the model's keel that supports the flag lockers is the same size as that in diagram 2 but smaller than diagram 1. So you have the keel is one shape in diagram 1, a slightly different shape in diagram 2 and actuality is somewhere between the two.

 

A thought about how to bring the galleries further forward without actually shortening the keel. What about discarding bulkhead 17 and fixing a transom piece directly in its place. The hull planking would fix to this as would the gallery parts. This would bring the gallery forward 5mm, which along with a steeper transom angle (4mm gain) and wider galleries (2.5mm gain) would bring the lower edge of the galleries forward by 11.5mm which puts them more or less in line with Chapman.

 

The lower edge of bulkhead 17 is wrong anyway (if you think of the geometry of a part curved in the vertical plane sitting on a part curved in the horizontal plane). It curves up when it should curve down. The lower edge of the transom part should also curve down where Corel has it straight (I think for simplicity). When I fitted my transom piece planking to the bottom of bulkhead 17 left me with a couple of hollows that I had to fill in due to this error.

 

In the photo the red arrows point to this filling. The blue arrows point to filler used to support the "floating" parts of the decorations.

 

 

My referring to the "transom part" is probably wrong but you know the bit I mean.

 

I am doodling some diagrams to shew what I mean. I will upload them a bit later.

 

 

[Landlubber Mike]

However the part of the model's keel that supports the flag lockers is the same size as that in diagram 2 but smaller than diagram 1. So you have the keel is one shape in diagram 1, a slightly different shape in diagram 2 and actuality is somewhere between the two. 

 

Yes, that's the conclusion I'm coming to as well  

 

I think dropping bulkhead 17 is the way to go.  You're right that extending and adding a curve to the transom will help me pick up a couple of more millimeters which should set things up nicely.  To make the curve, I probably need to modify the keel to fit stern extensions on a modified bulkhead 16 like I had on the Badger and I've seen with other kits.  The transom will sit on the extensions, where the inner pair of extensions is longer than the outer pair to help set up the curve.    The kit just has you slap the transom onto bulkhead 17, leading to a flat transom.  Since I'm planning on adding clear windows and dropping the flag lockers, this might help me add an element of depth if one looked into the windows.  

 

I have a feeling that the stern modifications are going to take at least a month and plenty of practice tries to get right.

[ianmajor]

Mike,

 

Have had a happy couple of hours doing real cut and paste with bits of paper, glue and my grandchildren's coloured pencils. Very therapeutic. 

 

The result - two images with what I believe the galleries would look like with bulkhead 17 removed. Each have the original Corel plan at the top with a modified version below. (Click on the pictures for a clearer view).

 

 

 

They include the rake of the transom increased to 16 degrees. This seems to make quite a bit of difference. It is pretty close to the Chapman diagram.

 

Joe's Granado stern construction looks the ticket. I guess that was how your Badger was also constructed. 

 

Another thought at the other end of the ship before I forget - the hawse holes as per Corel I think are too low. Chapman shews the ridding bitts on the upper deck (which is where I have added a set). I would therefore expect the hawse holes open in to the same deck. The Corel position would make them open in to the lower deck. I drilled mine some time ago and they now look quite silly to me.

Edited May 13, 2014 by ianmajor

[jwvolz]

Mike and Ian, I'm really enjoying watching you guys think your way through these Unicorn builds. I'm also glad a bit of research ignorance kept me in the dark when I built mine or I may never have gotten her done!!! 

[Landlubber Mike]

Ian, thanks so much!  I feel bad that you took a couple of hours on this on my behalf, but hopefully the exercise gave you plenty of therapeutic benefits  Thanks also for the heads up on the hawse holes.  In planning out the stem, I was trying to figure out where they should go, how to set up the bolsters, etc.  I'd like to have everything sketched out so that I have a plan on how to proceed.  

 

Joe, as you can see I've been thinking about this kit for the better part of the year (most of that time was while I finished up the Badger), and I'm on page 6 of this log but have yet to assemble any part of the model    Part of me wonders whether I should have just built the kit from the box with less ambitious plans.  But, this process with Ian, you and others has really been a lot of fun and I've learned a ton.  I really have Ian to thank for making me "think outside the box" so to speak and attempt to come up with a more accurate model.  This process has ratcheted up my interest and enjoyment of this hobby quite a few notches, so thank you guys!  I promise to start the actual build soon.

[JohnB40]

Greetings to all,

I'm glad to have found this forum and the wealth of knowledge contained within it. I have enjoyed looking at others work for a while and decided to return to the hobby. I am back on Corel's Unicorn after a hiatus of 4-5 years and have just finished the last bit of outer hull planking where I left off. I really stopped working on it (apart from a bit of bad health) when I started to look at the stern-transom area. The scale of the windows seemed off and well...it just was odd to look at. I have built 5 ships in the last 30 years and you kind of get an eye for something not flowing right. I thank Ian and Mike for spending the time and effort to put Corel's flawed kit to rights. Your Ideas seem to be the solution to the problem

I am about to start work on transom now,the hull is complete to bulkhead 17, including the rudder. This is my plan based on what Mike and Ian have written, I would appreciate any feedback .

I want the transom to have the correct radius,which I have now formed. My way around the ballroom sized windows is to cover the lower level of panes to the bottom transom decoration with a thin piece of basswood,painted black,topped with an  L shaped sill running the full width of the transom  . With a bit of file work and careful grinding you can get the panel flush with the windows and the sill will give it a finished look. I will epoxy this in place. I intend to place the ships name on the panel and the windows will keep their arch. If there is a slight difference between where the deck/cabin ceiling should be I can live with that

Your thoughts on using bulkhead 16 for the Transom backing seems the way to go.....Is that bulkhead at 16 degrees Mike?  I plan to carefully saw down the hulls stern parallel to bulkhead 16,removing 17. Then take a panel of 1/4"  basswood shaped in the profile of bulkhead 16. Radius its rear face to match transom. Glue in place to #16 and mount the cast part in place. I will have to see what will need to be done to blend in the curved lower transom area by the rudder. I will sort out the galleries and their windows later. The only problem I can see the hull is a little bit wider at # 16 making the galleries a little narrower which I don't know if I'm that bothered about.

Does this seem a feasible plan of action or will it make things worse in your opinions?

 

Regards John

[ianmajor]

John,

 

It is great that Mike's and my discussions have benefited others. We have had plenty of input as well from ZyXuz , Ollyweb, petervisser and others. That is the great thing about this forum.

 

My suggestion was to make a beefed up transom which would replace bulkhead 17 rather than be attached to bulkhead 16 so there would be no narrowing of the hull. Replacing bulkhead 17 with a part that is the width of the galleries brings the galleries forward by the thickness of the bulkhead.

 

Ideally the transom part need to be replaced. In entry 3 of this log Mike put a link to an image of the Chapman plan (link to plan) . From that you can see the underside should curve downwards at each end. By replacing the transom part you can also get better window shape and spacing.

 

My Unicorn is too far advanced to make these substantial changes but I had contemplated planking over the lower parts of the windows in the way you suggested. Your prompting may make me reconsider this.

 

How about starting your own build log? We can then have plenty of happy times comparing and discussing the various builds.

 

Mike, don't feel bad about me spending time playing with the children's coloured pencils - if I wasn't doing that my wife would probably pack me off to the local day centre to make cane baskets with the other ancients.  (sorry for pinching your log space  )

Edited May 14, 2014 by ianmajor

[ZyXuz]

Mike and Ian, I really love how you guys study the Unicorn plan to make this a more accurate model.

 

The stern part took some of my times too. I also made the degree of the stern more 'gradual' (like what shown by Ian, 1st picture 2nd image), because I feel that the original one was too steep. The captain would have problem walking toward the stern direction 

 

Take your time on your scratching, Mike. We'd really like to see more discussion here.. it helps us a lot on knowing more about ships and of course, Chapman's Plan

Edited May 14, 2014 by ZyXuz

[ianmajor]

Mike,

 

The tiller arrangement has been bugging me and I have given it more thought. This would have some effect on the work around the top end of the keel piece.

 

I have convinced myself that the tiller would have been above the quarter deck. Below is an extract from the Chapman diagram:-

 

 

Chapman marks the deck levels by parallel pairs of dotted lines. I have added some arrows. The blue marks the quarter deck the red the upper deck. I have also marked the top of the stern post with a green arrow.

 

Now the tiller would sweep back and forth above the top of the stern post. If it was mounted immediately above the stern post that would put it and its sector plate in the great cabin - bit of a no no. Hence my belief that it was actually above the quarter deck. Is it time to dig out the plans of your Badger and scale them up a bit?

 

As you noted previously the Lyme class had very low head room on the lower deck and later ships had this headroom increased. The later frigates were also increased in size. I have compared the counter on the Unicorn and the Lyme with the slightly later frigates. The Lyme class had a single curve at the counter, the later ones had two curves, the upper one corresponding to the seat level of the great cabin. I have borrowed an image from Chuck's Winchelsea to illustrate this (I hope he doesn't mind).

 

 

Notice its twin curves compared with the single curve on the Unicorn. On Winchelsea the tiller is able to enter below the upper deck level.

 

The tiller being on the quarter deck raises a few more questions.

 

With it and its operating ropes occupying much of the area behind the mizzen mast I can't see how cannon could have been used at the rearmost quarter deck ports.

 

The rudder would have passed right up through the great cabin at the rear obscuring the central window. Was there an actual window there? Was it a trompe l'oeil?

 

What do you think? Or am I talking b******s?     

 

BTW Have you seen Chucks latest on his Winchelsea (link) ? He is in the process of producing the stern galleries. Very useful.

 

 

 

 

[ianmajor]

....and yes Mike, you are also right. Whilst comparing with Chuck's model it became obvious that the Corel model has NO stern post. That would be easily added and look much better.

[Landlubber Mike]

John, welcome to Team Unicorn!  It's great that you're coming back to your build, and that it sounds like our discussion here has been timely.  

 

In terms of your planned modifications, I'm not sure if bulkhead 16 is at 16 degrees or not (I'd have to double-check the plans, but it might be fairly close).  I haven't mapped this out yet, but I'm thinking of adding two pairs of stern extensions to the after face of bulkhead 16.  The inner pair will be longer than the outer pair, to help shape the transom curve from fore to aft.  If bulkhead 16 is not at 16 degrees, I can modify the shape of the extensions such that the rake of the transom will be at 16 degrees.

 

I agree with Ian that it might be worth considering scrapping the cast metal transom and build your own, or just use select pieces from it as Joe did on his Fox build.  

 

I also agree with Ian that it would be nice if you started a build log on here

[Landlubber Mike]

Ian, thanks very much for this extra research.  I'm going to have to look at zu Mondfeld a bit to figure out how the rudder and tiller assemblies were constructed.  It does seem odd that the rudder would extend into the cabin like that.  If the rudder did go through the cabin, why add so many windows?  Since the Lyme class were based on French vessels, maybe its a French design thing?

 

Thanks for passing along the link to Chuck's build.  Very timely!  His work clears up a lot on how to scratch the stern galleries.

 

Thanks too for pointing out the double-dotted lines in the Chapman plans.  I was wondering how I would change the angle of the quarterdeck to help line up the deck with the open portholes, and that really helps a lot!  The one thing I'll have to check is whether the quarterdeck and upper deck generally ran parallel - if so, a change to the quarterdeck might mean some fiddling with the line of the upper deck.  I did notice that the line of the upper deck gun ports did differ a bit between Chapman and Corel.

 

A couple of other differences between Chapman and Corel - take a look at where the channels are on the Chapman plans versus Corel.  Chapman shows them sitting on the rails.  Corel has the aft-most channels correct, but if I remember correctly, the Corel plans have the other channels below the respective rails.  Also, the angle of the aft end of the stern post is a bit different on Chapman - if I remember correctly, it's 11 degrees on Chapman but 8 degrees on Corel.  The 11 degrees approach probably looks better if one is going to change the rake of the transom.

Edited May 14, 2014 by Landlubber Mike