HMS Jason by Beef Wellington - Caldercraft - 1:64 - Artois-class frigate modified from HMS Diana 1794

[hubacekn]

On 29. 9. 2016 at 6:52 PM, Beef Wellington said:

Think I've got a bit of catching up to do.  Firstly, heres the Captain Cook Monument in Waimea, no undercooked beef wellington shots in this one   .  Found the beach he landed at, nothing special but couldn't locate the plaque that allegedly marks the spot according to guide books.

 

 

I have managed at least an interim milestone, the completion of the starboard copper...this task just goes on and on

 

Couple of items I've found to be helpful:

• Super Solvent - I've found this product to be highly effective at getting rid of any CA glue residue (at least the Admiralty Pro thick stuff).  Wiping over the surface of any potential smearing is usually enough
• Some plates plates require very acute angles to be cut and when using scissors (which I find by far the easiest), the ends tend to curl and distort horribly.  I found that cutting these as part of a larger section this problem is eliminated, although care is needed still to separate them.

 

And the results.  Some of the photos are before I cleaned to plates with copper cleaner, which I did to ensure that there was no CA residue anywhere.  These will need to be done again once all the plates are on as I can guarantee more finger prints.  Managed to do the copper plate pattern at the bow that seems to be prevalent on so many models and AOTS drafts, slight discrepancies in the plates will only become less noticeable as the copper ages and darkens.  Overall I'm very happy with the Amati plates, and slight plate misalignments that just seem to be inevitable when using CA glue are tolerable.  Not sure I could do it any better if I were to do it again, so I think that's the yardstick to meaure to.

 

At the bow, I plated the cutwater first and tried to shape the plates on the planking to match the required curve.  Its far from perfect but will do.  I think these areas are inherently limited given the thickness of the plates, I suspect using copper tape would allow a more scale appearance.

 

I drilled some small holes in the waterline batten to simulate nails and highlighted with pencil, these are not to scale but felt it gives it a little bit more functional relevance.

 

 

Et voila!  The pinkish hue of freshly cleaned copper reminded me on the AOTS Diana picture, I was very pleased with the lines that appear once the waterline is apparent. Obviously next step is to continue with the other side.... 

 

Dear Jason,

 

i would like ask you from what material you made waterline...?

 

You said:

I drilled some small holes in the waterline batten to simulate nails and highlighted with pencil, these are not to scale but felt it gives it a little bit more functional relevance.

 

I made copper shield on my HMS Pegasus and i dont know, how to and what to do waterline.

 

Thank you a lot

Michal

 

[Beef Wellington]

All, thanks for the support, kind words and likes from such an accomplished group.  I noticed that I'm just past my 3yr anniversary for this model...I'm hoping things can start accelerating a little from here now all the foundations are in place.

 

@ Michal - its a simple solution I learned from others, the batten is simply a 1x1mm strip glued to the waterline.  Given that the hull shape requires this to bend through a number of convex and concave surfaces, especially at the stern, my experience was that it is easiest to thin by sanding to around 0.5mm or less and then glue in position with PVA glue.  The moisture in the glue adds to flexibility of the woods and sets quickly so fingers can be used to hold in place.  This was done in manageable strip lengths rather than trying to do the whole waterline with one piece.  Once this had dried fully, I then reduced the thickness a little more by careful sanding until it looked to be at the appropriate scale.

 

 

Edited September 29, 2017 by Beef Wellington

[hubacekn]

Dear Jason,

than you very much for your tips and advice!Its very helpfull for me.

Michal

[Beef Wellington]

Not much progress, but I want to ask a question, so felt obliged to post  a few photos 

 

Progress made on the upper and lower counter rail.  These need to follow quite a curve, more so than they appear, and were pre-bent to shape using a failed counter template I had kept.  Seems very important visually to get a smooth curve.  The ends of these rails will need to butt up against the side gallery rails and so were angled to approximately 45% in preparation.  Using a single pin amidships proved to be the ticket here ensuring that the rail could be consistently placed while the ends were fine tuned - the small hole should be pretty easy to mask afterwards with filler.  The top rail is not glued in place yet, but its possible to get a feel for the run of these rails.  Overall, I'm rather relieved and pleased with how this turned out with the name placement.  

 

 

So, to my question.  The Diana kit provides two 'ladies' at either side of the stern fascia which are pretty good castings (represent the goddesses Hera and Athena from Jason's story) which I'd like to use.  The tafferal is quite thick, and when compared to the AOTS diagram, the female figures appear to have some depth.  I thought that by this time, complex carvings in the round would not be in vogue for economic reasons, so I'm wondering if what is illustrated is a simpler relief carving on an angled corner.  If so, then the approach could be to simply angle the corner.  The hesitation here is that after so much work on the stern, I'm wary of making a mistake...but I do like the more 'fitted' look in the AOTS picture as it seems to gradually transition the thickness of the tafferal in a visually pleasing way.  Angling the corner would be easier with the upper counter rail off, but until that's decided its a roadblock to moving forward with the rest.

 

Opinions, thoughts and recommendations sought...

 

Edited August 31, 2017 by Beef Wellington

[hamilton]

Hi Jason:

 

Sorry I can't help with your question....but the model looks beautiful! 

hamlton

[cog]

Jason,

 

What I see in the image you posted, and what I can find on the net, e.g. here and here , it seems it is not going "round the bend" but remains on the stern facia. It looks ike it is a somewhat massive carving piece.

I hope you find a fitting answer to your problem though.

 

Cheers

[Blue Ensign]

Superb work on the coppering Jason.

I had a similar issue with the Quarter figures when I decided to retro modify the stern on my Pegasus, and replace the flat etched figures with angled relief figures.

 

 I had to chop quite deeply into the transom for my modification and I spent some time visualising how I would approach the task before I took knife to the stern.

 

I wonder if the raised arm of the figure would present a problem. If the figure is simply placed at an angle the arm would be away from the face of the transom unless the figure is set into the edge and the angle of the arm can be modified somewhat.

 

I think I would make a stern mock up using some stuff of the same thickness and see how it worked out. 

 

Cheers,

 

B.E.

[Beef Wellington]

Gents - this is why this site is so great, everything has suddenly become clear (or at least clearer), so thank you!

 

Carl - All beautiful, but maybe a little fancy for the late 18th century and undoubtedly beyond my ability to carve!

 

Dirk - I see you had the exact same 'problem'.  Despite being an avid follower of your beautiful Confederacy I somehow missed that, so shame on me!  That shows the situation very clearly and was a huge help in thinking this through.

 

B.E. -  You raise a good potential issue with the arm, I think the casting is sufficiently soft to allow that to be bent, but experimentation will be needed.  In photos below you can see I've bent the arm tentatively, will need more attention but I want to wait until final profile is known to reduce the risk of it breakage due to repeated bending.  BTW, I repeatedly admire your custom Pegasus stern and added figures - much better than the kit provided knights - but maybe a little too ornate for these later frigates (I may be wrong, but I believe the Artois class may have been among the last 5th rates with full figureheads)

 

Photos of a quick-and-dirty proof of concept, so think I know where I'm going with this...trying to ignore the horrible paint finish on the casting but there is no point in making it look good at this point...

 

[Blue Ensign]

if you've got some flexibility in the arm Jason, then I think you're good to go .

look forward to seeing the final outcome. 

 

B.E.

[Barbossa]

Hi Jason,

I'll settle for this too. Regarding the paint : I don't know about other MSW-members experience but I'm quite satisfied using Acrylicos Vallejo paints. They offer plenty of ocher combinations

If I had to do it all over again, I would have used them for the stern decorations ( instead of the unrealistic gold )  I used A.V. on my bowhead figure. The latter outcomed pretty well.

A white primer ( same brand ) is recommendable.

[Beef Wellington]

Cheers gents.

 

Christian - I'm being consistent in using the Admiralty paints yellow ochre which I quite like.  Constant handling of these parts seems to be no match for any paint and paint rubs off the high spots despite an undercoat.  Should not be a problem to get looking OK when the time comes.

 

Cannon Conundrums (or "Armament Angst")

 

I felt I needed a bit of a change of pace while continuing to work slowly on the stern, and decided to get a head start on the cannons as I foresee these being a rather repetitive activity.  Psychologically, it feels like I'm getting a head start on things a little by commencing work on these now rather than waiting until I have to do them.

The first decision was to finally decide on which barrels to go with.  Photos below show 3 options, specifically left to right, Chuck's Syren offering, RB Models and the kit supplied barrels.  I know I posted these pics in Andy's Diana log, but can't remember if I did here so pls forgive any repetition!

• Kit provide barrels - Painful as it is, the kit provided ones just don't cut the mustard with the bore being too large, the muzzle not being the right shape and the pommel just way too big.
• Chuck's barrels are very nice indeed, while the length certainly works, the bore seems a little small and for a 1:64 18lb'er and overall the barrel is a little dainty to my eye
• RBs Models (44mm) are also very nicely shaped and to my eye seem to fit the needed proportions best.  Each barrel is also supplied with a scale precut trunnion of high quality, so some labour would be saved there.

Next up, carriages.  I had ordered a set of Chucks Syren carriages a while ago and finally got round to building one up in addition to a kit carriage for comparison.  Pictures are self explanatory and show the kit carriage with kit barrel (left) with Syren carriage and RB models barrel (right).  Making these up allowed all the possible permutations to be tried, but these are best comparison.  Note - these were built over a number of very brief 10 minute sessions when I could escape to the boat yard, i.e. very quick and dirty, with quick paint job and no fittings. 

 

Couple of things are apparent:

• The kit walnut is not great, being very splintery with pronounced grain, and would require a lot of work to get an acceptable finish.  The carriage is noticeably a little more squat, and the 2mm thickness of the ply looks less substantial, and the trucks a little on the small side.
• Similar level of finish work on the Syren laser cut parts gives a much better result.  Dimensions all around look a little more pleasing to my eye.

 

The width of the Syren carriage were made slightly wider than the plans indicate to try and better scale to the RB barrel.

 

 

Final comparison was to place in situ.  The RB/Syren combination seemed to sit nicely mid port.  Placement of a quoin will need to be thought about as the barrel is probably already at approximately the right elevation.  Feel the RB/Syren combo is  clear winner, despite the additional investment that will be needed my view is that this will ultimately provide a more enjoyable building experience, especially as 28 of these puppies will need to be made up...

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 4, 2017 by Beef Wellington

[BANYAN]

Nice analysis Jason.  I agree with the RB/Syren combination being the more realistic.  Thinning the quoin bed should resolve your issue I think ?

 

Nice work.

 

cheers

 

Pat

Edited September 4, 2017 by BANYAN

[Beef Wellington]

Pat - that is a great suggestion - cheers!  I had been mulling over how to reduce the quoin thickness but it seems much more practical and easier to use thinner wood fort the bed as this would probably not be noticed.  Will continue to mull this over.

[Landlubber Mike]

I prefer the RB guns too.  For what it's worth, I am replacing my Pegasus guns with the RB guns, not only for better scale but better looks.

[Beef Wellington]

Thanks all for the "likes" and looking in.  Think a point has been reached where all of the known big challenges have been addressed, or at least an approach developed, so I can start to have a bit of fun tackling some of the other odd pieces on the deck.

 

I am starting to seriously consider not rigging this model... the reason being that I certainly still have plenty ahead of me (and I still haven't even finished rigging 'Snake' yet) even without rigging, also the size of the hull is already quite large and adding the masts and spars will increase the needed space significantly.  Curious on other's thoughts on this, hopefully it is not anathema.  The other consideration is that I would like to move onto another build sooner than I realistically would if I were to fully rig.  What this means is that I may spend a little extra time adding some details that I otherwise wouldn't, as I'm also wanting to leave my options open to possibly leave open some of the upper deck planking/scuttles.

 

4 additional standards have been added, 2 fore and 2 aft (still in process on larboard side) as these will be visible when the upper deck is in place.  You can see the kit supplied riding bitts in place.

 

The scale of these bitts is actually pretty accurate, but I didn't like the shape so decided to make up my own...and while I was at it also made up some fore riding bitts following guidance from TFFM as the AOTS book is a little sparse on detail.  These were fun little projects.  I believe the forward elm battens were nailed on for easy replacement but I haven't tried to simulate that, not sure how this would be done however, or whether this is a "less is more" situation.

 

Previous mods allowed the bowsprit to be secured within the hull on a bowsprit step so this was also constructed.  Going a little crazy some manger boards were also made up, these will not be readily (understatement) viewable but I think could add to the sense of depth when undergoing close inspection through a gun port , and help mask the obvious edge of the bulkhead against the deck.  The dimensions of the bowsprit step are a little ambiguous, in retrospect I would have made it 2-3mm narrower, but given the likely visibility, this will not be redone. 

 

 

The placement of the bowsprit step is a little dependent on some of the foremost beam, to be obsessive this should be a little further forward, but think it will be just fine where it is.  The foremost deck beams required modification to work around some of the other alterations made up to this point but this was simple enough.

And with everything in place a couple of deck shots to get a feel for things...

Edited September 27, 2017 by Beef Wellington

[dvm27]

Those bitts look fantastic, Jason. Definitely worth the extra effort.

[BANYAN]

Nice work Jason, those bitts and the manger look great.

 

cheers

 

Pat

[robdurant]

Wow. I love this bit of the build where the deck - and so the ship - starts to spring to life. It begins to feel like a place you could walk round. Great work.... and an inspiration for when I reach this stage. Love the bitts and manger!

[Landlubber Mike]

Looks great Jason - the bitts came out fantastic!

 

I completely get where you're coming from on the rigging.  Personally I think these models look a lot better fully rigged, but at the same time, the space they take up pretty much triples.  I was surprised once I rigged my Badger how much more space it took - I can only imagine what things look like on a bigger model.  Then of course there is the cost if you want to encase it, which goes up a lot if you need to account for a rigged model.  Not sure that helps you, but I would certainly say that your Jason will looked fantastic rigged or not.

[Barbossa]

Hi Jason,

 

Splendid work on the bits

Just a thought on "to rig or not to rig, that's the question"

The decision is yours but it's obvious that you succeeded brilliantly in altering lots of features to the hull, the rigging will probably also be subject to improvement. Meaning : as you went already this far, you won't settle for a straight forward built out of the box for rigging matters ( which I was more inclined to do, I admit ). This will of course require a lot of research and trial and error situations, I guess

(For myself : the rigging is not my favorite part)

On the other hand : If you were to go all the way...what a splendid ship, she would be...

My suggestion : why not first complete the rigging on your previous ship. This can only be a positive experience on which you might benefit-presumely- for HMS Jason. Regarding the space issue : family & very close friends are a safe harbor for already completed models. But that is only me speaking.

[rafine]

Jason, I'm prejudiced because I enjoy rigging, but I think the model will look spectacular rigged. 

 

Bob

[toms10]

My 2 cents ... rigging is the difference between a field goal and a touchdown.  I always hear people say how much detail is on a model and that is what makes it special.  In my opinion rigging is probably the most detailed work of a model.

Tom

[hamilton]

Beautiful work Jason! 

hamilton

[md1400cs]

Jason,

 

Just catching up. As has been repeated many times Brilliant work indeed.

 

Regards,

[Blue Ensign]

However you decide to finish her Jason she will be a stunning model.

I had the same issue about fully rigging a model when I built my Victory, mainly around the space she would take up.

I have always liked  the look of models rigged with just the lower masts and standing rigging, ever since I saw a drawing by Bjorn Landstrom in his book The Ship.

So I finished her on this basis, altho' I did include the Topmasts in the lowered position 'just in case' I decided to return one day to fully rig her. (which won't happen)

Models rigged to this level are far more manageable whilst still allowing some added interest, and the absence of yards makes a huge difference in display options particularly in a domestic setting.

 

Regards,

 

B.E.

[mobbsie]

Hi Jason,

 

Catching up on your log mate and WOW, absolutely beautiful.

 

With regard to full rigging or not is totally dependant on the display area, Like Bob I really love the rigging process and so am prejudiced and would ( with the bosses permission ) make space available. It's not always possible and can increase expenditure regarding the case. Good luck with that decision mate.

 

Love what your achieving.

 

Be Good

 

mobbsie

 

 

 

 

[Beef Wellington]

Thanks for all the 'likes', and Greg, Pat, Mike, Christian, Bob, Tom, Hamilton, Michael, Mobbsie - I really appreciate your thoughts and interest, the good news is that I don't need to decide right now.  I got a little over-obsessive on Snake using the kit supplied materials which bogged things down a bit, I'm sure I'd enjoy rigging more with better quality line and be happier with the result.  What I'm hoping is that I can leave my options open even after things get closed up when the quarterdeck and f'csle go on (e.g. mast stumps that could easily be replaced with full masts and yards at some point)

 

BE - your Victory, despite just looking fantastic, presents yet another interesting alternative.  I too like that look a lot.

 

Coamings

Moving on a little, have started on the coamings and gratings.  I had ordered some of Chuck's gratings some time ago and these were relatively painless to make up.  The coaming dimensions were taken from AOTS with a few small adjustments to ensure the edge of the coaming met the wider binding strakes as illustrated.  I did go the whole hog and build these as per TFFM which was good practice, if not slow.  Not really much else to say.

 

 

Where the companionways are, I did do bit more fiddly work to try and simulate the beams and carlings that would be visible.  I'm sure there must be a better way, but the approach I took was as follows:

1. Build up the bottom of the companionway coaming by 1mm to account for the thickness of the deck (as coamings would sit on the beams/carlings, not the deck)
2. 0.5mm sheet was applied to the side faces to simulate the recess on the interior face
3. Boxwood sheets and strips attached to simulate the beams/carlings.  This was not hard once the approach had been figured out as this all still needs to slide in through the holes in the deck (which had to be enlarged a bit). 
4. I did decide to paint these black, as is shown to good effect on the contemporary Winchelsea model.  I was tempted to leave these natural, but as I had made these out of pear, I felt that another wood tone would be distracting.  In any event, black appears to have been quite commonly used toward the end of the century to aid safety by making the companionways more visible against the deck.

Bit of a Frankenstein's monster from underneath, but to my eye looks convincing enough when in place. 

 

All the coamings and gratings have been made up and just need some finishing.  I was pleased that the coamings lined up with the butt pattern of the planks, because as irregular as they looks, they do correspond with the theoretical placement of the beams below.

 

The third photo shows the difference in appearance with the added depth in the companionway, vs the coaming simply sitting on the deck for comparison.  The last photo shows everything in place.  One slight fudge I'm making here is to put a grating into the foremost of the two rearmost openings.  This should really be a companionway down to the wardroom, but the keel former realistically presents this being represented, and given that this will barely be glimpsed, a grating went on top instead.  The kit plans omit this feature entirely.

 

Edited October 6, 2017 by Beef Wellington

[MEDDO]

 The coamings/grattings really look nice!  

[Barbossa]

Jason,

the black color gives a wonderful contrast. I just love it !

 

[ChrisLBren]

Beautiful work Jason - also nice beer in the background shot !