DERFFLINGER by piratepete007 - Euromodel - 1:80 - Dutch Fluyt

[piratepete007]

Prow Bulkhead (continued)

 

The first planking - as described in my previous post - needed to curve around past the Prow Deck bulkhead so I just worked on the principle that an excess amount of planking length is easily trimmed back to the required curve. Necessary was the formation of a fairly sharp beveled edge on the bulkhead piece to allow the planks to curve around. Also, as part of this process, alignment of the three edges (two frames and the bulkhead) in a straight line each side was important - starboard side was spot on but the port side needed approx. 1.5 mm. shaved off.

 

Found it difficult to ‘read’ from the drawings but in the end the forward edge was shaped to be approx. parallel to, and projecting about 3 mm. past, the sloping bulkhead. At this stage I constructed mast collars for both the Bowsprit and the Foremast. This in turn meant that the Bowsprit and Foremast lower mast needed to be constructed to enable the fitting of the mast collars.

Edited September 5, 2014 by piratepete007

[maggsl_01]

_{@ Brian}

 

_{I had some mails with the CEO of Euromodel as I want to visit their company when I go to Milan next time. And I asked him if there will be some new stuff in the close future. He said he is watching the market and has some ideas. Depends on the demand he says. But he did NOT reveal what he is thinking about}

_{I wish so much to find some new models in the market...}

 

_{Best wishes}

 

_Max

[piratepete007]

Bulwark Approximate Outline

Maybe this is stating the obvious but I felt it worthwhile to post this little step. The line of the upper bulwark along the ship has got me into strife before so I used the following little technique and it worked a treat.

Firstly I drilled a small hole (approx.0.75 mm but that is not significant) through the planking immediately above each frame - before the contouring arms were snapped off.

 

Then an outline of the upper edge was made on some ‘tracing’ paper with a soft graphite pencil and also copied onto the back surface of that paper. Using the holes as an guide, the paper was aligned over the whole surface and the outline traced onto the hull surface by a bit of careful rubbing over the pencil line

The following photo compares the two sides - before and after !

 

 

Edited September 6, 2014 by piratepete007

[amateur]

Bit late in replying to apost of sept thrid...

 

Actually, duyfken is known as. Yacht, by all naming stamdards, while derf.inger is supposed to be a fluyt (i have to say, a very poor example of it, based on a reconstruction fromthe early thirties by rolf hoeckel) duyfken is early 1600' whilde derflinger is suposed to be around 1700 ( i guess)

Derflinger as shown by eruomodel is not a fluyt by dutch standards, as the typical shape of the "back end" is not correct. It is also not a retourship, as again, the back end is not likea retourship.... Its kind of inbetween. (-although a nice model, it is not historically accurate)

 

Having said that: painting the hull white was habit in the mid 1600. A mixture of chalk, tar, sulfur, lead and some other toxic ingredients wre smeared below the waterline to prevent. Although thereare indications that especially in the baltic erea this was not done, as rot wasnt a problem over there.

 

The klinker plankint of the upper hull was standard, and in practice over long periods of time. It started off quite early, as the upper part of the hull had no structural function, and was build using thinnerplanks. To give some strength, klinkering was used.

 

Jan

Edited September 6, 2014 by amateur

[piratepete007]

Jan, delighted to read your comments and I must clarify my earlier comment re the Druyfken and the Derfflinger.

 

Yes, I said they were similar but in no way meant they were from the same 'stable'. The point I was trying to make really was the high, narrow bulwarks, particularly towards the stern ! Of course the Druyfken is a 'jacht'  ('yacht' in English) and that clearly makes it quite different to the Derfflinger which was itself based on historical records. That is the nature of the Euromodel design process.  It was rare indeed for precise, technical build records to be kept except through artistic portraiture and so opinions will vary on what may or may not be the correct shape, etc. Admittedly the VOC [Vereenigde Oostindische Compagne or Dutch East India Company) had design criteria for the ships they built. Arguments will always continue back and forth about historical accuracy and that I do not wish to get involved in. I have the 'crew manifest' for the Druyfken full-size replica at the moment and am studying it with great interest, however accurately or not it reflects the original ship.

 

The bottom line is that I am enjoying the build of the Derfflinger and having been involved in quite a few other Euromodel builds, this one is delightfully different. Having said all of the above, I totally respect what you have said, Jan.

 

To illustrate the difficulty of interpreting what we know, read and see is encapsulated in the following excerpt I came across.....

 

By the end of the 17th century the fluyt DERFFLINGER belonged to the fleet of Kurfuerstentum Brandenburg. In the "triangle trade" of that time she transported rum and other stuff to Africa, to buy slaves, who were then exchanged in the West Indies for sugar, which was then brought to Europe. Later she and other Brandenburg ships were used in the War of the Spanish Succession. Fleit Derfflinger was built in 1675 for the Elector of Germany Friedrich Wilhelm. The ship was named in honour of cavalry general Georg von Derfflinger, who 1675 won a Brandenburg victory in the battle of Fehrbellin against the Swedish.

 

 

The build log for the Derfflinger will continue ......

 

Pete

[amateur]

With not histrically correcti meant: giving a pictureofatypicaldutch fluyt.

Inthe dutch fluyts the 'bulge' at high stern is even more pronounced

Idon't know were Hoeckel found his resources for Derfllinger., and therefore can' comment on the accuracy of this specific reconstruction. As you said: something can be accurate or not. We will in many cases (duyfken is one, but there are more examples) give a picture of how it could have been, without ever knowing how far we are off.....

 

Jan

[piratepete007]

Thanks for all the comments of support through PM's.

 

To Jan, thanks for your above comment. Again, good to have a small debate. Always raises a few further queries to investigate.

 

And as I said, on with the build log .....

 

Pete

[piratepete007]

Main Deck Bulkhead (Aft)

 

There was both an aft and a forward bulkhead built on the Main Deck. The interesting thing here is that it was usual practice in Dutch ship-building during the seventeeth century to apply horizontal clinker cladding over the bulkhead surfaces. This style had no consequences in European waters but in the moist tropics, it easily led to wood rot. So whether the builder chooses to do this or be conventional with vertical strips is their choice. I went with the former style.

 

The drawings had to be carefully measured to obtain the correct slope on the bulkhead because that influenced the length of the over-lying planks of the Quarter Deck. I was a little concerned that the supplied plywood piece for this bulkhead was not quite wide enough (but that was being super-fussy) so another piece of plywood was glued onto the forward side of that piece as well as a piece of first planking being glued on the top edge. This doubling up of the bulkhead actually worked to my advantage when cutting out for the doors (see further down). The extra height allowed for the tapering of the top & bottom edges due to the sloping bulkhead.

One piece of thin plywood approx. 12 x 84 mm. was laminated with 0.5 mm. scrap planking strips, cut into five over-sized doors and then shaped to size. Laminating one long strip made the process so much easier. The doors without edging were 11 x 15 mm. - a little shorter than shown in the drawings but I needed to leave room underneath since the bottom edge of the doorway would have been above the deck surface. To the door edges were added strips made from scrap 0.5 x 3 mm.

At this stage, clinker planking had been started to establish a base line for the doors. Rather than fuss around with short pieces of planking around the door openings, I decided on full planking and then cutting out the doors. Having said that, it seems not uncommon for builders to just add the doors over the surface of the bulkhead !

 

Although the original instructions suggested using 1 x 3 mm. timber for the bulkhead planking, I would have been much better off using the 1 x 4 mm. second planking timber - both for appearance and ease of cutting through. Hindsight is a wonderful thing !!!!

 

A doorway recess was cut into the top layer of plywood.

With this space underneath, the cutting out of the actual doorway through the clinker planking proved to be a very simple exercise. When the doors were finally fixed in position, these spaces were re-filled with some short pieces of first planking timber. Certainly that was extra work but it seemed worthwhile.

Edited September 7, 2014 by piratepete007

[piratepete007]

Research on the Dutch Vessels -  Jacht and Fluyt

I do not wish to hijack my own build log on the Derfflinger but felt it necessary to uncover a few more facts - for myself - and for the forum. The last few days have been filled with a whirlwind of emails to people 'in the know' .I must say this has been an incredibly exciting journey into an avenue of shipbuilding of which I was so ignorant. This is a sad admission since the Dutch nation was a real powerhouse of shipbuilding in the 17 C.

 

I received the following text from Nick Burningham (nautical archaeologist) who was contracted by the Duyfken Foundation in Western Australia to design a full-scale replica of the Duyfken. I gratefully acknowledge his authoritative comments ....

 

“ … Dutch jachts and fluyts were similar in the sense that all sea-going three-masted ships of the same era and same place of building were similar. Terms such as jacht and fluyt were not formally defined in the way that later terms such as schooner and brig were.

 

However, there are major distinctions between the two

 

- a jacht was a fast, armed vessel with a square tuck stern, but

- a fluyt was a capacious cargo vessel with a round stern (not a round tuck stern).

 

Fluyten were sometimes armed, but they were not developed as armed vessels.

 

[Karl Marquardt did try to argue that jachts were round-sterned vessels [Marquardt, K.H., 2007. The Duyfken enigma: some alternate design possibilities. The Great Circle] but Nick suggested that there was insufficient evidence to support his comments]

 

In my article I make the point that the jacht is primarily a term indicating function and performance whereas fluyt primarily defines hull-form. Although a jacht usually had a square stern, a fast and armed, round stern ship could be regarded as a jacht, but it would be called a flieboot or vlieboot in the early 17th century….”

 

 

My comments ...

For those interested, Nick Burningham’s excellent article is worth reading and is called : The Flute; histories and mysteries and myths. MHA Journal Vol. 13 (3)

 

The fluyt had a very distinctive shape and purpose to have a large loading capacity whilst minimising the number of crew members necessary to sail them. The result was a much rounder and bulkier hull and steeper bulwarks towards the stern. In other words, these ships often displayed a long tumblehome design. The stern, like the bow, was quite rounded.

 

The sides of the ship inclined towards the inside at their top, creating a much smaller deck. Ships passing through the Danish Sound Strait into the Baltic Sea had to pay taxes (‘Sound Dues’) based on their deck surface area. Reducing the deck area resulted in a significant decrease of these taxes while actually increasing the carrying capacity of the vessel.

 

The unique design of the fluyt did cause some problems - if used in the tropics, the clinker design of the bulwarks and bulkheads accumulated moisture leading to wood rot and the rounded bow exposed to the harsh sun caused considerable cracking of the timbers. They were better suited to the European climate where they were so commonly used.

Edited September 13, 2014 by piratepete007

[maggsl_01]

 

 Ships passing through the Danish Sound Strait into the Baltic Sea had to pay taxes (‘Sound Dues’) based on their deck surface area. Reducing the deck area resulted in a significant decrease of these taxes while actually increasing the carrying capacity of the vessel.

 

 

Hi Pete...

 

they were really clever.... many freight, low costs... sounds like nowerdays

And - so we modellers have nice and interesting  builds on our desk...

 

Best wishes

 

Max

[piratepete007]

Painting the Derfflinger (or not)

 

There was a question raised about whether I would be painting the Derfflinger but I was not happy with my immediate response. After doing some research, I have uncovered a photo (seen below) of a fluyt model in the Maritime Museum Prins Hendrik, Rotterdam. The upper hull planking is painted dark green and wales are black but that does not categorically prove that painting should be done [Ab Hoving did not paint the upper hull planking on his model of Tasman’s Zeehaen]. 

 

There are also paintings by artists which show completely unpainted topsides on fluyten.  Dutch ships, when not painted, were coated with a mix of pine tar, oil and resin which made the timber quite dark, and eventually black.

 

It comes down to what the builder of a model wishes to do and historically, painting or timber finish both seem to be historically correct. At this stage, then, I plan to paint the upper portion of the hull green/ black and below the water line ‘white’. Between the two painted areas, there will be a relatively narrow band of unpainted timber.

Edited September 13, 2014 by piratepete007

[piratepete007]

Right on target Brian. It is so easy to become orientated on the usual, popular ships of the English and the Americans. The Dutch were massive ship-builders in the 17C producing ships for a number of other countries, so that deserves some recognition. The challenge is in building a different style of ship.

Pete

[tarbrush]

Hi Pete,

your proposed painting scheme sounds great, I really like the model example, Dutch ships are so interesting,  I am really looking forward to seeing your model progress.

[maggsl_01]

Hi Pete,

 

just found some helpful words and pics to build the Derfflinger on Euro Models site... I am sure, I know the pics...

 

I agree with all you say about the painting - but I am one of them who love to see the structure and color of wood without any painting...

But I am excited to see your wonderful Dutch beauty in a decorative cosmetical high-end attraction

 

Cheerio

 

Max

[piratepete007]

Thanks for your support Max. The following is just a personal belief ... it is so strange that we bend over backwards to get things as historically correct as we believe they are during the building of a ship ... and then we (myself included) leave the beautiful, beautiful timber with all its glorious texture and colour for all to see. How could it be covered up ?  It is at this final stage of building that we dare not add that coat of paint that was indeed used historically. I have just decided to be different with this build. Just a bit of rambling so excuse me as ship-building is all about being individual.

Pete

[maggsl_01]

Hi Pete...

 

 

Pls do not misunderstand me... I am really very excited to see the result of your efforts on the Derfflinger and your interpretation. You are right - all this things we modellers do are so individual - and that is at last what all is about: Being individual although we do very similar things (hope you understand as I am not a native english speaking Person). Its so different how People look at one Thing. I will do the Derfflinger too - and at least it will be a differnent model than yours. But we both are full of joy and satisfaction building this wonderful model.

 

All the best for you and your Derfflinger

 

Max

[piratepete007]

Finishing the First Planking

 

With the bulwark shape determined, it was time to finish the first planking down to the base of the keel. The only problem here was that the ship needed to be inverted and worked upon without damaging the tall, fragile bulwarks towards the stern. So care had to be taken in designing a support stand.

 

There is nothing startling to report about the technique used for planking this lower section. The set of photos included here are ‘raw’ and not looking ‘pretty’ - the surface will be ‘filled in’ with wood filler and sanded back to produce a uniform surface ready for the second planking shortly.

 

What is worth commenting on though is the profile of the hull section just forward of the Main Mast with the bottom surface being almost flat and quite bulbous, both characteristics together giving a shallow draft for ease of entry into river systems and ports. I have come across such words as ‘pear shaped’ and ‘box like’. These vessels were used commonly in coastal waters and with their minimal armament, they were vulnerable to attack from pirates and other mercenaries.

 

The Dutch are well known to have used mathematics (e.g. integral calculus as early as the 17C) for the development of hull shapes, underwater volumes and hence waterlines for various loads. Now I do not pretend to have the knowledge involved with the designing of hulls but I was just captivated by this particular profile.

Edited September 13, 2014 by piratepete007

[amateur]

I was awate of some people trying to calculate the load using basic integral calculus, but i wasn't aware of the use of matehematics in hull design.

Could you tell me where you found info on how they did it?

 

I know the books by witsen and van ijk, but they do not give any design-rules, apart from rules of thumb, and "it should be done this way, as we always did it this way...."

 

Jan

[piratepete007]

Jan,

I came across many 'one-liner' references to the Dutch use of calculus in the 17C but the text to look at is Dutch shipbuilding before 1800 : ships and guilds / Richard W. Unger.  I believe is the one to peruse. If you can find that one - and read it (either written in German or Dutch but not sure), then please pass on to us any useful bits of information.

Pete