DE 7 PROVINCIËN (1665) 1:50

[Maarten]

Perhaps. But the bitts and the masts and other vertical structures still went in certain places relative to the beams...which necessarily informs beam locations. It surely wasn't just random...

For sure that is about beam location but not about symmetry between ps and sb side.

 

[DARIVS ARCHITECTVS]

Deck planking may have been laid in accordance with whatever lumber was available, but the largest structural elements were set with precision, despite some asymmetry. What this allows is for leeway for us model builders when it comes to making perfectly symmetrical hull planking strakes and deck planking of varying widths and lengths. For many of us, the mistakes we make in these areas can often be actually historically accurate as a result. We may end up with an additional drop plank or stealer on one side off the hull, or one extra strake of planking on one side. Look at the pictures of Vasa's lower gun deck for how the deck planks appear as an example.

Unconventional deck joints made to get the most use out of available timbers on Vasa's lower gun deck:


Vasa's deck planking pattern was opportunistic based on available wood, not set to a strictly followed pattern:

 

[BradNSW]

Hi Paul,

In 17th century building let go this idea of perfect symmetry, it is just not the case. If you create perfect symmetry you create an unrealistic model.
This is not the case for 17th Dutch ships only but for all.
This means it is perfect to have it unsymmetrical

Darn it Maarten, I read this after I fixed my unsymmetrical stern!! It would have saved a lot of work, since apparently, I had it "perfect"!!