Don's Santisima Trinidad by OcCre

[donlong]

Thanks Gary.
As you can see I am more or less following Donnie's build plus I spent a lot of time doing research before I opened the box. I must admit I am pretty handy with my hands but I also found this ship can turn on you in an instant. That was when it occurred to me that there must be others that have not done this before. That is also when I decided to add those little things, add some history, add some justification for why I did a step a certain way. Perhaps what I would change if I did this again.

It is very rewarding when you spend days doing something and it turns out looking ok. The things I learned doing just the bulwarks was incredible. Needless to say, I am as happy as if I had good sense. It is even better when a veteran, such as you, positively responds to my posts.

So thanks again for your comments.

Don

 

[Donnie]

Hi Don,
excellent write up.

"Many of the cannon ports are cockeyed or not in line with the other ports"

that is very correct. This part really put a delay in my build as I knew that the ports would not have that much distortion to them. I had to correct them. I think I used a pair of dividers to help with the alignment.

If you want to go to http://www.shipsofscale.com/Trinidad/STBL05.html you will see (the attempt) that I made to correct this.

I did a lot of looking "down" the ship to see how the ports sweep. I think this is vital to correct. My blessings to you as you continue with your build.

 

[donlong]

Thanks Donnie.

The cannon port issue is critical for me since I have decided to paint the white ribbons along her sides. If my ports don’t line up, then my lines will be jagged. I think I will focus more on the planking than the bulwarks. The openings are approximately 10x10 in the bulwarks. The port frame mounting ridge is about 9x9. The frame itself is about 10.5x10.5. I realize 1.5x1.5 is not a lot of wiggle room but it does allow for some shifting of the port frame. As long as the planking windows are cut properly, I think the rest will fall into place. This is pretty much what you did.

I have just finished planking the quarter deck and am reviewing eyebolts and their placement. Before I start the hull planking and cannon port corrections, I am reviewing the four cannon in the stern. The kit does not have them yet I have drawings showing they have been there since she first launched. The other thing I need to work out is the stern supplied in the kit is the 1778 stern when she had 120 guns
The kit has 138 guns which would bring her closer to the 1805 time period. The stern at that time (1805) was pretty drab or lacking in decoration.

I also found the hull was copper clad in 1781 or 82. It is mentioned again in 1797. Apparently, she was not as yar (easy to handle) as one would hope. Due to her size and hull shape she listed badly in the wind. It was the hope that the copper plates would stabilize her more. So I have some more home work to do and then I will drive a stake in the ground and say, this is what I believe she looked like. Oddly enough, this is what most of the historians have done. Even the artists have made a disclaimer saying from my research, this is how I think she looked.

This may seem a little extreme but I really like the research. There are many other things I can do on the ship before I commit myself to the planking of the hull while I am doing some fact finding. Where’s a time machine when you need one? Right?

Later,

Don

 

[Anaga]

Don,
I wished I´d checked your thread more often!
Here are some things to take into account regarding the bulkheads:

One thing I did find, while many of the pieces of the kit are laser cut, the accuracy was not as good as it could be. This may account for Donnie’s gap issue he had when he installed his bulwarks. Many of the cannon ports are cockeyed or not in line with the other ports. Even the seams did not line up as I thought they should. So there were some adjustments required before the bulwarks were installed. There is no reason to believe this will not be the case throughout the entire assembly of the ship.

Bulkheads should be treated as big planks just like the ones used on the hulk. You need to sand the edges of the frames so that the bulkhead adapts to the shape of the each specific frame. This is especially important at the bow and stern. We all tend to think that laser cut means perfection and the reality is that we need to take into account the curved nature of frames and wet the bulkheads and sand here or there until the bulkhead adjusts nicely following the curvature of the hulk. The notches on the frames are the reference the first battery bulkhead has to follow in order for the rest to be correctly aligned to each other so it is a good thing you started with it. Because all this you should use brads or nails to hold the bulkheads so that when dried they stick to their position and curvature along the upper part of the hulk something I´m not sure only glue can attain.
There is an alternative method to avoid the hassles of bulkheads all together. I use a template made of paper, card or transparency where I draw the frames and the cannon ports position in relation to the frame. Something like this:

Once you have placed the template over the frame of interest use a needle to mark the four corners of each cannon port and then use Donnie´s jig to draw the port´s 10mmX10mm square. This way you get all ports on both sides symmetrically placed.

One word about cannon port cockeyedness. As you Know I plan to do ST from scratch so I´m using original plans from 1786. Cannon ports don´t follow a straight line such as a waterline. They follow an upward curved line ( especially at the bow) that represents the first, second or third deck surfaces. Something similar to a soft curved "smile". So the cockeyed ports on the bulkheads may be because of this. Although, I believe, from the pics I´ve seen, the ST kit follows a (wrongly) straight line. Anyways, if you do a template like the one above you should be all right as to the symmetry of the port holes.
On the link below you´ll find lots of good advice for your Trinidad build ;-)
http://modelismo-santisimatrinidad.blogspot.com.es/2009_09_01_archive.html
If you follow the steps in order and closely you´ll stay out of trouble.... perhaps you may even learn Spanish :lol: :handgestures-salute:

 

[donlong]

Anaga,

No worries about the frequency you check my build log. I only add things when I think I have something worthwhile to contribute.

I cannot thank you enough for your help. I have been trying to find a used copy of Joaquin Rodriquez Crespo’s book on the Santisima Trinidad but have not had any luck so far. I figure sooner or later one will pop up. I found one the other day but it had been sold already. I wish it would come back into print again but don’t see that happening any time soon.

I too felt the notches or ‘stops’ in the frame should be the starting point for the bulwarks. The instructions from OcCre did show the assembly in the reverse order. For whatever reason, it just didn’t seem like the way to go. There was no point of reference going from the top to bottom; at least none that made any sense to me.

Now that I have been working on the kit, I am beginning to get a feeling about the ST. The research is starting to bring some life to the model and I want to show her all the respect and dignity I can. Probably sounds dumb but I feel anything worth doing should be worth doing right or in this case, as right as it can be.

I found the only difference in using the wire brad nails or not using them was speed and ease of assembly. You are correct about the curvature of the bulwarks verse the frame. It seemed like it took hours to get the first battery to fit properly. I spent much of that time sanding the frame. I just accepted it as my inexperience in building these things. I did assume the laser cutting should be “perfect”. I had no trouble using just the glue. As I said in an earlier post, I wet the plank, shaped it with push pins and then dried it with a heat gun. The wood retained its shape and was very easy to glue into place. The key as you said is the prep work to get the plank to fit the frame.

I like the template idea a great deal. To be honest, I was thinking about that when I was installing the bulwarks. I do have a one to one drawing of the ST and can use it to transfer the general size and shape of the ST on to another piece of paper. If that looks correct against the model, then I can draw in the ports correctly. Who would have thought all those mechanical drawing classes I took in high school would finally become useful?

I do appreciate your advice and will certainly post you if I have any issues. So far so good and have only had a few problems that caused me any grief. Those were easily correctable.

The more I use the Spanish sites, the more I am beginning to pick up on some of the words. My wife speaks Spanish but it is not Castilian. It is more what we call ‘border language’ or a mixture of Spanish and English since we live so close to the Mexico/US border. She does not read Spanish well so I tend to use the translators on the web. That has worked well for me so far.

Well, I got to go. I am looking forward to seeing that soft curved “smile” on the sides of my ship. If she is happy, then I am happy.

Later,

Don

 

[donlong]

Hello to all,

Well I have read everything I can on the gun configuration, stern configuration and hull configuration of the Santisima Trinidad until I have a headache. So I am declaring this to be my stake in the ground.

THE GUNS
Unless there are some documents that have not been released in the last 244 years, this is pretty much the general opinion I have found from all the books, websites and data I have on the ship. Below is a matrix on the ordnance the Santisima Trinidad had during various years.



The Santisima Trinidad was certainly capable of carrying 144 weapons. Maybe not well but she could carry them. I use the term ‘weapons’ because depending on one’s passion for this ship, it seems to determine what they (the weapons) are called and defines how many of them there are. In some cases, the placement of the weapon determined if it would be counted or not. I think this is the reason for the variations in the counts from source to source.

The terms mortar and howitzer were used interchangeably in what I read. The esmeril was like a scatter gun on a pivot capable of firing single shots quickly or fire a spray of stone or iron balls across the deck of an opposing ship. There is still some dispute if the Santisima Trinidad was fitted for 144, 140 or 136 weapons the day of her final battle.

I found a discrepancy between the OcCre model and a drawing from the Museo Naval de Madrid I have of the 1805 version of Santisima Trinidad. The model has one gun too many on each side of the 1st battery. So I plan on blocking off the two forward guns; one on each side of the 1st battery. Below is another matrix I developed based on the gun placement on the ship during various years.



I have four drawings from the Museo Naval de Madrid that show the supposed configuration of the Santisima Trinidad for the years 1771, 1778, 1795 and 1805. All four of these drawings show the four stern guns. I only found a mention of them in the Battle of Cape St. Vincent in 1797. There are some models I have seen with two stern guns and some with four stern guns. For whatever reason, I believe she had four stern guns and so will my ST.

THE HULL
Another point is the coppering of the hull. I found she was coppered between 1781 and 1782 due to a naval requirement. She was coppered again in 1803. So I will copper the hull of my ST.

THE STERN
The stern configuration is hard to tell. I have only the four drawings from the Museo Naval de Madrid that show the different stern configurations and a blog that said the correct configuration was the one in the OcCre kit. The 1805 configuration is devoid of any decorations other than the Spanish seal (I think that is what it is). Unless I am swayed differently by the time I get to that point, I think I am staying with the OcCre kit stern plus four guns.

THE COLOR
The last thing is the color of the gun ports. It is a no brainer that the ports were red with a black divider. The only vague part is the white stripe. Some show it with one. Others show it with two. Still others show it with no white stripe at all. The midshipman on the HMS Neptune said it had one. I personally like the look of the two white stripes so I need to pounder this a bit more. The rest of her colors were pretty much standard for the Spanish Navy at that time.

Hope this has not bored anyone. I thought it would be some good information to share.

Later,

Don

 

[Anaga]

I found a discrepancy between the OcCre model and a drawing from the Museo Naval de Madrid I have of the 1805 version of Santisima Trinidad. The model has one gun too many on each side of the 1st battery. So I plan on blocking off the two forward guns; one on each side of the 1st battery.

The ST plan from OcCre is based on this one:

I guess the Crespo plans take a short cut and skip the the first battery cannon port at the bow. The plan above is at the Navy Yard and is a copy of the only surviving original plan of ST. It´s dated in 1796 from the Naval Museum of St. Petersburg in Rusia.
The next period drawing it is believed to depict ST in the early 1800s:

When counting the cannons leave out the ones at the stern. The stern cannons where move into position as the situation required. Because of this I plan to keep the stern port lids and the first port at the bow shut... that way the frontal details of the lids will be visible and you save a few cannons. Note it is the same plan as the fist one above:
http://usuarios.arsystel.com/naviost/nst/plano-mn/stcuader.tif
Here you have some artillery pics:

You can find more regarding the armament over here. The picture showing the howitzers detail is from a nice ST model recently acquired by Museo Naval:
http://www.todoababor.es/vida_barcos/arm_nav.htm
As to the stern check this polish modeller thread... it has lots of details that you may want to consider for your build:
http://www.koga.net.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=34233

 

[donlong]

Anaga,

As usual, thanks for all the great informantion and links. Believe it or not, I was actually sitting here this morning looking at the lead stern plate from the kit. If you hold it out a couple of feet, it does not look too bad but close up it is a disaster. So I began thinking maybe I should try to make one. Wow!! What the guy in Poland did is insane. I am not sure I have those skills BUT I do think I can make something better than what I have.

As for my issue between the kit and Crespo drawings, the drawing you supplied looks more like the 1771 or 1778 version of the ship. I am leaning towards the 1778 version since the stern looks the same as the kit. The OcCre kit 1st battery has 17 ports on one side. Since the 1795 or 1805 drawing state there are 32 36# guns in the first battery, two of the ports have to go. Looking at the layout of all the ports, I would say it would be the first bow port. The 1771, 1778 and the one you supplied has 15 ports on one side. The 1795 and 1805 drawings have 16 ports. All drawings have the first gun port missing at the bow end.

Another point is the number of cannon in the title by the date (on the original four you sent me) appears to be correct if you count the ports in the drawing plus the four stern guns. The list of armaments is incorrect in some cases if you add them up. So in the kit, I believe there is one gun too many in the first battery on each side. I also believe the OcCre kit is based on the 1805 drawing even though the stern decoration is different. The cannon port count is exactly the same for each battery except for the two bow ports in the first battery, the four guns on the quarter deck and the four stern guns.

I am guessing we will never know for sure unless the ship found off the coast of Cadiz is the Santisima Trinidad and she has been preserved fairly well.

Thanks again for the information.

Don

 

[Anaga]

Don,
The only original plan available of ST is the one from 1796. All the others are just the authors guesses as to how it may have looked. Up until the russian plan was found there were doubts as to the authenticity of the american plan. This was so because the american plan didn´t have any date or signature from any of the spanish naval architects from the period. Once the russian plan appeared with the date and the signature of Romero Landa everything fell into place and that´s why Berenguer de Guerra and OcCre based their models on the american plan which is a confirmed copy of the one at St. Petersburg.
I disagree with Crespo on the dates of his drawings. Crespo´s 1778 stern drawing is actually how it might have looked in 1796 and that is why I´m doing my drawings accordingly. A few months later, in 1797, ST was damaged at the battle of Cape St. Vincent and underwent yet another overhaul and the half-moon stern such as the one in Curro´s site might have appeared. As you can see it is anybody's guess as to how it looked in 1805. All we have are educated guesses. Maybe someday someone might find a lost new plan including the stern and we all will be happy. It´s too bad the ship sunk three days after the battle of Trafalgar and the british were not able to copy her lines for us all. So OcCre´s model depicts ST more or less as she was in 1796 and you are free to do her as in 1805 with a square or round stern. The only confirmed fact are the red color and white stripes although some authors doubt that too.
Oh I almost forgot, the russian plan from 1796 has 136 cannons ports... 17 port holes per side at the first battery instead of 15 as Crespo´s drawings.
As to the polish guy I think he got it right with the modified stern... he does the balconies that appear at the stern in 1796. Don´t forget to check all he´s done to the ST kit!
I´m still hopeful someday someone will investigate the Trinidad´s wreck. Sonar scans indicate she might be in not so bad shape. Apparently, the wreck remains are covered by silt which probably helps protect her remains. The spanish navy and scientist/historians have located many of the wrecks from Trafalgar plus another 1400 wrecks or so from different periods and it is believed that 20% were carrying bullion... that´s Billions of gold and silver laying on the sea floor. Regardless of monetary value the approaches to Cadiz are a marine archeologist dream come true from phoenicians, greeks, romans to XX century ships.

 

[donlong]

Anaga,

Thanks for the clarifications. I am glad these are educated guesses. It amazes me that with all the documentation of the ST's whereabouts there are no plans for her changes. At least I feel I am going in the right direction thanks to your inputs. Maybe someone can convince National Geographics or James Cameron to get involved. You see how he was with the Titanic. I think it all boils down to funding.

Later

Don

 

[Anaga]

It amazes me that with all the documentation of the ST's whereabouts there are no plans for her changes.

Blame it on the Napoleonic wars. The Grand Armee lived of the land which it meant you were free to rampage, loot and pillage. Unfortunately, many archives were destroyed and the plan from 1796 had other documentation including the stern and other details but all that was lost at some point. Who Knows, may be some day something new will be rediscovered at some museum or an old forgotten archive just as the 1796 plan.
I finally found the entire set of images from the 1/50 Trinidad the Museo Naval acquired. Although I don´t like the model´s stern there are plenty of details you can incorporate to your build:
http://siglosdemadera.com/modelos/trinidad/index.html

 

[donlong]

Anaga,
I see what you mean about the stern. That is a bit over the top. I will probably make something along the lines of what came in the kit. Something like the 1778 version Crespo did. The kit and his drawing are pretty close.

I do have a question for you. Do you happen to know the size of the copper plates they mounted on the hull? I have a 1:90 version of the HMS Victory I plan on building next. The planks they have in the kit are about 4.5mm x 14mm. They actually kind of suck as they are thin wood strips painted a patina color.

Thanks for the link. I am finishing up the quarterdeck and then will start the hull planking. I plan on putting up some pictures soon to show the progress of my ST.

Thanks,

Don

 

[donlong]

Hello to all,

Sorry, it is been awhile since I posted anything.

I wanted to complete a few things before starting the hull planking. I did the treenail treatment to the quarterdeck. I completed the wall below the quarterdeck except for the two doors. I will add them later. Installed the port backing plates under the quarterdeck and plan to drill the mounting holes for the false cannons shortly. I installed the quarterdeck and seal it with polyurethane. I corrected the quarterdeck height to railing base issue I had. I installed the inner lining or planking to the main deck bulwarks. I realize these items are out of order to the plans that came with the kit, but it will work better for me.



I have held off painting anything due to the sanding that is required to level the planks after they have been installed. Plus I found a few other things that may be helpful when building this ship. For example, when you select the Ramin strips for the main deck bulwarks inner lining; try to select seven or eight pieces (per side) that are the same thickness. I did not do this on the first bulwark I did and as a result, I spent quite a bit of time sanding it flat. My personal preference is to do all my sanding by hand (without an electric sander) so it was a chore. One thing I did do was sand it flat before cutting out the cannon ports. This made it much easier to do. Pay attention to the Ramin strips edges. They can be quite jagged. Most of the time these pieces can be used in areas where the edge will be sanded or cut off. Also, many of the strips in the kit get much thinner towards the ends of the strip. One I had was 1.3mm in the middle and .9mm on the end.



Two things I did after I cut out the cannon ports were to use a thin finger board or file to sand the edges down and to use a piece of painter’s tape to prevent scratching the main deck surface. If you cut the finger board in two lengthwise, it easily fits in the port hole. The boards I have use a thin piece of wood to stiffen it. This made it perfect for sanding in this area. These points may be obvious to the pros but for me it was something I figured out that worked well.





I have been pondering the stern and think I have convinced myself to make the decorative features myself instead of using the screwed up lead plate that was supplied with the kit. The plate I have is really bad. It looks like they could use a new mold. When I start this process, I will make sure I document it.



I am making the eyelets for the deck cannon. It is obvious the ones for the kit are too large. According to some information I found, the original eyelets on the ship were 9cm in diameter with a 5cm opening. The material was about 2cm thick.

All-in-all, I am pleased with the progress. It is going a little slower than I had anticipated but there are a lot of repetitive steps and details to monitor. The SoS site has given me a much better understanding of how it should look instead of trying to use those thumbnail drawings supplied with the kit. I think OcCre should have supplied a CD with the kit and photographs that could be magnified to see what is really going on.

Later,

Don

 

[donlong]

Hello,
It’s me again. I am working on the eye pins and rings. In reviewing the cannon rigging, I found the eye pins supplied in the kit are approximately 2mm in diameter. Doing the math, that would make them about 18cm in real life. As I said before, my research found the eye pins should be about 9cm in diameter.

With that said, I decided to make my own. To get in the ballpark, you will need a .5mm rod for the eye pin and a 1mm rod for the ring (yes a ring is needed also). I used .5mm copper wire for this operation. It is actually some old telephone wire I had.



The one on the left is the kit eye pin. You can see I made a hook basically that can be closed tighter after forming the eye.



The ring on the right is the kit ring. The ring is a complete circle, meaning the wire was wrapped completely around the rod until it overlapped the original wire. I then cut through the two wires where they overlapped.



Now I have my ring.



I then put the two together and closed the gap. I used the blackening agent from Micro-Mark to blacken the copper.

Believe it or not, these can be made quickly once you develop a process. I can make one in about a minute now. The blackening takes about another minute or two to achieve.

As for the placement of the rigging, it is about as varied as the color scheme of the ship. At http://en.santisima-trinidad.astillero.net/ under 3D then canon (as it is spelled on the site), there are four very clear drawings as to the cannon and its rigging. If the small size of this is not too crazy for me, this is how I plan on rigging my cannons. I need to make the eye pins and rings now so I can install them before doing the hull planking. Since I am making them now, I thought I would share my process.

Later,

Don

 

[Donnie]

fantastic rings is all that I can say - well done Don. I ran into the exact dilema about what to do. I wanted to add rings to the carriage, but this would entail making the carriages myself. I found some kit versions, but none that would work. I actually have a photo of some canons that i wanted to try. You would have to make the Canon Carriages yourself to achieve what you want.

Scroll half way down on this page and you will see the different pre made kits I tried.
http://www.shipsofscale.com/Trinidad/STBL02.html

If you use block and tackle on the sides of carriage, then your blocks will be about half the size of the smallest blocks that come in the kit. So, I think the blocks for that would be roughly 2mm x 1mm. I should have taken the time to do this. I think at the time, I did not have the tools and resources to even try it. Your Rigging line would have to be in the order of about .15 mm - in order to be scaled realistically and have balance.

this is one area that I see a lot of problems that people (with good intentions) will use the blocks for the yards and they are just too big.

I suggest getting a hard wood to make the 2mm x 1mm (no larger than 2.5 x 1.5) block and use a #80 or higher bit. It can be done ! But, what ever your decision is - rest assured, you would have to make at least about 160 blocks (4 blocks @ 40 canons on deck).

If you do not like your Canons, send me a plan that you like with Dimensions and for a very reasonable amount, I will make some for you - Stainless Steel or Brass. Yes, they will be bored and have the opening for the pin to go through. Need the pin, no problem, I can do that too.

 

[donlong]

Thanks Donnie,

Actually, there are 28 guns on deck for 112 blocks for the method I am using to rig the cannon. You are correct on the size of the blocks and the rigging lines. I have both on order that should fit the bill. Also, I can use the original cannon carriages. It is a simple matter to drill the holes for the eye pin and ring assemblies. I have tested this and it works fine.

I remember your cannon dilema all too well. For the moment, I am happy with the stock cannon. If I change my mind, I have a lathe and would probably make my own but thanks for the offer. At least now I have options.

My next big push is to plank the hull. I need to drill all of the holes required for the deck cannon and the false cannon before I do this. Once the hull is complete then I need to figure out if I want to paint, mount the deck cannon or do the stern since I don't want to use the lead stern plate. I have a plan for the stern and the steps I need to take worked out in my head.

My zeal for 'good intentions' left me years ago. I look for the challenge and the testing of my skills. I am having too much fun with this build to 'paint myself into a corner'. I have tested all my ideas and they seem doable. So far; so good. Besides, what do you say? No guts, No glory!

Thanks again for the info and the vote of confidence.

Don

 

[donlong]

While I was making the eye pin and ring assemblies for the deck cannon, I thought I would document the steps I did to make these little cuties. First, you will need some basic tools that are small enough to do the job.


Going from left to right is a Micro-Mark 84386 Sprue Cutter (red), Micro-Mark 82839 Pin Insertion tool (blue), common pair of small needle nose pliers (green), and finally a pair of tweezers.


Then I have a tapered mandrel secured in a vice.


And a stepped mandrel also secured in a vice. I am using a 2 foot piece of bare copper wire, .5mm in diameter to make the assemblies. The goal is to make a 1mm eye pin and ring assembly to be used on the deck guns for the ST.


Then I place it on the tapered mandrel.


Using the needle nose pliers, I form a round eye on the mandrel to the size I need.


While you are there, if you hold the wire with the pliers where the wire loop closes, you can pull the wire back and finish the eye pin.


One the other end of the wire, using the needle nose pliers, form a larger hook.


Place this on the stepped mandrel.


Hold the open end of the hook with the pliers and make a tight, closed loop by wrapping the wire around the pin.


Remove the loop and insert the cutter so both wires in the loop will be cut at the same time. Cut closer to the long length of wire.


You should end up with a ring and a small fragment of wire. The fragment is trash.


Take the tweezer handle and smash the ring flat. You don’t have to use tweezers. Anything that will smash the ring flat will do.


Take the ring and place it on the mandrel.


Press it down to open the ring. I use my thumbnails for this step.


Remove the open ring and place it in the pin insertion tool.


Take the end of wire that has the eye pin and gently close the open ring around the eye. If the eye is open close this gap also. Cut the eye pin to about 5mm or 6mm and you are done.


When you are done making these assemblies, you can take a needle and thread and sting them together on the thread. Dip them in a blackening agent for a minute or so and your eye pin and ring assembly is done.

You may not believe this but after you do one or two of these you can make one in under a minute.

Later,

Don

 

[GaryM]

You can buy the pin/eyelet part and the rings in several diameters. Amati makes them in packages of 100 and they are pretty cheap. When I place an order, I also find wood, deadeyes, blocks. rigging line, etc to include in the order so that the shipping cost is spread over the entire purchase. If you only want small items, call the supplier and as if he can send the small item in a regular envelope and avoid the large shipping expense.

 

[donlong]

Gary,

Thanks for the input. I just about have the ones I am working on completed but plan on checking out Amati to see what they have.

Don

 

[Anaga]

I do have a question for you. Do you happen to know the size of the copper plates they mounted on the hull? I have a 1:90 version of the HMS Victory I plan on building next. The planks they have in the kit are about 4.5mm x 14mm. They actually kind of suck as they are thin wood strips painted a patina color.

Sorry, I don´t Know the size for the plates but taking into account the 1/90 scale I think the measures 4.5X14 mm for the copper plates are right. The best thing would be to place a few plates over the hull and see if they look appropriate for the 1/90 scale.
Here you have a 1/1 croquis with all the measures for a Spanish 24:

Remember ST was carrying 10 24Lb howitzers but OcCre choose to forget about it.
Regarding the eyelets check this page from Spanish pin manufacturer... much better prices and quantities. Would not be surprised if Kits manufacturers were buying from them:
http://www.folch.com/main-menu-products/main-menu-view-all-products/view/category/virtuemart_category_id/22
Their GLD0770 Brass eye bolt 7 mm has a head diameter of 2.7mm!! which I think is similar to the ones you are making. Check the prices and quantities:
http://www.folch.com/main-menu-products/main-menu-view-all-products/view/productdetails/virtuemart_category_id/0/virtuemart_product_id/699
Isn´t it great to rip the benefits of globalization with the internet?. I wish I´d Known about them sooner. From now on I´ll kiss OcCre, Amati, etc goodbye for good.
Regarding the rope for cannons I suggest you make it with three strands of thin copper wire. It´ll keep the scale and after you paint it would look realistic. Something like this:

Cannon blocks need to be no more of 2mm in order to keep the scale. Kits are notorious for using parts out of scale specially at small scales such as 1/90. Are you going to make new cannons and howitzers?
Keep up the good work :greetings-waveyellow: