Don's Santisima Trinidad by OcCre

Anaga,

Thanks for the data. So I guess we can assume that 4.5mm x 14mm is the right size or close to it for the copper plates. The croquis of the Spanish 24 I have. Found it on the net somewhere and have used it a great deal.

As for the guns, I believe there were:

34 36# guns in the 1st battery
34 24# guns in the 2nd battery
36 12# guns in the 3rd battery

This accounts for 104 guns. In the kit, there are ports for another 34 guns on the main deck. This would bring the total to 138 guns. Finally, if she carried 144 guns into Trafalgar, that put 4 in the stern and 2 on the quarter deck.

On the main deck she had 10 24# howitzers (although I did find data stating she had 14 of them at Trafalgar). That would leave 24 guns if there were 10 howitzers. A lot of the data I found showed she had 18 8# guns and 6 esmerils. Do you have anything that spells out the guns on the main deck and their placement? I do plan on making the correct guns or buying them if they are available. I just set this part aside because I wanted to complete planking the hull. She is coming along nicely on the planking but cutting out the cannon ports is time consuming.

I love the internet also. I don’t think I would have been able to do the ST without it.

2.7mm eye pin comes to 243mm or 24.3cm or about 9.6” in a 1:90 scale. That seems big to me. I found a place that has them down to 1.8mm which I believe is big but closer. I have all the ones I need for the moment that I made. They are around 1.2mm. The trick of course is can I use them or are they too small. I have a plan that will work I think. I want to rig the cannon in a mockup and then install them on the ship fully rigged. I have played around with this and it appears I will be able to do it this way.

I have the 2mm single blocks for the cannon. I found them at http://www.syrenshipmodelcompany.com. I also found rigging rope in varying sizes. If the rope does not work, I will certainly consider the wire idea you showed me. Thanks for sharing this.

Later,

Don
 
2.7mm eye pin comes to 243mm or 24.3cm or about 9.6” in a 1:90 scale. That seems big to me. I found a place that has them down to 1.8mm which I believe is big but closer. I have all the ones I need for the moment that I made. They are around 1.2mm. The trick of course is can I use them or are they too small. I have a plan that will work I think. I want to rig the cannon in a mockup and then install them on the ship fully rigged.
Click to expand...
I´m sorry I did not elaborate more on this before. The 2.7mm are the diameter of the eyelet´s head. So if you subtract the the brass wire thickness of 0.7mm you end up with a 1.3mm diameter inner circle (2.7 mm -(0.7X2)=1.3mm). On the 1/1 24lb cannon croquis from the other post, where it says Argollas (eyelets- letter "d"), we see it has a 9cm with a 2cm thickness.So the inner circle diameter is 5 cm. If we scaled it down to 1/90 we get a 0.55mm diameter for the inner circle (90cm-4cm=5cm or 50 mm; 50mm/90= 0.55mm). Obviously, this is way too tinny (1/2 millimeter) to get by normal means. So I think, as long as you can manage to obtain a 1 - 1.3 mm inner circle diameter on your eyelet, you will have a more or less correct scale. The ring that goes on the eyelet on the side of the carriage has a 2-3mm inner diameter and you already have got it right (2-3mm as per the pictures?). Because of this, I believe three or four copper wires of 0.3 mm twisted together will give you around a 1mm cannon rope that will fit nicely through the 1 to 1.3mm eyelet at the back side of the carriage (the rope that holds the cannon to the deck) and also on the cascabel. I don´t Know if you can get good looking rope of 1mm thickness but the copper wire has the advantage of being stiff. Therefore, it allows you to give it a nice curved shape around the carriage sides. Something normal rope at such a small scale will not allow you to do.
Another important and difficult item to get at 1/90 is the peculiar shape of the Spanish cannon carriages. Those "S" curves at the upper edge are a nightmare to get at small scales. I did mine at 1/72 with laser cnc.
The info I have regarding the 1805 armament on Trinidad at October 19th, 1805 is as follows:
36 lb...................... 32 cannons
24 lb...................... 34 "
12 lb...................... 36 "
8 lb...................... 18 "
24 lb.......................16 Howitzer
4 lb....................... 4 "
32 lb....................... 6 Esmeriles
Total..146
All howitzers were at the fourth battery.The 24 lb howitzers were placed in the middle of the deck. The 4lb howitzer probably were at different interval fore and aft. Forget about the esmeriles as they were almost hand held artillery similar to falconets.
Later,
Anaga
 
Anaga,

Thanks for the information. Let me ask you this. On the OcCre kit and most of the 1805 drawings, the 1st battery has 34 cannon ports. Your cannon count for the 1st battery is 32. What do you plan to do with the extra two ports on your scratch build?

I must admit this has been troubling me since I started this project. If I want to be historically accurate, I guess I could leave two port lids closed but it seems strange to do that when all the other batteries are fully loaded.

Later,

Don
 
Don,
The plan I´m using is the one from 1796 which is more or less the same OcCre is using on its Kit.(same number of gun ports at the 1st battery). Don´t worry about the number of cannons because cannon numbers do not mean equal cannon ports. Remember that the four cannons at the stern where not on a static position. They were placed at the stern if the situation required to have defensive fire because the enemy was crossing the T on your vessel. Same happens with the cannon ports at the bow. What you see on Crespo´s drawings is a short cut that equates cannon number with port number which I think is not correct. I think you can have cannons at the bow ports and close lids at the stern or viceversa. I myself plan to have the ports at the stern and at the bow with closed lids because I want to show the gun port hinges detail. So it is your call whether or not to place cannons at the bow gun ports.... It look good either way!!. As long as you show 140 guns on your model it will be historically correct.... Mine will have 136 because I´m doing it as it looked in 1796.
In my opinion, it is more important to have the howitzers than to show the exact amount of 36lb cannons. Keep up the good work!
Cheers
 
Anaga,

Great!!! Now, I can put that to rest. I would rather focus on the howitzers anyway. I am still planking the hull so it will be awhile before I get to the main deck guns. Since I am not exactly following the OcCre plans step-by-step or in order for that matter, I have to think about what the next step is before I do it.

I have found many times the port count does not match the cannon count. So it gets confusing. Even the howitzers, I have counts from 10 to 16. If I remember correctly the ST got hammered during the battle at Cape St. Vincent. Accounts state she was able to keep the frigate Terpsichore at bay with her stern guns as she left Cape St. Vincent. They claim she had 24 and 36 pounders in the stern. So we know at least she had guns in the stern even though the OcCre kit does not.

I think it is great that you and I can kick these things around. It keeps it interesting.

Well back to the planking.

Later,
 
Here you can check a different Trinidad and how the howitzer dilemma was solved:
http://elsoldaditodepavia.mforos.com/1928797/10783684-navio-de-linea-santisima-trinidad-planos-museo-naval-1-90/
The Constructo cannons he uses to make the 24 lb howitzers are these:
http://www.hobbiesguinea.com/product_info.php?cPath=57_144_514&products_id=5144
The 24 howitzer croquis at the thread are self explanatory. You need to cover up the canon holes and open new ones for the howitzer after you have shorten the cannon. The carriage is quite easy too. If you plan to do a more accurate howitzer let me Know and I can get you drawings and real life measures.
Later.
 
Hello to all,
Thought I would surface and give a progress report on the ST. I remember how Donnie complained about the looks of the nails in the hull planking of his ST so I thought I would give it a go without the nails. One thing I can say is you will become very creative on ways of holding the planking in place until the glue dries. Of course, if you use super glue it is not too much of a problem. I personally don’t like super glue so I stayed with the Titebond as much as possible.

Since I am not following the instructions to the letter, I have found I have to plan what I do. There were several things I needed to do before beginning the outer hull planking.

One of the first things I had to do was to figure out the size of the eye pins and rings and make those for the deck cannon. That task, as you know, is complete.

Another task was to determine the placement of the holes in the main deck bulwark. What I did was print the pictures supplied at santisimas-trinidad.astillero.net for the ST cannon. Then I took different measurements of the pictures. Then I measured the actual cannon piece from the kit. From there I figured out a percentage number and calculated the scale placement for the eye pin holes. For example, the width of the back of the cannon carriage in the picture was 48mm. The width of the actual model cannon was 9mm. Therefore 9/48 = .1875. In the picture, the center to center distance for the upper eye pins was 110mm. So take 110 x .1875 = 20mm center to center for the model. The center to center distance of the lower eye pins was 82 mm in the picture. So my actual was 82 x .1875 = 15mm. Keep in mind if you use different pictures you have to recalculate the percentage number.

Once I had my placement numbers, I built a template so I could drill the holes in the same place for each cannon. I glued some planking pieces together and then glued one of the gun port pop outs from the bulwark plank.

DSC00064-1.JPGDSC00065-1.JPG
Since I am using .5mm or .0197 copper wire, I used a #76 or .0200 drill for the holes. If you don’t have one, PM Industrial Supply Co. has a nice ‘Decimal Equivalents and Tap Sizes of Fraction, Number, Letter and Metric Sizes’ chart that you can download in PDF format. It really comes in handy for things like this. This is not an exact science but it is certainly close enough for this 1:90 scale model. Since my main deck bulwark was already installed, I had to drill my eye pin holes before planking the outer hull. I felt it would be easier drill the holes from the hull side than the deck side.

DSC00066-1.JPGDSC00067-1.JPG
Another thing I thought about was not painting anything unless all or most of the sanding was completed. I remember the deck planking was different thicknesses, so sanding was required to give the planking a better appearance. OcCre did not let me down on the strips for the hull planking as they were also different thicknesses.

I sanded the inside surface of the deck bulwarks so all I need to do is paint them when the time comes. I also inserted copper wire into the eye pin holes so I would not lose track of them. They are pretty small and fill up quite easily.

DSC00075-1.JPG
Another thing I did not want to do is start planking and then stop to cut out the cannon ports. Then start planking again. I put a center mark in each cannon port. Then I used a cannon port near the stern for my reference point.

DSC00072-1.JPG
I recorded the distance from the reference point and from the top edge of the bulwark for each cannon port. This way I can plank the entire hull, then sand it and finally cut out the cannon ports based on the measurements I have taken. This was a personal preference.

It is funny how a mistake can lead to something great. While I was planking, I had no trouble planking from the top. It was very easy to use clamps to hold the wood in place. The bow was not a problem. When I got to the point where clamps would not work, I decided to use push pins. Well, as luck would have it, the push pins would pop out any place where there was a tight bend in the wood. So I decided to use the planking clamps that you can get at most hobby shops.

DSC00071-1.JPG
In my case, the hole left by the push pin was a little too large for the screw of the planking clamp to grab securely. I decided to use a small screw with the clamp base. That worked great but it was hard to keep the screw straight since the plank was 2mm thick and the clamp had about a 1mm step to it. I decided to put a piece of ramin under the step. That raised the clamp so the screw would go in straight. This combination would hold the planking securely in place until the wood dried.

DSC00079-1.JPGDSC00070-1.JPG
I have all the ramin planks in place and will start the bottom of the hull next. I am please with the outcome so far. I did not soak the entire plank. I only soaked the part that required bending. I used a bending tool to make the bow bend.

DSC00076-1.JPGDSC00077-1.JPG
Keep in mind I have not done any gap fill in or sanding so it is pretty ugly at the moment.
I used a small pair of needle nose pliers for bending the planks that wrap at the stern.

DSC00078-1.JPG
I was able to do all this planking without the use of nails.

I have to admit, I began wondering, “What was I thinking?” when I got to the lower planks. The nails would have been much easier and faster but I am glad I took to time to do it without them. Once again I like challenges and this was a personal preference.

I will check in again when I get the rest of the hull planked or I find some revelation that may be of interest to you.

Later,

Don
 
Last edited:
Don,
I am really amazed at your quality of craftsmanship. I see that you are using those hull planking tools that screw into hull to hold the planks.

They are fair. The material was or is a little too soft for me. But, they got the job done for what I needed them for.

I see that you have a nice bending tool. Dang - I am jealous. This is going to be a very nice build.

You should have went before me as I have learned some tips from you.

Donnie
 
Thanks Donnie.

I have found this to be a learn as you go process. I am following your build and am trying to solve some of the problems you ran into as well as some I have created for myself.

While the planking clamps are soft, I found them to be very adequate. It depends on how you use them. I found the thumb screw that comes with it to be hard to use. The modification I made by using a screw instead made it much better. The tool is soft but not if you push the material down that you want to hold instead of trying to get the tool to push the material into place. Paying attention to the step height vs. the material thickness you want to hold I found was critical for using this tool successfully. By placing something under the step to make the height the same as the material you want to hold made all the difference in the world.

I have found putting the ship together is not difficult at all except for getting my fingers to do what I want them too. The varying plank thicknesses for the decking and the hull seems to be an issue with this kit. At least it is for me. This may be an issue I address in my next build. For now, I am learning the process and sharing that with anyone that may find it interesting or helpful.

I must admit planking without the nails was an interesting challenge but one I learned a great deal from. I want to get the planking done and sanded so I can start on the stern scratch build I am planning.

Anyway, thanks for the kind words. I will put some pictures up of the planking after I am done. Then I have to decide if the stern is the next step. I think it is but not 100% sure.

Later,

Don
 
donlong said:
Hello mates!
I told you I would share my failures and successes. In this case, this one was a failure I turned into a success. The problem I encountered was the crossbeams that pass through nine of the frames. I could not get the beams to pass through all of the frames once they were glued in place. Not sure why this happened. Perhaps it was my lack of experience that caused the problem BUT I did dry fit and mark everything. Then I glued and trued each frame again to make sure. I also made sure the false keel was straight and well secured.

I ended up having to wet the middle frames until they were loose. At that point, I slid the crossbeams through the frames. Once I got the beams in place, I glued the frames in place again. In hindsight, I should have passed the crossbeams through each frame as they (the frames) were glued to the false keel.

The planking of the lower deck presented several interesting challenges. I don’t know how the planking strips come in other kits but the ones in this kit were buggered up on the edges. The edges were not square or had saw marks or gouges in the strip. Another issue was the caulking between the planking. During my research, there seemed to be as many ways to represent the caulking as there were strips. The same held true with the treenails. “Oh what to do… Oh what to do…”

Well this is what I did. I went to my handy hardware store and picked up two 1”x36”x1/16” aluminum strips. I clamp them to the work bench using two Quik-Grips. I spaced them apart so a plank, standing on the long edge, would fit in the gap. See the picture below.


Most of the strips I had were just a little greater than 3mm wide. Using an old X-Acto sanding block, I lightly sanded both edges the length of the strip. Obviously, care must be taken not to sand too much. Next, I took a piece of pencil lead (HB or B) and blacked the entire edge the length of the strip. I did this to both sides. The lead is the type used in a drafting pencil. It is about a 1/16th of an inch in diameter. This process corrected the edge roughness and the caulking between the planks. The benefit to this is when you sand the planks; the caulk line is still there.

Next, was the plank shifting. I used Donnie’s method of cutting across a plank to signify a plank joint. Then I darkened it with a .3mm, B lead, mechanical pencil. This is a little hard to see here but looking at plan #3 from the “Instituto De Historia Y Cultura Naval – 1983”, it shows very specifically that the planks line up on the fourth plank from the first. These drawings are easy to find on the net if you want a closer look.

Here part of the drawing blown up for you.

I made the assumption, most of the drawings from this time period, did not show all the details. One assumption was they did not draw in every plank seam. The drawings only show what was generally required. It was left up to the builders to implement it and make it work. The 60-40-20 shifting scheme seemed to work for this. Right or wrong, I shifted my seam marks based on 20% of the length from the first plank seam, then 40 % from the first plank and then 60% from the first plank. My planks seam marks were based on a 25’ plank. Below is what I ended up with.

Next, the treenails. I tried five or six ways to make them. I finally decided to punch a hole using the small hand press from Mircomark and a pick or probe that was about .2mm in diameter; about 1/16” up from the tip. I used a small hose clamp to limit the travel of the punch to about 1/16”. After I punched the four holes around the seam, I used a .3mm, B lead, mechanical pencil to darken the holes.

I did not want the treenails to be jet black. I also wanted the general appearance of the deck to look somewhat weathered. This is what I did to get it. I sanded the deck to get rid of the fuzzies. I used a nail file sanding stick. This one was pink, had about 1/8” of foam between the two filing sides and had a super fine grit on both sides. It is about 6” long and maybe ¾” wide. They are cheap and flexible. By sanding the deck, the treenail holes filled up with a very fine wood dust. The black lead between the planks tended to embed itself somewhat in the wood grain during sanding, giving a used look. Then I sealed it. The wood still raised some additional fibers. I allowed the sealer to dry hard and then sanded it again to remove the rest of the fuzzies and deposit more dust in the treenail holes. After a second coat of sealer… voila, a weathered deck. I used a ‘matte finish polyurethane’ to seal the deck during this process. The picture below shows the results.


I am pleased with the results as it was what I wanted the deck surface to look like. The treenails look like wood with a black ring around them that could be interrupted as tar. The planks have a used look about them but not severely weathered. I am working on the main deck now using the same process.

I am not a photographer by any stretch of the imagination but hopefully the pictures I have will give you an idea of what I am talking about. If not let me know and I will take some more.

Good day!!
Click to expand...


Don, I really love the looks of your deck. I was wondering if you mind me coping the style? I put on all of my planks straight on without think about doing something like you did. So now I have to go back and use an E xacto knife to cut all the planks length wise then use a dark pencil to make it look like it has caulking.
Have you heard of anyone spraying a clear semi-gloss using an air brush to spray the desks and the hull? Also what size pin vise bit did you use for the nail holes?
 
Here is something that works like a charm:
 

Attachments

  • Pic02.jpg
    105.3 KB · Views: 2,852
  • Pic01.jpg
    116.7 KB · Views: 2,833
I was able to do all this planking without the use of nails.
I have to admit, I began wondering, “What was I thinking?” when I got to the lower planks. The nails would have been much easier and faster but I am glad I took to time to do it without them. Once again I like challenges and this was a personal preference.
Click to expand...
I think it is a risky choice you made. The Kit has double planking so you could have used nails for the first and then hide them with the second planking. You can somewhat hide the nails by nailing them half way thru and then cutting the nails heads. The first planking acts as a holding surface for the second and final planking like a solid hull. So if you have a secure and fair surface on your first planking I guess you can glue the second planking without nails. The problem is that if there is a change in humidity the glue may not do its job and the planks at the bow and stern (the tricky areas) might come loose. Play it safe.
 
Anaga,

Thanks for the advice and another way to hold the planking in place. I live in Arizona where the humidity is usually 9%. The only time it is higher than that is when it rains. Since we only get 7" of rain a year, it stays pretty dry. Just the same, the nails for the lower hull might be a good idea since I will be copper plating it anyway. The screw and planking clamp I used on the stern and bow ends where the planks tend to be harder to keep in place. When I use nails, I use wire brads instead of the ones that came with the kit. The heads are much smaller and are easy to set if you don't want to see them. It is not too late for me to use the nails on the bow and stern. I agree it is better to play it safe but I also learned a lot from the experience of planking without the nails.

My biggest problem is bending the sapelli wood for the lower hull. That stuff is really hard. I have tried soaking, hot irons, boiling water and the bending tool I showed in an earlier blog. It just does not want to bend without breaking. I can get the gradual bends without any problem but the sharp bends are a different story. I have a crimping tool coming that I just ordered and I might try putting slits on the back side of the planks. If that all fails then I may use a softer wood. These old fingers are beginning to hurt.

The only reason I am using this wood is for the practice and experience for future builds. Otherwise I would not bother with it since it would be covered with the copper plate.

Anyway, it is good to hear from you and thanks again for the advice.

Later,

Don
 
Even though I paint the model to appear as the real ship would look, double planking is the answer that really makes a difference. It is really hard to get a smooth surface on the first planking. Using a filler to fill in minor ups and down and other problems does not give the best base for paint. But the second planking can turn out really smooth and gives a great base for painting. Even if you do not intend to paint the model, the second planking is a lot easier to get a really good looking hull that will varnish up and look really rich and professional.
 
Donnie & Gary,

Thanks for the additional insight. I guest my only disappointment was I spent one day and only got two of the sapelli planks mounted. I could do about six of the ramin planks of the same thickness. You are correct that the OcCre kit only has the single plank unless you want to count the bulwarks.

The ST will be painted and coppered. I did my first pass sanding of the ramin and it came out great considering the thickness variations, and the roughness of the saw cuts on some of the planks.

I will be ok on the lower hull planking. I have a few more ideas for bending the sapelli. If that does not work, then I will use a softer wood. The paint and copper will cover it anyway. My only problem for the moment is my fingers are sore from fighting with the sapelli. Plus I must admit I am getting anxious to work on the main deck cannon rigging and the scratch build stern section.

Later,

Don
 
Don,
this is a hand drawn image of the beveling that I used on my ST. I was pretty much raw hide and just ground away. I am sure that it would be cringe worthy to some. Plus I used the dremel with sandpaper attachment and sanded the entire hull this way. Hey, I was ready to get this part over with.
 
Donnie,
I think the goal is to build these ships, make them look as professional as possible, share our ideas on both successes and failures, and TO HAVE FUN. :lol: Other than my sore fingers, I am having a great time working on the ST and working through issues with other SoS members.

Oddly enough, I was thinking about doing the sharp bends the way you have in the drawing except on the ends instead of lengthwise. I still might if I stay with the sapelli. This issue of bending these rock hard planks brought out a lot of great ideas. I personally think that is super and hopefully will help newbies like you and me to become more skilled in building these things.

Also, by following your build, I have very few gaps I need to fill in. The worse places were once again in the tight bends but even then I have managed to keep the fill in areas minimal.

Thanks for the drawing. I sanded my hull by hand. For some reason, I felt safer or more in control of what I was doing. She came out great. As soon as I finish the lower hull, I plan on putting up some more pictures.

Later,

Don
 
Don, I would like to get your opinion of either brushing for using an air brush. I have a small airbrush gun like you would use for fancy painting on a motor bike or I have a slightly bigger one to do a small paint area on a car. Do you have any preferences or Suggestion on painting the desks or Hulls?
 
Hi Don,


I don't know if this is still relevant but in the last days I've been doing a lot of research on the ST guns and I came across this web site:

http://threedecks.org/index.php?display_type=show_ship&id=2647

The number of guns differ from other places but the detailed information, the sources they use and the number of guns somehow fit more perfectly to the different information that I found.

hope it helps...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top