HIGH HOPES, WILD MEN AND THE DEVIL’S JAW - Willem Barentsz Kolderstok 1:50

[Daniel20]

Man, I love it Henrich! At first, I thought moving the windlass winding axel directly under the belay rack would severely inhibit its function but after study I see it actually gives room for greater movement per wind than its original position. The all-natural wood construction is way better as well. I think you hit this one out of the park.

 

[Heinrich]

Man, I love it Henrich! At first, I thought moving the windlass winding axel directly under the belay rack would severely inhibit its function but after study I see it actually gives room for greater movement per wind than its original position. The all-natural wood construction is way better as well. I think you hit this one out of the park.

You have such a fine eye for detail Daniel! Movement per rotation is exactly what concerned me at first as well, but I do see that it has actually increased. Thank you so much for the kind comment.

 

[Robp1025]

Hello Dear Friends

Today there are no specially-taken pictures, just hard slogging and two results. A few days ago, @Robp1025 asked me what is happening to the windlass and I knew that I had to finish that part of the build.

To recap, this was my first effort as per the kit.

View attachment 303460

There were four things that screamed "No-No" to me. Firstly, it was made from Triplex (Blue Arrow), secondly, I stained it trying to make it look better (it made it worse) (green arrow), thirdly it protruded too far above the bulwarks (red arrow) and lastly, I wasn't too keen on the belaying rack interfering with the foremast (yellow arrow).

So the only option was to build one from scratch. For that I wanted to use real wood, try to lower the whole assembly and clear the foremast. A bonus would be if it could look more integrated with the rest of the stern, than the previous effort. I drew what I think look the side-frame of a windlass, grabbed a scarp piece of pear wood and started filing. No Proxxons, Dremels or scroll saws here - just some files, an X-Acto, hand labor and plenty of patience. This continued until I thought something that could work.

View attachment 303461

The let's see what it looks like on the ship.

View attachment 303462

View attachment 303464

I was happy that the whole assembly was now sitting much lower, but now of course, the knight's head still needed to be fitted in front of the belaying rack and in such a way that it would not interfere with the foremast.

View attachment 303465

Knight's head fitted and now i was starting to feel better as it looked as if there was going to be some space between that and the foremast.

View attachment 303466

And THAT is how tight things get in the WB's stern.

With that out of the way I could now make the belaying rack to be mounted directly in front of the foremast. Once more this was made from Pear wood. I have an idea about the Pear and Walnut, but I will have to see later how it pans out. The reason for doing this now, is to see how the two boats would fit as the belaying rack also impedes on the available space.

View attachment 303467

View attachment 303468

And then the results:

View attachment 303469

The boat fits, but so much is hidden underneath the canopy that I don't know if I want to go this route.

View attachment 303477

The little boat (it still has a lot of work before it is finished), is a much better fit, but I am not happy with my build of that. If I choose to go for the little one, it will be a complete rebuild.

And that is me for yet another day. Let me know what you think about the windlass and the lifeboats and - as always - criticism is just as welcome. I look forward to your comments as they have already been so valuable to me in this build.

View attachment 303463

That looks so much better then the provided option. I am glad you built it yourself and I have to say it's a marvel to look at the hand built product. It looks better then the kits attempt I would say.

 

[Pathfinder65]

Wow, that is a tremendous improvement. Another fine example of your patience and building skills.

 

[Heinrich]

That looks so much better then the provided option. I am glad you built it yourself and I have to say it's a marvel to look at the hand built product. It looks better then the kits attempt I would say.

Thank you very much Rob. The main thing I did not like about the previous one was the fact that it was made from Triplex and that I messed up when I stained it. The fact that this one was scratch-built is a bonus!

 

[Heinrich]

Wow, that is a tremendous improvement. Another fine example of your patience and building skills.

Thank you very much Jan. It took a lot of patience - I lost count of the number of "file-and-fits" that it took.

 

[rtibbs]

Heinrich, I'm still trying to get my head around your build compared to Piet's build. Earlier I said yours looks to "Cozy" to operate the windlass.. When comparing the two builds you can see there is much more room between the windlass and the canopy wall on Piet's. I'm just wondering if the canopy placement between the two is what is different.
I realize this is purely conjecture on my part as I have yet to start my WB build.

Stay safe my friend

OBTW, cutting those pieces without the use of power tools is the sign of a true craftsman. Well done!!!

 

[Heinrich]

View attachment 303509View attachment 303510
Heinrich, I'm still trying to get my head around your build compared to Piet's build. Earlier I said yours looks to "Cozy" to operate the windless. When comparing the two builds you can see there is much more room between the windlass and the canopy wall on Piet's. I'm just wondering if the canopy placement between the two is what is different.
I realize this is purely conjecture on my part as I have yet to start my WB build.

Stay safe my friend

OBTW, cutting those pieces without the use of power tools is the sign of a true craftsman. Well done!!!

Thank you very much for the great observation and good question. I think there are two main differences between Piety's model and mine. You may recall that I have often referred to a "wide" and "narrow" build of this ship. This is largely determined by how much material is removed during the fairing of the bulkheads and of course also the angle at which the bulkheads are faired. Most of my predecessors have had issues with the roof beams of the front canopy being "too short" at the front. To my mind that could be addressed by making sure that the ship is not too wide at the stern - so I consciously started out by attempting to build a "narrow" ship.

To illustrate my point, have a look at this:



Look at the railings which run from the hull to a center point on the beakhead and look at the curvature that is induced by the width of the hull.

Compare this to my build where the railings run absolutely straight with no curvature.



When comparing these two pictures, it is clear that my WB is narrower than Piet's one - obviously making the available space narrower at the front.

Secondly, there is the case of how far forward the canopy is. It might very well be that my front canopy is further forward than Pietsan's, but I am very confident that I am accurate (according to the Kolderstok plans) as to the location of my canopy.

If we look at Hans's test build, his stem is just as crowded as mine.



I hope this goes some way to explain the differences between the two builds. Thanks again for that great question, my friend!

 

[pingu57]

Heinrich my friend, i think that is is an excellent solution for your problem with the windlass.
In modelbuilding from a ship of this size you can't do much else i think, you have to make some consessions every now and then, but if the crew would be able to operate this windlass, i doubt it very much, but your crewmembers won't argue with you i think.
It looks great like this.
Oh, and by the way, Pietsan also changed his windlass to fit in, so he also had a bit of a problem with it

 

[Heinrich]

Heinrich my friend, i think that is is an excellent solution for your problem with the windlass.
In modelbuilding from a ship of this size you can't do much else i think, you have to make some consessions every now and then, but if the crew would be able to operate this windlass, i doubt it very much, but your crewmembers won't argue with you i think.
It looks great like this.
Oh, and by the way, Pietsan also changed his windlass to fit in, so he also had a bit of a problem with it

Thank you very much for that comment my friend. You are right - sometimes we just have to make concessions - on the replica De Weerdt did not even attempt to put the windlass behind the foremast - hence his windlass is sitting midway between midships and stem. But what makes the whole thing such a mystery - how did those men operate the windlass if it was that far to the front?

 

[Peter Voogt]

So the only option was to build one from scratch.

Hello Dear Friends

Today there are no specially-taken pictures, just hard slogging and two results. A few days ago, @Robp1025 asked me what is happening to the windlass and I knew that I had to finish that part of the build.

To recap, this was my first effort as per the kit.

View attachment 303460

There were four things that screamed "No-No" to me. Firstly, it was made from Triplex (Blue Arrow), secondly, I stained it trying to make it look better (it made it worse) (green arrow), thirdly it protruded too far above the bulwarks (red arrow) and lastly, I wasn't too keen on the belaying rack interfering with the foremast (yellow arrow).

So the only option was to build one from scratch. For that I wanted to use real wood, try to lower the whole assembly and clear the foremast. A bonus would be if it could look more integrated with the rest of the stern, than the previous effort. I drew what I think look the side-frame of a windlass, grabbed a scarp piece of pear wood and started filing. No Proxxons, Dremels or scroll saws here - just some files, an X-Acto, hand labor and plenty of patience. This continued until I thought something that could work.

View attachment 303461

The let's see what it looks like on the ship.

View attachment 303462

View attachment 303464

I was happy that the whole assembly was now sitting much lower, but now of course, the knight's head still needed to be fitted in front of the belaying rack and in such a way that it would not interfere with the foremast.

View attachment 303465

Knight's head fitted and now i was starting to feel better as it looked as if there was going to be some space between that and the foremast.

View attachment 303466

And THAT is how tight things get in the WB's stern.

With that out of the way I could now make the belaying rack to be mounted directly in front of the foremast. Once more this was made from Pear wood. I have an idea about the Pear and Walnut, but I will have to see later how it pans out. The reason for doing this now, is to see how the two boats would fit as the belaying rack also impedes on the available space.

View attachment 303467

View attachment 303468

And then the results:

View attachment 303469

The boat fits, but so much is hidden underneath the canopy that I don't know if I want to go this route.

View attachment 303477

The little boat (it still has a lot of work before it is finished), is a much better fit, but I am not happy with my build of that. If I choose to go for the little one, it will be a complete rebuild.

And that is me for yet another day. Let me know what you think about the windlass and the lifeboats and - as always - criticism is just as welcome. I look forward to your comments as they have already been so valuable to me in this build.

View attachment 303463

Also here by your build, the scratch build gives te solution. Nicely made, Heinrich. It’s a small ship, so the combination off items is common know.
And with the space the small boat takes up: the ’little’ boat on the Mayflower of the Pilgrims with its many people on board is known to take up a lot of space too.
The small boat looks better.
Regards, Peter

 

[Heinrich]

Also here by your build, the scratch build gives te solution. Nicely made, Heinrich. It’s a small ship, so the combination off items is common know.
And with the space the small boat takes up: the ’little’ boat on the Mayflower of the Pilgrims with its many people on board is known to take up a lot of space too.
Regards, Peter

Indeed Peter - thank you for that. The scratch-part has improved matters - no doubt. Whether it has offered me a "solution" I am not so sure of. I am still not convinced. Oh well, there is another sleepless night of thinking ahead. I want to know how it worked on the real ship and this still makes no sense!

 

[RDN1954]

Wow, that's some space allocation issues you have on your hands. It almost looks like you've got yourself some "runway" equipment. Especially those two boats are concerning me; no room to stow and handle them.
The bow really looks overcrowded and that's without mast, bowsprit and all the standing and running rigging installed, but there are few, if any, alternatives. How you'll ever be able to make use of these belaying pins, I honestly don't know.
There really isn't any advice I can think of, other than, when looking at all the issues you encountered, that I can't help but think: "How, just how?"
I also checked @pietsan's build log of the WB, his bow configuration looks also pretty crowded. That all put aside; what a lovely little ship!
So, Heinrich, you better get yourself a huge box of patience and a large crate of Tsingtao, you're going to need it.

 

[Heinrich]

Wow, that's some space allocation issues you have on your hands. It almost looks like you've got yourself some "runway" equipment. Especially those two boats are concerning me; no room to stow and handle them.
The bow really looks overcrowded and that's without mast, bowsprit and all the standing and running rigging installed, but there are few, if any, alternatives. How you'll ever be able to make use of these belaying pins, I honestly don't know.
There really isn't any advice I can think of, other than, when looking at all the issues you encountered, that I can't help but think: "How, just how?"
I also checked @pietsan's build log of the WB, his bow configuration looks also pretty crowded. That all put aside; what a lovely little ship!
So, Heinrich, you better get yourself a huge box of patience and a large crate of Tsingtao, you're going to need it.

Johan - you echo my sentiments exactly - "How, just how?" Do I eat humble pie and follow Gerald de Weerdt's layout on the replica?



1. Place the windlass at the rear opening of the front canopy.
2. Leave out the mooring bitt - according to Van Yk, the mooring bitt was often omitted on smaller ships.
3. Place the belaying rack in front of the canopy - that way the very crowded space should be considerably "less crowded"
4. Forget about storing both boats on deck and only attempt to squeeze in the smaller one?

Oh boy - I knew this was going to be a sleepless night!

 

[Pathfinder65]

Johan - you echo my sentiments exactly - "How, just how?" Do I eat humble pie and follow Gerald de Weerdt's layout on the replica?

View attachment 303668

1. Place the windlass at the rear opening of the front canopy.
2. Leave out the mooring bitt - according to Van Yk, the mooring bitt was often omitted on smaller ships.
3. Place the belaying rack in front of the canopy - that way the very crowded space should be considerably "less crowded"
4. Forget about storing both boats on deck and only attempt to squeeze in the smaller one?

Oh boy - I knew this was going to be a sleepless night!

Oh no, another interpretation. I'm sure you will have an answer in the morning. Who is wrong, who is right, who knows, it was few hundred years ago. Just saying.......

 

[rtibbs]

Johan - you echo my sentiments exactly - "How, just how?" Do I eat humble pie and follow Gerald de Weerdt's layout on the replica?

It goes down well with a couple of Heineken’s

 

[Heinrich]

It goes down well with a couple of Heineken’s

Hi Johan - i don't drink at all - but I do "sloopt" quickly!

Between the time I replied to your posting and now:



Note the wet wood - hot water used to loosen the PVA.



Which proves again that I am not kidding when I say I welcome all comments and criticism! On the one hand I had the complimentary comments from @RobP Rob, @Daniel20 Daniel, and @Pathfinder65 Jan which worked wonders for the confidence in my scratch-building ability (because I will have to do that again), and on the other hand you had the probing comments from @rtibbs Ron and yourself which set me thinking again.

And if it ain't look right, it ain't right! (an old motor racing saying).

Thanks guys for thinking along. I feel a lot better! Let's have a smoke and go to bed (one of the perks of living alone!).

 

[RDN1954]

Johan - you echo my sentiments exactly - "How, just how?" Do I eat humble pie and follow Gerald de Weerdt's layout on the replica?

View attachment 303668

1. Place the windlass at the rear opening of the front canopy.
2. Leave out the mooring bitt - according to Van Yk, the mooring bitt was often omitted on smaller ships.
3. Place the belaying rack in front of the canopy - that way the very crowded space should be considerably "less crowded"
4. Forget about storing both boats on deck and only attempt to squeeze in the smaller one?

Oh boy - I knew this was going to be a sleepless night!

When sleep escapes you, the best ideas pop up... Sometimes...

I think that your proposed lay-out makes sense, in fact it appears to be the most logical option.
One thing on storing the boats; would it be possible to store the smaller boat off centre, or would the relocated windlass prevent that?
Eating humble pie? Don't know about that, you researched and evaluated all available options, within your current constraints and this is the result of that journey.
One other thing, and I don't really want to question all the research other people did, but how certain are we about a) the dimensions of the WB, b) the equipment on board and b) the exact arrangement of all equipment of the WB? I have this gnawing feeling that you are dealing with just to many contradicting variables.

 

[RDN1954]

Oh no, another interpretation. I'm sure you will have an answer in the morning. Who is wrong, who is right, who knows, it was few hundred years ago. Just saying.......

Yep, another interpretation... I find this fascinating; people from literally around the world are trying to understand how on earth they did that. With all our knowledge and experience we come up empty handed. And in the end of the day, AL-FI put aside, we come up with something how it could have been,

 

[Daniel20]

When sleep escapes you, the best ideas pop up... Sometimes...

I think that your proposed lay-out makes sense, in fact it appears to be the most logical option.
One thing on storing the boats; would it be possible to store the smaller boat off centre, or would the relocated windlass prevent that?
Eating humble pie? Don't know about that, you researched and evaluated all available options, within your current constraints and this is the result of that journey.
One other thing, and I don't really want to question all the research other people did, but how certain are we about a) the dimensions of the WB, b) the equipment on board and b) the exact arrangement of all equipment of the WB? I have this gnawing feeling that you are dealing with just to many contradicting variables.

I think Johan ha a real valid point. I know for me having too many choices is a curse. Like trying to pick out wall paper with the Admiral, just impossible.