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

@Dean62 Your way of dividing the hull into belts is an excellent way to prepare for planking and is the method that all should follow - in theory! Here is Hans's very instructional sketch to me which basically shows the same method.

IMG_3896.jpg

On the Batavia, I have done the same thing - no problem - because the planks at the sides and at the bow run in a perfectly straight or almost straight line. On hulls that I call slab-sided, the theory can be put to practice!

Build 366.jpg
 
So, do I follow this very sound advice on the build of the Willem Barentsz? In a nutshell, the answer is "No" _ I refer you to a previous comment made by Hans:

Reading all the discussions above about how to, what is right, and what is wrong please keep one important thing in mind. We are nowadays almost always planking a hull with straight planks, because a straight plank is something which is more easy available. This was however not how it was done in the 17th century.

Have a look at this (old) image:

Dubbele kromming aan de boeg.jpg

Picture: Hans (@Kolderstok )

What you can clearly see is that every plank has a double curve from side to bow, from concave to convex (looking from above), and then also is bent into the blunt rounding of the bow.
This rather complex form cannot be achieved by a single straight plank which we nowadays have for cladding a hull. And what makes it even more difficult is that a model plank only has a thickness of f.i. 1,5 mm and a width of 6 mm. Even after soaking it for years it is difficult to bent the double curve in it. It is therefore that planks are tapered, and also a reason why a blunt bow is more difficult to plank.
When you look at the first planks Heinrich has mounted it is correct what Ptér said. The end of it should go downwards a bit. But when trying this the plank will start to open itself at the second bulkhead, like the gill of a fish. This we don't want, as we have only 1,5 mm of material to sand away.
Thus we taper the planks to get a smooth and nice bow.
In the end your planking could look something like this:

Vooraanzicht romp_18102018.jpg
Picture Hans (Kolderstok). I have edited the picture indicating the three lost strakes at the bow on either side.

Therefore, I maintain that theory cannot be successfully applied to the WB where we have to deal with marked lateral and vertical curvatures. You HAVE to employ lost strakes, inserts and custom-shaped planks. If Piet had to do that, and if the 16th and 17th Century's Dutch shipwrights did it, it has to be good enough for me! ;)
 
Heinrich said:
@Dean62 Your way of dividing the hull into belts is an excellent way to prepare for planking and is the method that all should follow - in theory! Here is Hans's very instructional sketch to me which basically shows the same method.

View attachment 279445

On the Batavia, I have done the same thing - no problem - because the planks at the sides and at the bow run in a perfectly straight or almost straight line. On hulls that I call slab-sided, the theory can be put to practice!

View attachment 279446
Click to expand...
On the picture above, the planks all taper and run the length of the hull at the stern. However at the bow, there is not a taper allowing all boards to run to the keel. Instead they are ending with a point, before reaching the keel. This is a fine model practice that many use, and looks fine, however it doesn’t follow shipyard practice as far as I know. I realize some ships may have been done similar, however it wasn’t regarded as good practical for several reasons. First, a pointed board would be difficult to seal and nail properly, second it would be more prone to leak with only minor rotting, and finally it would be a weak point in the hull. So for a model it’s ok, but I doubt an actual ship would have been planked that way? Doing belts, is just a way to plan the run of planks to avoid extreme or unnatural lateral bends that would require spiling boards. And also it allows the hull plank runs to go from bow to stern without needing to be cut to a point. Obviously you still will require drop planks and stealers. However even pointed stealers are incorrect.
So it really comes down to your objective. Make a nice looking model, and forget about shipwright practice. Or perhaps make a few compromises because it’s a model? Or try to be as accurate as possible and copy actual shipwright practice.
For me, I obviously don’t mind making a few exceptions for modeling purposes. But I am going to try to plank the NL as close to shipwright practice as I can. Once again, as the belts go on, I may have to make some adjustments to ensure all rows are complete, including stealers and drop planks as required. It’s not an easy task! In fact a nice single plank hull is not an easy task regardless of approach! ;)
You’re doing a great job, and I know it will look fantastic, even if you have to use a odd plank here or there. ;)
 
Last edited:
Heinrich said:
So, do I follow this very sound advice on the build of the Willem Barentsz? In a nutshell, the answer is "No" _ I refer you to a previous comment made by Hans:

Reading all the discussions above about how to, what is right, and what is wrong please keep one important thing in mind. We are nowadays almost always planking a hull with straight planks, because a straight plank is something which is more easy available. This was however not how it was done in the 17th century.

Have a look at this (old) image:

Dubbele kromming aan de boeg.jpg

Picture: Hans (@Kolderstok )

What you can clearly see is that every plank has a double curve from side to bow, from concave to convex (looking from above), and then also is bent into the blunt rounding of the bow.
This rather complex form cannot be achieved by a single straight plank which we nowadays have for cladding a hull. And what makes it even more difficult is that a model plank only has a thickness of f.i. 1,5 mm and a width of 6 mm. Even after soaking it for years it is difficult to bent the double curve in it. It is therefore that planks are tapered, and also a reason why a blunt bow is more difficult to plank.
When you look at the first planks Heinrich has mounted it is correct what Ptér said. The end of it should go downwards a bit. But when trying this the plank will start to open itself at the second bulkhead, like the gill of a fish. This we don't want, as we have only 1,5 mm of material to sand away.
Thus we taper the planks to get a smooth and nice bow.
In the end your planking could look something like this:

View attachment 279449
Picture Hans (Kolderstok). I have edited the picture indicating the three lost strakes at the bow on either side.

Therefore, I maintain that theory cannot be successfully applied to the WB where we have to deal with marked lateral and vertical curvatures. You HAVE to employ lost strakes, inserts and custom-shaped planks. If Piet had to do that, and if the 16th and 17th Century's Dutch shipwrights did it, it has to be good enough for me! ;)
Click to expand...
The above planking would require you use the spiling technique. This means you need sheet stock to cut the shape from verses trying to bend a plank. That’s the problem with planking a kit model, because they give you one width board for the entire hull…this makes things more difficult. We know the garboard plank alone needs to be spiled to the proper shape, and thus requires more than one plank width. ;)

Ps - it seems some of the newer kits from China are incorporating pre cut spiled planks to use. This makes for a very nice hull that follows shipwright practice. I believe Hans spoke of precut planks for the Fluyt or Fluit?
The hull shape alone intrigues me, with precut planks…hmmm! ;)
 
Last edited:
Dean62 said:
The above planking would require you use the spiling technique. This means you need sheet stock to cut the shape from verses trying to bend a plank. That’s the problem with planking a kit model, because they give you one width board for the entire hull…this makes things more difficult. We know the garboard plank alone needs to be spiled to the proper shape, and thus requires more than one plank width. ;)

Ps - it seems some of the newer kits from China are incorporating pre cut spiled planks to use. This makes for a very nice hull that follows shipwright practice. I believe Hans spoke of precut planks for the Fluyt or Fluit?
The hull shape alone intrigues me, with precut planks…hmmm! ;)
Click to expand...
Dean - I would love nothing more than to build the Fluit in conjunction with you! That would be something unbelievable!

About the precut planks on the Fluit, yes that is the idea.
 
Kolderstok said:
There are two main sources which give a bit of insight in the Dutch shipbuilding in the 17th century. Nicolaes Witsen and Cornelis van Yk both wrote a book about Dutch shipbuilding in the 17th century. The former curator of the Rijksmuseum, Ab Hoving, wrote a book in which he explained the works of Nicolaes Witsen. You should know that Witsen was a very educated man, but his style of writing was - to say the least - a bit confusing. When you try to read the original Witsen book (in old Dutch) you get lost very soon. Hoving managed to "open" the book and gave a clear explanation how ships where built - with the shipwrights (in Dutch bestekken or Certers, Charters or Cherters) as leading guide. These "bestekken" where contractual specifications about the length, width and depth of a ship, and if you combine this information with the method of construction as described by Witsen, you get a very large number of data about the ship, including diameters and lengths of masts, and the corresponding ropework. I don't know if this book is also available in English, but I will ask Ab Hoving.

Hans
Click to expand...
A thought from alongside the pier stems from a few similar "design specs" that were from some nautical archaeological papers and particularly from the book, Seafaring and Seafarers in the Bronze Age Mediterranean and paraphrased in Wooden Ship Building and the interpretation of Shipwrecks, notes that for trade vessels engaged in the profits or losses of sale and resale of raw materials, commodities, produce, exotic items, etc. . . the burden or load weight capacity was a defining factor in how large the vessel had to be and the shipwrights of that construction place used their own methods to "design" (or more accuagely) construct the necessary hull proportions. Money talks and certainly where the potential loss of a ship demanded a cost/benefit to such matters . . . IMHO. The economics of trade and merchant shipping I believe have not changed over the eons of work upon the seas. Just a thought. Rich (PT-2)
 
Dean62 said:
Wow! One last plank on that side! I only dream of getting to that point! :p
She’s looking great! ;)
Click to expand...
Thank you Dean !!! That means a lot to me. Yes - you have your job cut out planking an almost meter-long hull. At this point, without the bowsprit, the WB only measures 320 mm! the NL is a big lady!

I will shortly tempt you! ROTF
 
PT-2 said:
A thought from alongside the pier stems from a few similar "design specs" that were from some nautical archaeological papers and particularly from the book, Seafaring and Seafarers in the Bronze Age Mediterranean and paraphrased in Wooden Ship Building and the interpretation of Shipwrecks, notes that for trade vessels engaged in the profits or losses of sale and resale of raw materials, commodities, produce, exotic items, etc. . . the burden or load weight capacity was a defining factor in how large the vessel had to be and the shipwrights of that construction place used their own methods to "design" (or more accuagely) construct the necessary hull proportions. Money talks and certainly where the potential loss of a ship demanded a cost/benefit to such matters . . . IMHO. The economics of trade and merchant shipping I believe have not changed over the eons of work upon the seas. Just a thought. Rich (PT-2)
Click to expand...
Oh absolutely Rich. Money spoke no louder than in Dutch merchant shipping. To that you can also add the fact that the Dutch were/are notoriously "stingy" (by their own admission, so don't shoot the messenger :)) ! That is one of the reasons why shipwrights used what they had at hand - another reason why "perfectly" planked hulls, symmetry and exquisitely laid-out and detailed decks, are nothing more than a model shipbuilder's imagination!
 
Heinrich said:
Oh absolutely Rich. Money spoke no louder than in Dutch merchant shipping. To that you can also add the fact that the Dutch were/are notoriously "stingy" (by their own admission, so don't shoot the messenger :)) ! That is one of the reasons why shipwrights used what they had at hand - another reason why "perfectly" planked hulls, symmetry and exquisitely laid-out and detailed decks, are nothing more than a model shipbuilder's imagination!
Click to expand...
Dreaming and imagination are what draws all of us onwards! Rich
 
OK guys, let's take a small break from the WB and tempt @Dean62 Dean and anyone else who feels like being tempted.

Planken Fluyt.jpg
These are the planks which are used for the new Kolderstok model - het Fluytschip: (Photograph: Hans @Kolderstok )

And here is the current status of the Fluit under construction by Hans Groenenberg.

20211224_092438.jpg

20211224_092459.jpg

20211225_155730.jpg

Enjoy!
 
Heinrich said:
OK guys, let's take a small break from the WB and tempt @Dean62 Dean and anyone else who feels like being tempted.

View attachment 279463
These are the planks which are used for the new Kolderstok model - het Fluytschip: (Photograph: Hans @Kolderstok )

And here is the current status of the Fluit under construction by Hans Groenenberg.

View attachment 279459

View attachment 279460

View attachment 279462

Enjoy!
Click to expand...
Wow! I’m more than tempted! What intrigues me is the shape and design of this hull. Very unique and at the same time sexy! Gorgeous lines! I think I want to build this one! And the bends make it even more interesting and at the same time challenging! I’m actually excited about this ship!
Dang! I might as well sell my San Felipe…lol…at this rate I will have to wait until I retire to build it! :p

Ps - I’m sold! I really like this ship! I’m already envisioning building it. ;) Be sure to keep us posted as to when it will be available!
 
Last edited:
Heinrich said:
OK guys, let's take a small break from the WB and tempt @Dean62 Dean and anyone else who feels like being tempted.

View attachment 279463
These are the planks which are used for the new Kolderstok model - het Fluytschip: (Photograph: Hans @Kolderstok )

And here is the current status of the Fluit under construction by Hans Groenenberg.

View attachment 279459

View attachment 279460

View attachment 279462

Enjoy!
Click to expand...
That hull is "no planksters prank!" Unique how the high stern has carried over from those of the Eastern Med Bronze Age. Have to wonder about that????? Rich
 
Dean62 said:
Wow! I’m more than tempted! What intrigues me is the shape and design of this hull. Very unique and at the same time sexy! Gorgeous lines! I think I want to build this one! And the bends make it even more interesting and at the same time challenging! I’m actually excited about this ship!
Dang! I might as well sell my San Felipe…lol…at this rate I will have to wait until I retire to build it! :p

Ps - I’m sold! I really like this ship! I’m already envisioning building it. ;) Be sure to keep us posted as to when it will be available!
Click to expand...
That is great Dean Thumbsup- I couldn't agree more with you!

I will rather tag Hans @Kolderstok so that he can answer your questions and provide information as to when it will be available. That way you know you get the most up to date news and specs. During the test build, there were still quite a few things under consideration, so it is best that Hans answers you in that regard.
 
Heinrich said:
OK guys, let's take a small break from the WB and tempt @Dean62 Dean and anyone else who feels like being tempted.

View attachment 279463
These are the planks which are used for the new Kolderstok model - het Fluytschip: (Photograph: Hans @Kolderstok )

And here is the current status of the Fluit under construction by Hans Groenenberg.

View attachment 279459

View attachment 279460

View attachment 279462

Enjoy!
Click to expand...
I will watch those tempted with interest. Getting close to laying that final plank on your WB Heinrich. Brilliant.
 
Dean62 said:
The above planking would require you use the spiling technique. This means you need sheet stock to cut the shape from verses trying to bend a plank. That’s the problem with planking a kit model, because they give you one width board for the entire hull…this makes things more difficult. We know the garboard plank alone needs to be spiled to the proper shape, and thus requires more than one plank width. ;)

Ps - it seems some of the newer kits from China are incorporating pre cut spiled planks to use. This makes for a very nice hull that follows shipwright practice. I believe Hans spoke of precut planks for the Fluyt or Fluit?
The hull shape alone intrigues me, with precut planks…hmmm! ;)
Click to expand...
It's been mentioned before; using paper mockup planks and didn't receive much follow-on, but for complex shapes, like this beauty, wouldn't it be helpful to use thin cardboard strips and perform a dummy planking of the hull? When satisfactory, trace the lines on whatever strips you like, test-fit and then attach the planks permanently.
 
GrantTyler said:
I will watch those tempted with interest. Getting close to laying that final plank on your WB Heinrich. Brilliant.
Click to expand...
Thank you Grant! Although ... on the Port Side there are still about four that need to go on. :)
 
RDN1954 said:
It's been mentioned before; using paper mockup planks and didn't receive much follow-on, but for complex shapes, like this beauty, wouldn't it be helpful to use thin cardboard strips and perform a dummy planking of the hull? When satisfactory, trace the lines on whatever strips you like, test-fit and then attach the planks permanently.
Click to expand...
Johan in theory it will certainly work (Ab Hoving builds all his models with cardboard). In practice, whether the bending characteristics of the wood (which will be a lot harder to bend and have a certain amount of spring-back), will still throw you a few curveballs, I don't know. This is something that will have to be put into practice and tried first. Only then will we know for sure.

If you are referring to the Fluit, there is talk of creating pre-cut planks for the kit so that should make things slightly easier. I say "slightly", because the Fluit has a few other surprises of her own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top