• LUCZORAMA SHIPWRECK SCAVENGER HUNT GIVEAWAY. 4 Weeks of Fun • 1 Legendary Prize ((OcCre’s Fram Ship)) • Global Crew Welcome!
    **VIEW THREAD HERE**

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

Uwek said:
In principle an interesting discussion to compare the two transoms and their differences.

Nevertheless I have my doubts, that the artist did realy know, what he is showing.
Looking at the flags and the sails compared with the ships sailing direction I think he was not realy a technician or sailor, but more an explorer knowing icebeers etc.

Also in a lot of the engravings the vessels are looking completely different and often very simplified or technically incorrect (ship construction)
In my opinion very questionable, if a correct interpretation, of how the ship looked like, is possible......

View attachment 327120 View attachment 327126

View attachment 327121 View attachment 327122

View attachment 327123 View attachment 327124

View attachment 327125
Click to expand...
Dear Uwe

When someone like you with your vast technical knowledge and experience takes the time to participate in the build log of the Willem Barentsz, it makes me very happy and is much appreciated. To answer you in the best and most accurate way possible, requires me to take you back to where the research on this ship has started - and as all my friends who have followed along in this process will tell you - that is a mammoth task as this log spans well over 200 pages!

Therefore, I believe that the best way to answer you is to refer you to the comments of @Ab Hoving in his invaluable work Het Schip van Barents. What follows is an accurate translation of his thoughts as they are found on pages 33 and 34 of the abovementioned book.

Nevertheless, this report (the journal of Gerrit De Veer) would not have appealed so much to the imagination if it had not been for the excellent illustrations added to the account. It is not known who the maker of these prints was, but that he was very well instructed by De Veer is beyond doubt.

[That the artist] knew those depicted vessels from his own observation is clearly visible in the detailed way in which they are drawn. Yet it is not a case that the ship's drawings are some kind of photographic evidence. From drawing to drawing the number of wales, gun ports and standing rigging change and once the ship is even drawn with a round stern, unlike all other images.

However, the artist is otherwise fairly consistent in the main characteristics, the rigging, the shape and the size of the ships and so the pictures form a reliable basis on which to rely when reconstructing a ship of that type. Also in the journal itself you can find clues about the ship. It is beyond doubt that all the descriptions in the text which refer to operations on the ship or which incorporate parts of the ship correspond entirely to the ship displayed on the plates with great attention to detail. On other drawings from that time, we encounter the depicted type of ship so regularly that we can say that there are no indications that the details on De Veer's prints show strange deviations from what was common in his time.

Both the text and the drawings of Gerrit de Veer's diary and other contemporary images have contributed to this reconstruction of Barents's ship.
 
Interesting pictures, like always I look to the rigging to see details. And this drawing let us see that the stay of the foremast on the bowsprit is done with an euphroe and not with a heartblock or ring. Nice detail that I did mentioned in an early discusion how it should be. This proofs I was on the right way saying not a ring or heartblock.
20220907_173506.png
Five.png
 
Steef66 said:
Interesting pictures, like always I look to the rigging to see details. And this drawing let us see that the stay of the foremast on the bowsprit is done with an euphroe and not with a heartblock or ring. Nice detail that I did mentioned in an early discusion how it should be. This proofs I was on the right way saying not a ring or heartblock.
View attachment 327139
View attachment 327140
Click to expand...
You are absolutely correct about the euphroe on the bowsprit, Stephan. Also see Ab's model.

Barents-12.jpg
Photograph: Willem Barentsz - Ab Hoving
 
The ships in the drawing are sailing on the wind, almost on the bow. That's why the sails are full blow to the side and flags go in that direction with the wind. A little over done in the pictures but it seems to me in the right way.
 
Steef66 said:
The ships in the drawing are sailing on the wind, almost on the bow. That's why the sails are full blow to the side and flags go in that direction with the wind. A little over done in the pictures but it seems to me in the right way.
Click to expand...
Correct Stephan. And the fact that the position of the sails may be somewhat exaggerated in the pictures may just be strong affirmation of the direction of travel. We need to remember that a large portion of the journal is devoted to wind directions, latitudes and longitudes, map readings and compass readings - in all, a big focus was placed on navigation.

Also, the picture does not appear random in the book. Every single picture is placed very specifically in the journal and serves to highlight a particular portion of the written text.
 
Don Case said:
Maybe he's got the flags slightly off wind to emphasize something that's on them
Click to expand...
Exactly, Don - that is what I also think. To the uninitiated, the position of the flags may be questionable, but once again everything is understood when the historical context is taken into account. The 1594 and 1595 expeditions comprised of ships from Zeeland, Enkhuizen, Rotterdam and Amsterdam. The Zeelanders had a very clear idea of the route that should be followed (it should be taken into account that the expedition leader on both those occasions was Cornelis Cornelissen-Nay from Zeeland) while the Amsterdam contingent wanted to follow a route as advocated by their cartologist, Petrus Plancius.

The 1596 expedition (the picture shows the start of the 1696 expedition) was undertaken by ships of the Admiralty of Amsterdam only and provided them with the opportunity of following Plancius's route without any hindrance. Should they have been successful, it would have been great publicity for Amsterdam and Plancius would have been vindicated. The picture could therefore be interpreted as good publicity or a kind of early advertisement for the exploits of the Admiralty of Amsterdam.
 
Another observation: the ship on the RH side of the picture has 7 canons per side, whereas the ship on the LH side only shows 6. Also, the ship on the RH side also appears to have two canons in the stern. The latter could be argued though.
 
Dear Friends

For the last three days, the hammer went down hard in the Lincoln Shipyard in Nantong.

7.jpg
Gunports on the Port Side were all cut-out, those which needed to be closed up, were closed up, and those which required interior framing, were framed.

2.jpg
Thereafter the Port Side cannons were constructed. This picture shows the final mounting blocks in the process of manufacture. All were filed and sanded and covered with CLOU stain.

1.jpg
Gunports on the starboard side were definitively mounted (above and below)

9.jpg
Even though it appears as if the stern most cannon sits too high in the gunport, that is just an optical illusion. For reference look at the first picture and you will see that it exits exactly in the middle of the port.

6.jpg
Gunports on the Port Side were permanently installed (above and below).

11.jpg

3.jpg
As you will remember, I have already dry-fitted the deck halves previously, so all that had to be done now was to cut out the openings for the hatches.

13.jpg
Port side deck half fitted. The main mast that is visible in the background, was borrowed from WB#1 to ensure the correct deck alignment. Push pins were used to ensure that the deck lies flat and true on the deck beams.

微信图片_20220910135348.jpg
The starboard side of the deck in position. The gap that developed towards the bow between the two deck halves is indicative of the amount that I have increased the width of the hull by. It may not seem like much, but this picture does not tell the full story. On WB#1 the deck was far too wiide to fit unless the excess around the edges were removed. On WB#2, nothing was removed - and despite that - the two deck halves would still not meet in the middle. The bow on WB#2 is considerably wider than that of its sibling.

20.jpg
Counting from the stem, bulkheads #1 to #6 were removed,

微信图片_20220910144406.jpg
The deck beam that ran in the middle of the large hatch was sawn out,

微信图片_20220910144359.jpg
And so was the deck beam that ran along the front edge of the smaller hatch.

微信图片_20220910144636.jpg

And finally, an overview shot of where I am this afternoon. This evening I am going to have supper with two of my colleagues so I doubt that anything further will happen today.

This is the point of the construction that I have dreamt about. From here (even though I will be using the kit components that coincide with my research), much will be scratch-built. This is the part by which the model will stand or fall - not from a construction point of view, but from the point of something that is historically worthy, and which can bear out the hundreds of hours of research that has gone into it. I am excited.
 
pingu57 said:
Again, a job well done Heinrich, She is looking beautifull to me. now you know why you have done so much research. ThumbsupThumbsup:)
Click to expand...
Thank you, my friend. Until the deck planking is done, the inner planking has been completed and the hatches are done, she will look a bit on the "rough" side, but that is just the nature of the build.
 
Heinrich said:
Dear Friends

For the last three days, the hammer went down hard in the Lincoln Shipyard in Nantong.

View attachment 327667
Gunports on the Port Side were all cut-out, those which needed to be closed up, were closed up, and those which required interior framing, were framed.

View attachment 327668
Thereafter the Port Side cannons were constructed. This picture shows the final mounting blocks in the process of manufacture. All were filed and sanded and covered with CLOU stain.

View attachment 327665
Gunports on the starboard side were definitively mounted (above and below)

View attachment 327669
Even though it appears as if the stern most cannon sits too high in the gunport, that is just an optical illusion. For reference look at the first picture and you will see that it exits exactly in the middle of the port.

View attachment 327666
Gunports on the Port Side were permanently installed (above and below).

View attachment 327670

View attachment 327671
As you will remember, I have already dry-fitted the deck halves previously, so all that had to be done now was to cut out the openings for the hatches.

View attachment 327672
Port side deck half fitted. The main mast that is visible in the background, was borrowed from WB#1 to ensure the correct deck alignment. Push pins were used to ensure that the deck lies flat and true on the deck beams.

View attachment 327681
The starboard side of the deck in position. The gap that developed towards the bow between the two deck halves is indicative of the amount that I have increased the width of the hull by. It may not seem like much, but this picture does not tell the full story. On WB#1 the deck was far too wiide to fit unless the excess around the edges were removed. On WB#2, nothing was removed - and despite that - the two deck halves would still not meet in the middle. The bow on WB#2 is considerably wider than that of its sibling.

View attachment 327682
Counting from the stem, bulkheads #1 to #6 were removed,

View attachment 327683
The deck beam that ran in the middle of the large hatch was sawn out,

View attachment 327684
And so was the deck beam that ran along the front edge of the smaller hatch.

View attachment 327685

And finally, an overview shot of where I am this afternoon. This evening I am going to have supper with two of my colleagues so I doubt that anything further will happen today.

This is the point of the construction that I have dreamt about. From here (even though I will be using the kit components that coincide with my research), much will be scratch-built. This is the part by which the model will stand or fall - not from a construction point of view, but from the point of something that is historically worthy, and which can bear out the hundreds of hours of research that has gone into it. I am excited.
Click to expand...
Yep just beautiful, very interested to see what happens next.
 
I'm looking forward to seeing the next phase of decking begin Heinrich. Just curious, will you be filling in the gap from the forward hatch forward? Seems like it may be too wide for a plank to be properly glued down.
 
Pathfinder65 said:
That looks like you’ve made a lot of progress. The gun ports and cannons look great.
Click to expand...
Thank you, Jan. I could wangle some time for the build and made the most of it. These items are all relatively mundane but needs to be done before I can get to part, I really look forward to.
 
Daniel20 said:
I'm looking forward to seeing the next phase of decking begin Heinrich. Just curious, will you be filling in the gap from the forward hatch forward? Seems like it may be too wide for a plank to be properly glued down.
Click to expand...
Hi Daniel. I am also looking forward to the deck and inner planking - I am still undecided whether I want to go the well-proven way of the Abachi planks or whether I want to try something more adventurous. About the gap - at its widest point it is 1.5mm and will be planking with 4mm wide strips (irrespective of the wood I choose). I think I should be ok without filling it as I also edge-glue my deck planking. The first steps though are to make the deck hatches and plank the remaining bulwarks from midships to the stern as they need to be at the correct height before I can start the inner planking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top