I am pulling the chair to watch your build.
Good morning. Wonderful. I will join Jim pulling up a chair. Cheers Grant
looking very good - clean and accurate work 
thank you Uwek. big fan of your worklooking very good - clean and accurate work
thank you very much Grant
thank you very much
This is a lovely build Lucian! It is a really interesting vessel with the two sliding keels. Also interesting is that as mentioned by Vanguard she was lengthened 22 feet the next year. Looking at the rebuild plans she also gained a third keel and more gun ports.
Allan
Allan
Last edited:
I was thinking about that as well but have no answer, sorry. With the sliding keels I do wonder if the coppering would have been an encumbrance in getting them up and down through the keel. Maybe the hull was coppered and not the sliding keels?? Hope another member has some insight into this. I did find an interesting site that goes into the details of the class that you may find interesting. https://kenthistoryforum.com/index.php?topic=111.0
Allan
Allan
I agree here with Allan
In my personal opinion and not knowledge, I would think that the sliding keels were not coppered.
First of all it would be additional weight for lifting up.
Second the keels were relatively easily to be exchanged, if after years the would have some damages caused by woodworm
Third, the keels were solid wood, so no problematic if they would slightly rot..... no need of watertightness like on a hull
On the other hand, the rudders of ships were also coppered
But looking at the detailed drawings - there was so small space between the sliding keel and the shaft, that all copper sheathing of the keel would produce maybe some problem with the lifting - imagine, if one copper sheat would stand away, or one nail would be slightly too long etc....
These are drawings of the HMS Cynthia (1796)
www.rmg.co.uk
I think they had more problems to make the inside of the keel shaft watertight - maybe this part was coppered (but not visible in a model)
BTW: kenthistory is a very good page with often interesting and complete technical data of ships and the classes - worth to have a visit or two or three
In my personal opinion and not knowledge, I would think that the sliding keels were not coppered.
First of all it would be additional weight for lifting up.
Second the keels were relatively easily to be exchanged, if after years the would have some damages caused by woodworm
Third, the keels were solid wood, so no problematic if they would slightly rot..... no need of watertightness like on a hull
On the other hand, the rudders of ships were also coppered
But looking at the detailed drawings - there was so small space between the sliding keel and the shaft, that all copper sheathing of the keel would produce maybe some problem with the lifting - imagine, if one copper sheat would stand away, or one nail would be slightly too long etc....
These are drawings of the HMS Cynthia (1796)
Collection Results | Royal Museums Greenwich
Explore seafaring history, timekeeping and astronomy, fine art and the world's largest maritime library and archive collection. Start your search today.
I think they had more problems to make the inside of the keel shaft watertight - maybe this part was coppered (but not visible in a model)
BTW: kenthistory is a very good page with often interesting and complete technical data of ships and the classes - worth to have a visit or two or three
yes, this is where i read about the coppering. still, not so accurate as the text is copy paste at all ships