HMS Agamemnon by Caldercraft

[iutar]

Mark, the data from Allan's document can also be verified on the model itself (unfortunately, but we usually adjust the dimensions to Chris Watton's fantasies).
Analysis of models and drawings suggests that the height of the black strike was such that this strip touched the second gun port of the main gun deck.

 

[AllanKP69]

The below is an example of another ship, the Boyne, so the dimensions do not apply to Agamemnon, but gives an idea on the varying thickness of the planking from keel upward.

 

[iutar]

Main wales line, for control on the model

 

[iutar]

 

[iutar]

Well, I bought a kit of plastic figures like those used by architects. I happened to find one with three women... And the rest: some carving, some CA glue, some tinkering, some sanding, and then painting...

I have an idea! Mark, manufacturers of polystyrene model kits, in addition to tanks and planes, also make figurines in various scales. Polystyrene is easy to cut and saw, glue and fill. You can create realistic-looking bodies, arms, legs, and heads from prefabricated figurines.

 

[HMSFly]

I have an idea! Mark, manufacturers of polystyrene model kits, in addition to tanks and planes, also make figurines in various scales. Polystyrene is easy to cut and saw, glue and fill. You can create realistic-looking bodies, arms, legs, and heads from prefabricated figurines.

View attachment 547618View attachment 547619View attachment 547620View attachment 547621View attachment 547622View attachment 547623View attachment 547624View attachment 547625View attachment 547626View attachment 547627View attachment 547628

Yep indeed very good idea.....I will try to find them!

 

[iutar]

For inspiration:

 

[AllanKP69]

Hello Iutar, The stern for Sterling Castle 1775 and Ramillies,1785 are obvious but what are the others, including the quarter galleries? I am guessing by the clear counters the stern views are ships before 1770 and after 1780? Can you please give the name of the ships for each drawing for us?
Thanks!
Allan

 

[iutar]

HMS Anson (we will return to this ship many more times)
HMS Warrior

 

[HMSFly]

So, the black strike is installed....

 

[iutar]

Dear friends! So, I've prepared a short essay dedicated to the biggest mistake of the Agamemnon model kit.
There's a lot of text here, but it's important. I'm not trying to push anything on anyone, and if you're not interested in this material, just skip it.

So, in message 243 I gave links to the drawings of the Ardent series ships from the Greenwich archive.



If someone wants to make a model of the HMS Agamemnon and applies to Greenwich, the museum will send them these very plans.
Specifically, these will be drawings under numbers ZAZ 1279, 1280, 1281, 1282, 1283, 1284 or their copies under other numbers (for example, ZAZ 1501 is a copy of ZAZ 1281, and so on).

Judging by a number of distinctive details, these were the plans that Chris Watton worked from when he designed the HMS Agamemnon kit for Caldercraft.

And these drawings played a cruel joke on Chris.

 

[iutar]

But first, a little historical information.

By the end of the 1880s, it became clear that 64-gun ships had failed to prove themselves as third-rank ships, "ships of the line class."
These ships required the same amount of construction, maintenance, and support as 74-gun ships. But the 74-gun ships were far more effective in combat.
It is natural that in the 1780s the construction of new 64-gun ships ceased completely, and the ships already built were gradually decommissioned as new 74-gun ships arrived.

What did the Admiralty do with the 64-gun ships?

First, the oldest and most dilapidated ships were no longer restored to their original condition, but were abandoned as hulks, floating prisons, and warehouses. For example, of the Ardent-class ships of interest to us, HMS Raisonnable (1768) became a floating prison.

 

[iutar]

Second. Some ships were degraded and rebuilt as so-called "heavy frigates" of the fifth rank. Their upper gun deck and part of their sides were cut away, leaving only the lower deck and about 30-40 guns. For example, of the Ardent-class ships of interest to us, HMS Indefatigable (1784) was rebuilt in this way.



Third. Some ships were converted into guard ships. These ships, with reduced crews and supplies, were unable to undertake long voyages and served as floating artillery batteries. They guarded the port entrance, served as a customs house, and served as a fire station. For example, HMS Raisonnable (1768), a member of our Ardent class, was converted into a guard ship.

 

[iutar]

As we explore the story, we come to the most interesting episode. It's important for understanding how the model's error arose.

Fourth. Over the course of the century, the Royal Navy conducted a considerable number of amphibious operations. Our HMS Agamemnon (1781) also participated in such an operation. From August to December 1793, the ship carried 6,000 troops to occupy Toulon. Let's remember this fact.

Combat experience has shown that the use of line ships is not effective for transporting large numbers of troopers.
Then the ships began to be converted into so-called "troop ships".
The ships were reduced to fifth-rate, with half their armament and most of their crews removed. Many useful fittings were removed, and anchor bitts and capstans were moved. The remaining space was used to create additional cabins for landing parties. An example of such a ship, from the Ardent series, is HMS Nassau (1785).

The Royal Navy planned to convert all Ardent-class ships into troop ships, but due to various circumstances, only HMS Nassau (1785) was converted into a troop transport in 1799. She retained only 36 guns, her anchor bitts were moved to the upper deck, the central capstans were removed, an additional galley stove was installed, and cabins were created.

What kind of remodeling can you do without drawings?

And here a surprise awaits us!

So, the archival drawings of ZAZ 1279-1284 (and their copies under other numbers) show not only the hypothetical ship of the Ardent series, but also show the modifications that need to be made to turn this ship into "troop ships".

The drawings show the ship itself using ink, and on top of this, drawings are applied using pencil and corresponding inscriptions are made about what changes should be made to the design of the ship.



All this has to do with HMS Nassau, but has nothing to do with HMS Agamemnon!

Although HMS Agamemnon had once been used as a troop ship, she was not specifically converted for this purpose.

 

[iutar]

An interesting point. Ironically, if we look at the original archival drawings of HMS Nassau, ZAZ 1298, 1299, 1300, 1301, 1302, we're surprised to find that they contain no pencil corrections for conversion into a landing ship.
It turns out that the plans for HMS Nassau are more suitable for making a model of HMS Agamemnon than the "general plans for the entire Ardent class" that Greenwich sends.




I gave you a link to the HMS Nassau plans in post 243 (bottom five links).

 

[iutar]

So what happened over 20 years ago when Chris Watton started designing our model?
Having received the drawings with corrections, and also knowing that the HMS Agamemnon once carried landing troops, Chris added elements characteristic of a "troops ship" to the model.


Just to be clear, I respect and value Chris Watton's talents. He has contributed greatly to modern ship modeling. His modern kit model designs are of the highest quality and are among the best in the world.
Mark is already familiar with his models, even without realizing it. True, Mark was dealing with Chris's old models, which were full of errors. It was Chris Watton who designed the HMS Fly, HMS Diana, and HMS Agamemnon. Friends also know his HMS Vanguard. But, alas, twenty years ago, Chris was just taking his first steps and making mistakes. That's normal for anyone. My goal isn't to criticize Chris. My goal is to help the ship modeler figure out where to correct Chris's mistakes.


So, what did Chris do? Following the penciled instructions, Chris moved the anchor bitts to the upper deck. To do this, he had to remove the after bulkhead of the forecastle. But, for some reason, Chris didn't remove the center capstan or install an additional galley stove.

We need to throw parts 41, 44 in the trash and restore the rear bulkhead of the forecastle, which, unfortunately, will have to be done from scratch.

 

[iutar]

... and restore the rear bulkhead of the forecastle, which, unfortunately, will have to be done from scratch...

The aft bulkhead of the forecastle consisted of three large blocks. Between the second and third gun ports of the upper deck were the boatswain's cabin on the port side and the carpenter's cabin on the starboard side.
These cabins were collapsible. The bulkheads facing the galley had doors leading into the cabins. And the bulkheads facing the waist and mainmast—let's call them the "after bulkheads"—had small windows.

In the middle was a collapsible galley. Its aft bulkhead consisted of two doors opening toward the mainmast. These doors had no windows. When it was time for dinner, these doors would swing open, and the sailors would pour soup from the ship's stove into buckets.

Between the boatswain's and carpenter's cabins and the galley, two double-leaf swing doors were installed. These doors usually had windows.

Looking at the photographs of museum models, you, dear friends, probably noticed that these doors have been removed, and the rear bulkhead of the forecastle does not look intact.

The thing is, the space under the forecastle served as a hospital. It housed a medicine cabinet and special hammocks—comfortable ones, not the usual sailor's kind. If there were no sick or wounded on board, the doors on the aft bulkhead of the forecastle were left open or removed entirely.



The front and side bulkheads of the galley were also often dismantled because the ship's stove was producing intense heat.

When looking at the photographs, note: on 64-gun ships, the aft bulkhead of the galley is aligned with the aft bulkheads of the boatswain's and carpenter's cabins. On 74-gun ships, however, the galley protrudes slightly toward the mainmast.

You can make the boatswain's and carpenter's cabins entirely, and leave only the aft bulkhead from the galley, and also remove the double doors between these three cabins, if you wish, of course.

 

[iutar]

This is the essay I wrote about the main mistake on the model. From now on, I'll post snippets of photos Mark sent me and describe where things went wrong. Unfortunately, there are still a huge number of errors on the model, but none of them are as serious.
To be continued!

 

[HMSFly]

This is the essay I wrote about the main mistake on the model. From now on, I'll post snippets of photos Mark sent me and describe where things went wrong. Unfortunately, there are still a huge number of errors on the model, but none of them are as serious.
To be continued!

Dear Iutar, Wow, A lot of interesting work... I'll try to implement all your remarks...hope I do not forget them!

 

[iutar]

Well, let's take one of the photos Mark sent me. Since it's just a photo, I can't take measurements; Mark has to do that himself, printing out the archival drawings. So I'm only showing the obvious discrepancies.

In this case, I "attached" an archival drawing to Mark's photograph, increasing its scale, comparing the size and location of the main wales and gun ports. That is, now the sizes and lines match.