HMS Ontario 1780 scale 1:32 POB full version

Mike41 said:
Hi Zoltan,
I agree with Maarten on a ship with the frames perpendicular to the waterline the gun port sides would be parallel to the frames and the top and bottom would follow the deck line.
Mike
Click to expand...

Hello Mike

that would make the gunports an awkward shape, a square gunport lid would not fit in there
 
What I would do about the gun ports is follow what was drawn on the original plans John Coleman drew and built both the Royal George and the Ontario. here is what I see the gun ports are square no doubt about it and they are the same height above the deck.

it is clear the port sill is parallel to the waterline you can see this with the last gun port to the left. the difference with the angle between the sill and deck is so slight it would make no difference with the operation of the gun.

ont.JPG
 
lets check the original plan of the royal George

I see the same thing here the gun port sides are parallel with the station lines. Importing the drawing in CAD I checked and they are square the sill is at a 90 to the sides so logically if the station lines are perpendicular to the waterline and the sill is square to the station lines thus the sill is perpendicular to the water line and NOT the deck line. This tells me there is an ever so slight angle between the sill and the waterway. The deck slants but the gun port sills do not.
when in doubt I will always follow what the draftsman drew, what's the point in trying to second guess what is drawn in black and white. The plans may not be perfect but you can see the idea of what he drew, and John drew square gun ports level with the waterline and what the heck he was a master shipwright

rg1.JPG
 
Last edited:
there was a debate if there is a rake to the keel ( the hull sits lower at the stern) would the frames slant backward., The final answer was a simple one When building a ship EVERYTHING is built on a level waterline. So no the frames would not slant and gun port sill are level.
 
That's a very interesting question. I remember having this conversation with piratepete many years ago when I was a member of another forum.
Pete has written many articles and he told me and this makes perfectly good sense, it that the gun ports follow the line of the decking and is not square to the waterline.

yes the ports follow the deck line that is common sense but the sills are level with the waterline

The reason why it makes sense is that generally the Wales and the planking also follow the top decking.

pete should study a few plans most all cases the wales and sheer of the planks DO NOT follow the deck. The blue line on this plan is the deck the red line is the wales and sheer. This is very common on many plans and I can post plan after plan and the wales and sheer do not follow the deck line. not so say there may be a case where they do match.

snake.jpg

here is a prime example it stands to reason the gun ports would be the same height from the deck so the sills are following the deck line. notice the gun ports are cutting into the wales and planking. This is a tell tale that the run of the hull planks do not follow the deck line

1roebuck17c.jpg
 
Last edited:
looking at those photos of the Ontario I see first off the gun ports are the same height from the deck that is a given, notice the ports are getting closer and closer to the black wales as they approach the stern, this tells me ole Pete is wrong the wales and sheer do not follow the deck line if they did the space between the ports and black wales would be equal all along the hull.
those ports are indeed square and the sides are parallel
 
G'day Zoly
I have to apologize to you for my answer regarding the gunports.
I have been reading up through my books and on the net ad Dave is partly correct.
The bottom and top follow the line of he decking, But the sides follow the vertical.
Here is a quote from Mark Taylor from MSW on this question :"Generally, on English ships, the gunport sides matched the frames (thus vertical) and the sills matched the sheer of the deck. The catch is: but not always."
Here is another quote from testazyk "Not sure what the exact formula is but Longridge says "Let us make the gun port lids first. Most of them are square but a few of them at the bows have a slight tilt."
Again on the same discussion
"Looking at Sutherland is always an adventure! Have you seen the 1993 article in The Northern Mariner by Tevor Kenchington - The Structures of English Wooden Ships: William Sutherland's Ship, circa 1710? http://www.cnrs-scrn.org/northern_mariner/indices/index_vol_3_e.html"

It is a very interesting read as he moves through reconstructing the ship based on Sutherland and contrasting with contemporary ships and later practice. For example, see the figure below from his paper:
Port 3.jpg
This clearly shows the gun ports are not square!

I find this model and it shows the distortion of the gun ports at the stern and at the bow.
Gun ports .jpg I have marked the gun ports in red so you can easily seen what i'm talking about,
Gun ports 2 .jpg
Regarding Pete's input, I was talking to him on this matter about 6 years ago, and my memory isn't that clear on the matter, He could have said some ships follow the the decking and the wales etc. ........PLEASE DON'T BLAME PETE, BLAME ME FOR NOT REMEMBERING CORRECTLY.
Well thats my pennies worth.
Happymodeling
Greg
 
Last edited:
zoly99sask said:
Ok guys now I am lost I might modify the Ontario and build it without gunports,like merchant ship ,we are shots merchant shipmodels anyway Lol.
Click to expand...
As my original line to you..... That's a very interesting question.
You can ask two people and get 3 different answers. There's an expression here in Australia 'you don't know if your are Arthur or Marther' or 'you are damed if you do, or damed if you don't'.
But Mark Taylor said "The catch is: but not always."
The final say in this matter, is yours..... nothing else matters, mate.
havagooday
Greg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top