Very nice work Oliver
Are the semi-circular notches in the mast step for the pumps?
Kind Regards
Nigel
Are the semi-circular notches in the mast step for the pumps?Kind Regards
Nigel
La Belle 1/36 - Plan by Jean Boudriot / myself
- Thread starter Olivers Historic Shipyard
- Start date
- Watchers 56
Thank you Nigel. Yes right, the notches are for the pumps.
Very good progress my friend.
Great looking mast-step - very accurate executed (also the the wooden wall).
I have one question:
Is there a reason, why you have on one side a non symetrical pattern of the bolts? Was this the pattern found at the wreck?
I am looking forward to see your model next weekend - great
Great looking mast-step - very accurate executed (also the the wooden wall).
I have one question:
Is there a reason, why you have on one side a non symetrical pattern of the bolts? Was this the pattern found at the wreck?
I am looking forward to see your model next weekend - great
Hello Uwe,
thank you for your kind words.
i tried to follow the wreck. But if i follow 100% the wreck my model will look like made in the kindergarten from my daughter.
The reallity is a chaos between treenails and iron nails.
thank you for your kind words.
i tried to follow the wreck. But if i follow 100% the wreck my model will look like made in the kindergarten from my daughter.
The reallity is a chaos between treenails and iron nails.
My second timelapse about the construction from the La Belle
Wow - a very interesting video with some additional photos and views - Great
Thanks guys. Maybe it helps for something.
Often we as model builders want to create something perfect. The actual builders were not striving for perfection but for the best product for the lowest price build in the shortest time with the material they had at hand. This means nails, dowels and planks were not perfectly alligned but efficiently drilled and placed, creating in our eyes a kinder garten chaos.
Look at Vasa s deck, not one planks is the same and the deck is not mirrored.
Look at the tree nailing of the currently build replica of the Willem Barentz ship.
We as model builders are often too precise if we compare it with the real thing.
I believe, IMHO this is because the real ship was built by thousands of people, where one group start the task, and another completed. In the case of a model, we are a single entity (for the most part) in control: from start to finish. Also, the size: On the real ship, it is hard to find the blemish unless you look specifically at it. The model is relatively small and you can see everything at glance.
As i know each side of the vasa was buildt by two different nations. Dutch and swedish. Both used a own feet-system. This helps for a good symmetry 
.
I agree wtih Jim. You can see the whole result with on view. If you try to copy the asymmetry you look like more a bad modeller than a person who
know the details from the original.
The Willem Barentz is a interesting project. The ship combine with the La Belle in a lot of points.
.I agree wtih Jim. You can see the whole result with on view. If you try to copy the asymmetry you look like more a bad modeller than a person who
know the details from the original.
The Willem Barentz is a interesting project. The ship combine with the La Belle in a lot of points.
I am certainly not promoting that we should start to be less precise but I am convinced that the building methodes in the 17th century were different then we have now and measurement standards were also different.
One last contempory ship, a Dutch pinas.
One last contempory ship, a Dutch pinas.
I totally agree with the above comments.Many obsess about building models 1mm perfect to Monographs.If the Monograph was an exact copy of the builder's original drawings,it is almost guaranteed that this isn't how the ship left the slipway.This is the case with modern vessels as well.
On a different note,you could digitally survey Victory or Vasa to produce a dimensionally accurate model.Refits aside,100s of years of timber movement results in a ship not the same shape as when it was built.
Kind Regards
Nigel
On a different note,you could digitally survey Victory or Vasa to produce a dimensionally accurate model.Refits aside,100s of years of timber movement results in a ship not the same shape as when it was built.
Kind Regards
Nigel
A lot o details has been done. I continued a little bit with my anchor and started the constuction from the stern-timbers. I have cut out the frames and integrated the gun ports. The deckbeams, hatchbeams and mastbeams was prepared. All beams are cutted with dovetails and customized with the deckbeamshelf.
Superb joinery Oliver.My only observation is the use of the bubble along the vessel.Do the gunport cills not follow the Deck Sheer?
Kind Regards
Nigel
Kind Regards
Nigel
Its a good point. If the gunport follow the deck you have to cut out the frames as well perpenticular. Otherwise you get a rhombus for your gunport.
I think in theory the gunports has to be parallel to the Loadwaterline. But this is theory. I think in the dockyard 1684
practice beats theory. The frames are layed in 90 degrees to the keel and the gunport are done in the most simple way. 90 degrees.
I think in theory the gunports has to be parallel to the Loadwaterline. But this is theory. I think in the dockyard 1684
practice beats theory. The frames are layed in 90 degrees to the keel and the gunport are done in the most simple way. 90 degrees.
Oliver the gunports should be a Rhomboid,at least on French vessels.Check the side elevation of the complete vessel in your plans.The top of the lower cill lines up with the top of the spirketing inside the bulkwark.The Spirketing follows the deck sheer so therefore the cill has to follow the sheer.
Kind Regards
Nigel
Kind Regards
Nigel
Yes, i see. You are right. Its a good point for the future. But the first two ports are more or less "correct", ths last has a very soft rhombus. Its so small that i don´t recognized it. I think because it´s a very small ship. I compared it with the plan from the Ambitieux. The angel of the ports there are much bigger.