La Belle 1680 - 1/36 - ANCRE monograf - POB prototype by kuba91nt

[kuba91nt]

POB La Belle 1680 Prototype...



Hello friends.
My story with the LaBelle 1680 began about four years ago. Due to the high prices of kits, very incompetent production, and a lack of historical accuracy, i purchased a monograph from ANCRE, along with wood and a few necessary tools, wanting to start a new adventure from scratch.
Currently, the price of a kit covers a substantial amount ofequipment, books, and wood.
Browsing through the monographs, i encountered numerous design errors even at this stage, but i decided to attempt construction. La Belle is simply majestic, and i want to own she...
It's simple, building a small ship from a plan, right?


Attempt 1, POF design +thunderstorm...
First, I decided to transfer the POF monograph to .SVG format for future laser or CNC printing. I prepared the design by transferring and correcting errorsto a 2D model in the program. The model was ready, ready to print, but one day a storm hit and my computer burned out, the hard drive crashed. I didn't have time to print the project or save a copy. Nothing.
It happened suddenly and painfully... Several years of my collection, documents, photos... What more can I say? Quote?

The roof,, the roof, the roof is on fire...
The roof, the roof, the roof is on fire...
The roof, the roof, the roof is on fire...
We don't need no water, let the mtherfker burn... Burn mtherfker burn...

The entire project was gone, 80 hours in the dust.


Attempt 2, From ashes + task failed successful...
I put the project aside for about three years, unable to get over the loss of so much data. Friend tried to save my computer, but he only recovered 40% of the disk's contents. Fortunately, the La Belle project was there, but when i opened the file and tried to modify it in any way, errors appeared. File was for viewing only, and i had a basis for further work.

I started the project again, this time as a POB, due to my still low morale, thinking it would be faster, simpler, and better...
Design was created and printed, but massive construction flaws revealed Burdiot's 80-year-old hand... each sheet of the 2000 monograph is different, with no overlap.
What if the frames on one monograph fit, but the keel on the other doesn't? The entire project is flawed, 70 hours in the sand...
It was supposed to be faster, right???




Attempt 3, What shall we do with the drunken sailor?, Early in the morning!
In an act of anger, i started the project from beggining, scratch, as a hybrid of everything i have, based on the ANCRE Jean Burdiot plan.
This is how La Belle came to be, made of MDF. A hybrid of balsa, MDF, and hard wood... Based on digital visualization, blueprint reading, laser cutting, and CNC engraving. Everything i have on board.
What will come of this? I don't know...
The hull, frame, and core are all correct according to the plan.







This is Attempt 3, the last one, there will be no more.
Is this project worth anything? Judge it yourselves.

Currently, i'm at the stage where Ieither continue or give up. I'm still struggling with low morale...
Model is great, but not worth the effort. I would have made anotherone from scratch by then without the flawed plan.
Core is ready, now it's time to fill it with balsa and the rest with wood.
What wouldn't you do for La Belle?...
Greetings friends... and maybe i will try to update this thread.

 

[JacquesCousteau]

Very cool project! That's disappointing hear about the errors in the plan drawings.

 

[kuba91nt]

Very cool project! That's disappointing hear about the errors in the plan drawings.

Thank you!
Center line of frames is shifted relative to center in reflection of frame from 0.8 to 1.4 degrees, which results in differences of up to 4-5 mm on the width of upper part of frame. The connected frames are still OK, however bow and stern of plan 5 and numbering 15-16-17 - this is a tragedy...
Great model, however the year of the plan 2000 plus almost 80yo Burdiot hand is doing its job, instead of building, i have been sitting on the plan for X hours...
For now, a better solution would be to simply make L'Amarante because is more complicated but simpler in construction and on a fresh modern plan...

g

 

[WojtasS]

Hi
I was wondering when you're gonna show something. I guess today is the day

1st question Is this MDF POB design finished or still in construction? If Yes I would add some elements.
Why MDF instead of plywood?

I get your dedication to La Belle, cutting off sth that we invested a lot of time is hard choice, but speaking from experience - working on deformed plans grows some levels of frustration, as we have to put much more work, so you have to calculate between iritation with plans+love fore La Belle and possible smooth work on other ship.

Designing a POB is not that hard so even couple of hours is nothing in comparision to tens of hours working in wood on model

 

[kuba91nt]

Hi
I was wondering when you're gonna show something. I guess today is the day

1st question Is this MDF POB design finished or still in construction? If Yes I would add some elements.
Why MDF instead of plywood?

I get your dedication to La Belle, cutting off sth that we invested a lot of time is hard choice, but speaking from experience - working on deformed plans grows some levels of frustration, as we have to put much more work, so you have to calculate between iritation with plans+love fore La Belle and possible smooth work on other ship.

Designing a POB is not that hard so even couple of hours is nothing in comparision to tens of hours working in wood on model

Wojtek. I decided that La Belle project would be a suitable basis for a transition between a kit and monograph, as well as a direct, brutal lesson in shipbuilding.
Project you see is currently unfinished. I lost all original 2D plan. I chose MDF because of possibility of correcting these errors. I can more easily fill bulkheads with hard wood and sand them internall with combination of balsa, plus second because of the technical feasibility.
CNC machine i have, is bought for learning, doesn't offer much flexibility.
This is an open-ended project. I'll simply use maple as the wood, and treat the whole thing as a learning experience, both in the prograaing and monograph reading. I'm not aiming to complete this model. New editions of other plans from ANCRE are much clearer. With knowledge i have now, i could more quickly create a plan for... say, ANCRE frigate La Mahonesa...
As they say, a toy is a toy, you have to play with it.

Wojtku, uznałem że projekt La belle będzie odpowiednią podstawą do przejścia pomiedzy zestawem a monografią, oraz bezposrednią brutalną lekcją szkutnictwa. Projekt który widzisz aktualnie jest nie ukończony, pierwotny plan utraciłem. Wybór padł na MDF ze względu na możliwość korekty tych błędów, jestem w stanie łatwiej wypełnić grodzie drewnem i szlifować je od wewnątrz w połaczeniu z balsą, po drugie również na ograniczoną możliwość techniczną, CNC które posiadam zakupiłem wyłącznie do nauki, nie posiada ono wiekszysz możliwości.
To jest otwarty projekt, jako drewno użyję po prostu klonu. Całość potraktuję jako naukę, zarówno do programów jak i korekty monografii. Nie nastawiam się na ukończenie tego modelu. Nowe wydania planów od ANCRE są znacznie bardziej przejrzyste, z posiadana aktualnie wiedzą, byłbym w stanie szybciej ułożyć plan chociażby pod fregatę La Mahonesa...
Jak to mówią jest zabawka to trzeba się bawić.
Pozdrawiam Cię serdecznie i dziękuję za zainteresowanie.

 

[WojtasS]

Zastanawia mnie dlaczego nie usztywniłeś łączeń pomiędzy strukturą kilu. Jak zamierzasz też dorobić jakiś element na którym powinna opierać się rufa. Wspominałeś mi coś o skorupie, więc domyślam się że pokładniki będziesz umiejscawiał jak już skończysz kadłub?

I'm wondering why you didn't stiffen the joints between the keel structure. How do you plan to add a supporting element for the stern? You mentioned something about the shell, so I assume you'll be placing the beams once you've finished the hull?

 

[kuba91nt]

Zastanawia mnie dlaczego nie usztywniłeś łączeń pomiędzy strukturą kilu. Jak zamierzasz też dorobić jakiś element na którym powinna opierać się rufa. Wspominałeś mi coś o skorupie, więc domyślam się że pokładniki będziesz umiejscawiał jak już skończysz kadłub?

I'm wondering why you didn't stiffen the joints between the keel structure. How do you plan to add a supporting element for the stern? You mentioned something about the shell, so I assume you'll be placing the beams once you've finished the hull?

View attachment 574604

Łączenia będą na stałe zespolone kawałkiem sklejki albo MDFu jak w zestawach. Rufa oraz cały bukszpryt, konstrukcyjnie opierają się na kilu, będą one zrobione zgodnie z planem z drewna, całą galeria rufowa będzie opierać się na tym wsporniku jak u B.Frolich.
La Belle ma bardzo wysoką stępkę. Rdzień jest tylko nośnikiem ramek, ma on 4mm, keel za to jest szerokości 5mm. Rdzeń więc będzie wtopiony w kil.
Jak połączę na stałe kil z rdzeniem będę kształtował korpus za pomocą balsy. Będzie to na zasadzie pół kopyta, z wypełnieniem grodzi o których kiedyś rozmawialiśmy, tak jak u Mirka na La Belle Poule. Innowacja.

Joints will be permanently connected with a piece of plywood or MDF, as in the kits. Stern and the entire bowsprit are structurally supported by the keel, see photo by B. Frolich.
La Belle has a very high keel. Core only supports the frames (measuring 4mm), while the keel is 5mm wide. core will be embedded in the keel.
Once the keel is permanently connected to core, i will shape the body using balsa wood, just like Mirek's did on La Belle Poule.
It will be a innovation design, with full filled bulkheads we talked about earlier.
Testing. "My way"...

 

[WojtasS]

Dobra, teraz rozumiem sytuację. Powodzenia w dalszej budowie

 

[-Waldemar-]

.​

What if the frames on one monograph fit, but the keel on the other doesn't? The entire project is flawed, 70 hours in the sand...

Come on! It's enough that there's no bit of a computer mouse or TV remote sticking out of the hull somewhere, and everyone should be happy... Sorry, I couldn't resist...

.​

 

[kuba91nt]

Dobra, teraz rozumiem sytuację. Powodzenia w dalszej budowie

Thanks. I think it can be done better. Maybe I'll take a lesson from you someday...

.​

Come on! It's enough that there's no bit of a computer mouse or TV remote sticking out of the hull somewhere, and everyone should be happy... Sorry, I couldn't resist...

.​

Thank you, Waldemar.
Time spent watching TV won't compare to time spent building a ship. And apparently, that's a hobby too, right?
I learned a lot, and it wasn't wasted. For now i know, i should first compate all these monographs, and next plan construction.
No trust one plan board...

 

[Mirek]

Witaj
Będę z przyjemnością oglądał twoją pracę Kuba życzę powodzenia i wytrwałości. Pozdrawiam Mirek

 

[kuba91nt]

Witaj
Będę z przyjemnością oglądał twoją pracę Kuba życzę powodzenia i wytrwałości. Pozdrawiam Mirek

Dziękuje Mirek. To jeden z kilku projektów. Belle Poule też jest na stole, być możne kiedyś...
Thank you Mirek. This is one of several projects. Belle Poule is also on the table, maybe someday...

 

[Roger Pellett]

I don’t have the Ancre monologue but I do have the Archeological report published by Texas A&M Press. La Belle’s recovered hull remains were conserved by them prior to being placed on display at the Texas State Museum. I wonder if this is more accurate.

Roger

 

[-Waldemar-]

.​

I wonder if this is more accurate.

Nope. Both conceptual attempts presented in the archaeological monograph by Texas A&M University Press are simply failed, and the first one in particular is a total misunderstanding. Please note that nowhere in the monograph are the lines reconstructed using methods chosen or conceived by archaeologists compared with the lines taken from the artefact (and certainly not in the first attempt). This is no accident, because these lines simply can not match, and it would be rather embarrassing for the authors to show such a large discrepancy. In other words, it is a fantasy based on wishful thinking, or rather on the authors' current state of knowledge.

La Belle 1684 was almost certainly designed as shown on the plan below (i.e. using parabolic curves for the frame contours), and this original plan (incidentally one of the oldest French ship's draught) is actually from the same year and the same shipyard where La Belle was built. Only the upperworks are different due to La Belle being a barque (type of cargo ship), and the plan below is for the fluit (Le Profond 1685, designed 1684).

​

.​

 

[kuba91nt]

I don’t have the Ancre monologue but I do have the Archeological report published by Texas A&M Press. La Belle’s recovered hull remains were conserved by them prior to being placed on display at the Texas State Museum. I wonder if this is more accurate.

Roger

.​

Nope. Both conceptual attempts presented in the archaeological monograph by Texas A&M University Press are simply failed, and the first one in particular is a total misunderstanding. Please note that nowhere in the monograph are the lines reconstructed using methods chosen or conceived by archaeologists compared with the lines taken from the artefact (and certainly not in the first attempt). This is no accident, because these lines simply can not match, and it would be rather embarrassing for the authors to show such a large discrepancy. In other words, it is a fantasy based on wishful thinking, or rather on the authors' current state of knowledge.

La Belle 1684 was almost certainly designed as shown on the plan below (i.e. using parabolic curves for the frame contours), and this original plan (incidentally one of the oldest French ship's draught) is actually from the same year and the same shipyard where La Belle was built. Only the upperworks are different due to La Belle being a barque (type of cargo ship), and the plan below is for the fluit (Le Profond 1685, designed 1684).

.​

Roger, museum Texas document is 916 pages long, with a perfect description of this ship, however, even there there are numerous inconsistencies.
ANCRE is a typical modeling database, much simpler, and frame coverage is minimal.
J. Budriot states at the outset that it is his own interpretation of this model, based on available Archaeological plans at project year.

 

[-Waldemar-]

.​

In order to make my criticism more constructive, below I present my own conceptual solution for La Belle 1684, using the example of the plan of the fluit Le Profond 1685. Please note that, unlike both proposals by the authors of the archaeological monograph by Texas A&M University Press, this solution is complete, i.e. a single coherent geometric structure covers the entire underwater part of the hull. Otherwise, it would be a bit like approximating the shape of an aeroplane with fragments of, say, a steam boiler; sometimes it might even fit.

It may be said that this is an intermediate approach between the classic Dutch design style and the later French style based on diagonals. What I mean is that in this particular case, the longitudinal design lines already have the form of diagonals, but they still fulfil the functions of the traditional Dutch ‘vlak’ and ‘boeisel’ lines. The contours of ordinary frames consist of two parabolas (for both rho = 0.5), separated by a ‘boeisel’ line, and a straight line of the ‘flat’.

For greater certainty, and in contrast to the archaeological monograph, I present my solution against the background of the original plan for comparison of the line contours, the original ones with those according to the proposed explanation.

​

.​

 

[Roger Pellett]

My interest in La Belle is in part due to another vessel of the same era and remarkably also involved with the same Explorer LaSalle.

In 1679 LaSalle built a vessel named Le Griffon, and described as a 48 ton Bark, for sailing on the Great Lakes of North America. She was built on the Niagara River just upstream of Niagara Falls and made one trip from the Eastern end of Lake Erie to the Northern end of Lake Michigan. She disappeared on the return trip loaded with a cargo of furs.

Her construction and voyage has been described by Fr Hennepin who sailed on board the ship. Although a Catholic priest, historians claim that parts of his book are fanciful. Le Griffon’s existence is however not in dispute.

Reconstructions of the vessel show her as a miniature galleon type craft with high fore and stern castles. As recent research indicates that the term “Bark” refers to a specific type of vessel and not just a rig per its later usage I believe that this interpretation of her design is wrong and reflects a vessel type of 100 years earlier.

Does research of La Belle tell us anything about Le Griffon?

Comments please.

Roger

 

[-Waldemar-]

.​

[...] Reconstructions of the vessel show her as a miniature galleon type craft with high fore and stern castles. As recent research indicates that the term “Bark” refers to a specific type of vessel and not just a rig per its later usage I believe that this interpretation of her design is wrong and reflects a vessel type of 100 years earlier.

Does research of La Belle tell us anything about Le Griffon?

Comments please.

Please take a look at my post #141 in the thread https://shipsofscale.com/sosforums/threads/samuel-1650-–-a-dutch-mid-17th-century-trader.13902/page-8, and despite the apparent complacency of archaeologists themselves, I still consider my harsh assessment on the archeological monograph by Texas A&M University Press valid.

Among other matters, first and foremost, and despite Boudriot's earlier warnings, the authors of this monograph still confused the merchant barque with the barque longue, the latter being more predatory and military in nature, which caused quite amusing chaos in the archaeological explanations regarding the nature and characteristics of the vessel.

Below are images of merchant barques, taken both from Dessins des différentes maniéres de vaisseaux que l'on voit dans les havres, ports et riviéres depuis Nantes jusqu'à Bayonne qui servent au commerce des sujets de Sa Majesté, anon., 1679, and also from Recüeil des vuës de tous les differens bastimens de la mer Mediterranée et de l'Océan, avec leurs noms et usages by Pierre Jacob Gueroult du Pas from 1710, i.e. practically from the same period as La Salle's American expedition. These reproductions are not included and commented on in the archaeological monograph, although they definitely should be.

As can be seen, Atlantic variants of cargo barques are very economical in terms of decoration, nonetheless, for the sake of completeness, I am also including Mediterranean variants, more decorated, even though they are less suitable in this particular context.


Atlantic cargo barques, from left to right of 19, 35 and 54 tons:

​

Atlantic cargo barque of ca. 45 tons (on the left):

Atlantic cargo barques (and gribanes), from 30 to 60 tons:




Mediterranean cargo barque-vaisseau, a hybrid vessel „having a hull of one, and a rig of another vessel”:




Mediterranean dual purpose (trading in partially dangerous waters and privateering) barque, sporting lateen rig:




Notorious , Atlantic barque longue of quasi-military duties („exploratory voyages, escort duties, war-time trading”), sporting sharp lines, which confused and somewhat led archaeologists astray:


​

.​

 

[-Waldemar-]

Kuba, sorry, nie masz nic przeciwko, że używamy Twojego wątku? Możemy to przenieść gdzie indziej...

 

[kuba91nt]

Kuba, sorry, nie masz nic przeciwko, że używamy Twojego wątku? Możemy to przenieść gdzie indziej...

Nie ma problemu Waldemar. Zawsze jestem pod wrażeniem Twojej wiedzy oraz źródła informacji, nie mam nic przeciwko.

I'm always impressed by your knowledge and your sources of information. I have no objections. You can post anything