|
**VIEW THREAD HERE** |
Think about that - so in real life, if you were standing at the base of the stern-post, the ship would rise about 64’ in the air (roughly 43’ from the aft waterline) to the tafferal! Incredible.
Nice back yard! I don’t see how you have the time to keep it up. I don’t suppose the Admiral would allow sanding inside. Thanks for sharing this build.As I mentioned a moment ago, I was in a weird place where I was not going to post a build report. The reasons are complicated – but basically, I was finding myself annoyed by several individuals (a small group?) on the forum. Self-righteousness is always unattractive in my book, so I found the forum draining rather than life-giving.
On the other hand – there are some truly remarkable fellow modelers on the forum, so I’ll do my best to lean into those friends rather than allowing the others to take the joy out of my participation.
All this to say that the model has been on my workbench for a while now and I have not been diligent in taking pictures. The smattering that I have will have to suffice.
The Ancre monograph is epic in its breadth. But for those familiar with it you will understand it when I say that there are some difficulties. Perhaps the single most vexing is that Mr. Lemineur argues that the frames were not perpendicular to the keel – they tip ‘forward’ about 1.2 or 1.3 degrees. As you might expect, that makes the drawings uncharacteristically difficult to interpret.
At first I thought to simply ignore this feature – but eventually I decided that would be unwise. The construction solution is rather simple – but every time I look at a drawing it gives me a headache.
The one significant departure that I am taking (sorry @NMBROOK) is the way the frame pairs are joined. The Saint Philippe has morticed frames. Here are a few images from Nigel's build showing what I am talking about:
View attachment 525686
View attachment 525687
The purpose of these mortices was to lessen the tendency of the ship to hog (the bow and stern are less buoyant by volume, so they sag into the water).
I have chosen to ignore this distinctive feature of the SP. You might argue that omitting the mortices is tantamount to no longer building Le Saint Philippe. But I am fully planking the exterior so the mortices would not even be visible there. The interior of the framing WILL be visible – but is the added complication of morticed frame pairs justified for the little bit it would be visible on the inside of the hull? I have decided it would not be. My apologies to the historical purists.
In true scratch building form, I began with rough cut lumber. This is European pearwood purchased at great cost:
View attachment 525690
After some head-scratching I figured out how to use some of my shop tools to turn these into dimensional billets:
View attachment 525689
I chose to begin with the frames. For this stern section model I decided to build 15 frame pairs (30 single frames) in the typical manner. You know how it goes:
View attachment 525698
View attachment 525699
View attachment 525700
View attachment 525701
View attachment 525702
Here is the size of an SP frame compared to the Kingfisher (both are 1:48 scale):
View attachment 525705
View attachment 525706
The obligatory picture of a stack of rough frames:
View attachment 525703
View attachment 525704
For the Kingfisher I installed these frames in a build jig and commenced with the sanding/shaping. Here I chose to add some provisional bevels based on the frame drawings. I left some extra on the frames, but I won’t know if I left enough until it comes time for the final shaping...
The Kattner sanding center:
View attachment 525707
View attachment 525708
My thanks for your interest!
Let's try to keep this under 200 pagesLooks to be a wonderful project, Paul. Methinks it may exceed the 200+ pages on your Kingfisher. An advantage for me here is that I won't be punishing myself for not getting a Kingfisher kit when they were available. I'm sure your skills will translate perfectly to this scratch build, and look forward to spending a lot of time here. Hope you don't mind that I brought a recliner, instead of using one of Jim's chairs, but it's much easier on my back.
...
Thanks for following along, Ken!
Much appreciated, Peter. Let's see how it turns out.What Jim said.
Comparing the ship's frame in the same scale as the Kingfisher demonstrates what an enormous ship she was!and therefore what an enormous model she'd be if complete! looks like an enormous task at any rate. Kudos to you. I feel the same way about my own skills compared to yours as you do comparing yours to the masters you mention, so I guess it's all relative. At any rate I look forward to this next adventure, the learning experience, and diversion it provides.
Rock on, dude!
Yer Humble and Obedient Servant, Pete G.
No sanding inside! At least not powered sanding. As for the landscaping upkeep...I've got a guy...
Hi Marc, FYI - your SR model is why I didn't take these plans and try to build a Soleil Royal (which has an even more ornate stern section). The experts would have been all over me
. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I will limit my comments to likes, then. (With some obvious exceptions.)Let's try to keep this under 200 pages
Just send a thumb's up instead of a reply, that helpsLet's try to keep this under 200 pages
.
You are most welcome, Shota.
Happy to have you join all the other friends! The crowd will thin once everyone discovers I'm forever in 'what does that part of the drawing mean?' mode.
Yes, I am all too familiar with that mode. I'm relying on Jean Boudriot's Monograph from ANCRE for all of my ship's dimensions and its very challenging since I have to physically measure the plans then translate onto the model it's certainly not scratch building though. Again, congratulations on your choice of a pure scratch build, you are sailing among the best builders around which in my opinion is where you belong.
The angled keel riser is a brilliant thought! And hello to your partner.Today's posting will bring this build report up to the current day...
The keel of the SP was of four segments joined in series via hooked scarf joints. Even though I am only building the stern section it happens that one of these hooked scarf joints fell within the scope of my work (I'm building a somewhat longer stern section than more typical examples).
I've made hooked scarfs by hand in the past - but have seen others fabricate them using a mill and a tilting table. I gave that a go...
While I was at it, I also milled a normal scarf into the knee of the sternpost...
View attachment 526429
View attachment 526430
View attachment 526431
An unexpected first-time success!
View attachment 526432
If you look carefully, you can see that I have also completed some preliminary shaping/tapering of the aft deadwood (and also created the rabbet at the keel and sternpost). The Saint Philippe has a (mostly) square tuck.
It is interesting to me that the monograph refers to the deadwood (edit - should have said rising wood) as a false keel. I'm not sure if this is a translation issue (my version of the monograph was translated from French) or if there was a different nomenclature in use at that time in history. I also learned that it was a known practice (late 17th century) to add a full keel (not a false keel) to the underside of an existing keel to mitigate hogging.
Anyway, here is the other side of the assembly with some of the details visible:
View attachment 526433
View attachment 526434
View attachment 526435
View attachment 526436
Where the rabbet is straight, I used my little mill. Where the rabbet is curved, I used a v-gouge (very carefully as not to ruin a piece with much already invested in it).
Finally (on the SP), the frames seat into notches along the rising wood. These were cut in with a mill - though there are two that will need to be done by hand because I can't get the mill where it needs to go because the sternpost is in my way).
The following images also show my solution to the fact that the frames are not perpendicular to the keel (they tip forward 1.2 degrees). Under the keel you will notice a 1.2 degree ramp... Now I can erect the frames perpendicular to the build-board and when I remove the ramp I'll have a forward tip to the frames.
View attachment 526437
View attachment 526438
Thanks for visiting!
P.S. My oldest grandson and I just finished his first ship model. Here we are showing off our work
View attachment 526428
Thank you, Mark. Credit, however, goes to some forum friends...I know a good idea when I hear it
.
. There are a number of things I COULD do next, but no one to tell me what I SHOULD do next. Clearly, certain things need to happen before anything is glued and before frames can be faired - but my lack of experience is not easily ignored. leaning against my work bench about two months ago.
Oh, I know exactly who always knows what to do next... but are you sure you want his help? You might end up needing a jeweler's lathe (actually, I want one myself), a microscope, and a PhD in shipworm psychology by the time he's done advising.I had the most marvelous epiphany this weekend: a scratch build does not come with instructions
