USRC Harriet Lane Model Shipways 1:96 scale circa 1863

A pic of the tracks with unfinished guns on my model for comparison. You can see on the Parrot rifle at the time I was thinking to pin the gun forward so that the back wheels of the carriage rested on the tracks.

Gun Tracks Inst BE.jpg

You'll also note that my tracks are nowhen near as intricate as the real thing. I used a circle cutter and tried to match the width of the carriage wheels with construction paper. In the end, I decided to be happy with a likeness, rather than a replication of the real thing.

As the say in Wien: Servus!

Blessings. Peace. Gratitude.
Chuck "The Gavel"
 
Based on the book, photos, and plans that show them, the earlier slides generally only had rollers at one end; the tracks went where there were no rollers and where the rollers need to slide sideways. There were skid-plates on the bottom of the slide where there weren't rollers.

In Civil War photos, you often see rollers at both end of the slide, and tracks for the rollers to ride on show up. When they do, they mostly appear on gun boats and field modifications than builder or ship-yard installations

con20240419a.jpg
 
JerryTodd said:
Based on the book, photos, and plans that show them, the earlier slides generally only had rollers at one end; the tracks went where there were no rollers and where the rollers need to slide sideways. There were skid-plates on the bottom of the slide where there weren't rollers.

In Civil War photos, you often see rollers at both end of the slide, and tracks for the rollers to ride on show up. When they do, they mostly appear on gun boats and field modifications than builder or ship-yard installations

View attachment 466462
Click to expand...
I was hoping you would add your expertise to the discussion! Thank you, Jerry. Love the guns in your photo! Well done!
 
What ho, shipmates!

Thank you for looking in and for the likes and loves. Love you too :cool:.

In post #355 I offered an anker (10 gallons or about 38 litres) of the best navy strength rum to anyone who could tell me what was wrong with how I rigged the IX inch Dahlgrens on the Marsilly carriages.


1724423484739.png

No one took me up on the offer and I'm not sure I could have delivered 10 gallons of any kind of rum ROTF

The mistake, if there is only one, is the absence of rings/locks for the breaching rope on the sides of the carriage. It happened because I was hyper focused on making sure the breaching rope rested exactly as shown in the Ordinance Manual. In the next 3 pics you'll see the reference and you can judge whether my work accurately reflects that detail. The problem with the Ordinance Manual diagram is that it doesn't show the rings/locks for the breaching rope on the carriage. I forgot to cross check the Manual against pictures:eek:. By the time I realized the error, everything was CA'd down. After more than a moment of funk I decided to accept my mistake and get on with my life and the build. The final photo shows the IX inch Dahlgren as rigged during the Civil War.

Marsilly Rigging Reference.jpg
Marsilly Rigging 1.jpgMarsilly Rigging 2.jpg
Marsilly Rigging Reference Pic.jpeg
 
Yeah. Like the first time you take it to a show, an expert in Civil War Naval ordinance is going to come past do a double take and declare " Oh! My God! You forgot the rings/ locks for the breaching ropes on the nine-inch Dahlgrens!!!":eek:.
As they say: "Declare victory and move on..." :rolleyes:
She's looking GORGEOUS, by the way... Thumbsup
 
Last edited:
Peter Gutterman said:
Yeah. Like the first time you take it to a show an expert in Civil War Naval ordinance is going to come past do a double take and declare " Oh! My God! You forgot the rings/ locks for the breaching ropes on the nine-inch Dahlgrens!!!":eek:.
As they say: "Declare victory and move on..." :rolleyes:
She's looking GORGEOUS, by the way... Thumbsup
Click to expand...
ROTF Pete, you're the best! I was rereading part of our conversation with Barry where you said exactly that to him. Made me laugh and I felt better.

Thank you!

Blessings.
 
Very nice work on an interesting subject!

For future builders wanting to “bash” or to otherwise super detail this kit there are several resources that they might want to refer to in addition to the kit plans:

First, William H. Web’s portfolio of ship plans. This was reprinted in total about 1990 in the Nautical Research Journal. Webb built what appears to be virtually a duplicate vessel for the Russian Govt.

There was an article also in the Journal analyzing Harriett Lane’s Armament.

Another Journal article discussed a similar vessel USCG Saginaw.

Use the Guild’s on line index to find the articles, then order downloads from the NRG office.

Roger
 
Roger Pellett said:
Very nice work on an interesting subject!

For future builders wanting to “bash” or to otherwise super detail this kit there are several resources that they might want to refer to in addition to the kit plans:

First, William H. Web’s portfolio of ship plans. This was reprinted in total about 1990 in the Nautical Research Journal. Webb built what appears to be virtually a duplicate vessel for the Russian Govt.

There was an article also in the Journal analyzing Harriett Lane’s Armament.

Another Journal article discussed a similar vessel USCG Saginaw.

Use the Guild’s on line index to find the articles, then order downloads from the NRG office.

Roger
Click to expand...
Dear Roger, thank you for the compliment and the guidance on sources! At this point I hope I can take advantage of these resources. I am currently in the planning stages for her rigging. With any luck I will be able to take advantage of these resources in that part of the project.

Blessings.
Chuck
 
The Gavel said:
Again, thank you all for the encouragement! It was harder than I thought getting back to work on my Harriet Lane after the long absence.

Blessings!

Chuck
Click to expand...
Been there! Done that! I have made no progress on my Phantom since I retired from the USN in 1996. I keep telling myself that I will complete the kit but I keep working on far more interesting ships . . .

Bill
 
WilliamM said:
Been there! Done that! I have made no progress on my Phantom since I retired from the USN in 1996. I keep telling myself that I will complete the kit but I keep working on far more interesting ships . . .

Bill
Click to expand...
I started Constellation in February of 1999, your 1996 makes me feel a little better now, though, I have actually managed to sail her, unfinished, in the mean time.;)

con20161026fl.jpg
 
Good day, shipmates!

In post #369 @Roger Pellett , Roger, pointed me to sources for the original W. H. Webb plans. I tried the Nautical Research Guild site and got frustrated. Then, it dawned on me to just google "William H Webb portfolio of ship plans". Amazing how long it took me to think of that, btw.

The search turned up the Webb portfolio! https://archive.org/details/WEBB-BodyPlanCrossSectionsPlanHalfBreadthPlan

Roger was right about Webb building an identical ship for the Russian government! Webb built that ship, the America, in 1855. Harriet Lane followed two years later in 1857. How I wish I had these plans when I opened the box on my model! I'm heading to FedEx to see if I can get the plans enlarged to match the kit plans. I won't go into any detail this morning. I just want to tell Roger thank you and show the plans. So, Thank you, Roger! And now America and Harriet Lane!

:eek::mad::mad::mad:
For some reason the TIFF files won't appear when I try to attach files. So - at some point I'll get the plans on here. In the meantime here are the links:






Blessings.
Chuck
 
Now I see that the conversion lost a lot of detail. Sorry! In any event, the links get you to the full detail. I'll see what I can do to create useful images of the specific differences between the actual ship and the kit that jumped out at me so far. But even with the sketchy jpegs you can see that Webb designed her to carry two boats which I proposed before even knowing (See posts #31 and 32) (Good job, Chuck!) and the boats are different which Paul @dockattner suggested (See post # 37) (Good job, Paul!). The design did not use chains to support the paddlewheel assembly. The wheel was not dead aft over the rudder.
 
Never fails. All the real skinny comes to the surface after I've finished a model, or so far into the midst that I need to take a wrecking ball to what I've accomplished just to catch up. See: Mamoli Flying Cloud kit bash log. Emphasis on the bash... :rolleyes:
 
Peter Gutterman said:
Never fails. All the real skinny comes to the surface after I've finished a model, or so far into the midst that I need to take a wrecking ball to what I've accomplished just to catch up. See: Mamoli Flying Cloud kit bash log. Emphasis on the bash... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Amen, brother! I'm just glad that I didn't attach the ships wheel in exactly the WRONG location. As it stands, I have to fill a hole I made, sand and refinish the deck. Same thing for the location of the king posts and the chain trusses to support the weight of the paddle wheel assemblies. The hole I made in the deck for the king posts may need to be filled etc. But at least the posts aren't glued in and I I haven't attached the chain trusses. I'm very glad to have the America sail and spar plan. Which reminds me: Pete you did a wonderful job adding the running rigging for the head sails on your Harriet Lane! Since Harriet Lane is a copy of America, I see no reason not to follow Webb's sail and spar plan for America which shows a gaff on the foremast that is not in the spar plan for the kit. Why leave that out?

I managed to get to FedEx this sultry mid-Missouri afternoon and got the tif files printed. I'll take pictures (jpeg) of the parts of the plans that I have the option to follow and post them. It's incredible that I never thought to Google "Harriet Lane plans." It probably helped, thank you again Roger, to have the William H Webb portfolio part, but really!!! Once I get done with her, I'll probably post a thread dedicated to advising others about building this particular model including sharing links photos, etc. I'm also thinking to build her again - that is after I build the Royal Caroline. Perhaps I just need to write a detailed review and include our friends at @Model Shipways . Jerry Todd, who is worth his weight in gold, should be hired to produce accurate scale guns. Harriet Lane is a good kit that could be a great kit. I'm enjoying the build in part because of the kit, but in large part because of my shipmates!

Thank you all for your patience! If any of you notice that I'm talking hogwash I know you'll point it out in a gentlemanly way :)

Blessings.
Chuck
 
One thing I learned about Flying Cloud is that she had a Spencer gaff and sail on her main. None of the plans I have show it. Not a difficult addition. requiring about eight more belaying pins four port and four starboard.
 
The Gavel said:
You always find the silver lining, Pete!
Click to expand...
Chuck,

This is an amazing build for several reasons:

- Your skill and attention to detail have made this a work of art

- The research you have done on the HL makes this, along with your building skills, true "museum-quality"

- The additions and revisions you have made to the kit have made me rethink the HL kit. I've seen in on ModelExpo for years and, while I've always liked the real HL a lot (probably the most heavily armed Coast Guard ship per ton in history), the catalog photos reveal such an out of the box lack of detail and out of scale parts that it always left me thinking "Meh, no thanks" but you have shown how to change a mediocre kit into a first-class model.

Keep up the awesome work!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top