Willem Barentsz by Kolderstok AD 1596

Pathfinder65 said:
Test fitting a very critical component of the WB. This little piece caused quite bit of discussion on @Heinrich WB build log. I hope I've got it right.

The Kolderstok/Whipstaff
View attachment 392524

:D
Click to expand...
Good morning Jan. It looks like you owned those fiddly canopy beams and whipstaff. It is so enjoyable seeing the WB progression. Cheers Grant
 
Well folks I managed to do it again. :rolleyes:


The Canopy is all filled in. To me it looks absolutely great, BUT there is a minor flaw.


fullsizeoutput_233.jpeg


The plan and my DIY spacing jig.


fullsizeoutput_234.jpeg

If you count the number of 2 X 3mm planks on the plan (9) versus the number of planks on my build (8) you can see I've managed to modify my WB slightly. Only you guys will know because I'm not telling anyone else.

I haven't got a clue of how it went wrong ROTF

Jan
 
Heinrich said:
Dear Frank, my friend,

If Jan allows me, I would like to answer your question if I may.

Please see the same phenomenon in my build.

View attachment 391598

And from the top.

View attachment 391599

The hull has two pronounced "cheeks" or hollows - these are areas that first bend inwards before bending outwards again. The first one that you will see at the bow (when I start planking that area) and the other one where you have indicated. Maybe that is what confused you.

On the ship of Barentsz these cheeks are still mild compared to those of the Geunieerde Provincien of 1603.

View attachment 391600

View attachment 391601
View attachment 391602

These cheeks or hollows were typical of ships of that era. Jan has built a very good hull if he has achieved those cheeks.
Click to expand...
Hi Henry, I really appreciate Your information but I am a little skeptical of the construction, sorry, Frank
 
Pathfinder65 said:
Well folks I managed to do it again. :rolleyes:


The Canopy is all filled in. To me it looks absolutely great, BUT there is a minor flaw.


View attachment 392815


The plan and my DIY spacing jig.


View attachment 392816

If you count the number of 2 X 3mm planks on the plan (9) versus the number of planks on my build (8) you can see I've managed to modify my WB slightly. Only you guys will know because I'm not telling anyone else.

I haven't got a clue of how it went wrong ROTF

Jan
Click to expand...
To me it looks great as well, Jan! ROTF Eight or nine - it doesn't really matter; the shipwright simply ran out of battens and had to improvise! ROTF
 
Heinrich said:
To me it looks great as well, Jan! ROTF Eight or nine - it doesn't really matter; the shipwright simply ran out of battens and had to improvise! ROTF
Click to expand...
So true, I did have to improvise. I ran out of 2 X 3mm pieces in the WB kit box, I have to "borrow" pieces from the Duyfken kit to keep going. I'm going to have get a resupply from Hans when I get back to the "Little Dove" build.

Jan
 
Pathfinder65 said:
Well folks I managed to do it again. :rolleyes:


The Canopy is all filled in. To me it looks absolutely great, BUT there is a minor flaw.


View attachment 392815


The plan and my DIY spacing jig.


View attachment 392816

If you count the number of 2 X 3mm planks on the plan (9) versus the number of planks on my build (8) you can see I've managed to modify my WB slightly. Only you guys will know because I'm not telling anyone else.

I haven't got a clue of how it went wrong ROTF

Jan
Click to expand...
Good morning Jan. It looks brilliant. I won’t tell anyone about your DIY configuration- promise ;)
Pathfinder65 said:
I haven't got a clue of how it went wrong ROTF
Click to expand...
maybe it is because “seven ate nine” ROTF.
Cheers Grant
 
GrantTyler said:
Good evening Jan. No idea but that last photo is a stunning reflection of your WB stern. Cheers Grant
Click to expand...
Hi Grant, I'm just a bit puzzled by this part. If I place the deck to fit into the canopy and trim it to fit between the bulwarks then the mast holes do not line up. One of those moments :oops::oops:

Jan
 
Hi Jan. You will have to look at my build log pictures of WB1. The deck definitely butts up to the rear of the canopy. I THINK, emphasized THINK, that the deck was slightly below the 2x3mm edge. (Remember, on WB2 I did not follow this configuration at all.) As far as the mast hole goes (I am sure you are referring to the mizzen), that stands at quite an angle, so the holes will not be directly above and below each other.
 
Heinrich said:
Hi Jan. You will have to look at my build log pictures of WB1. The deck definitely butts up to the rear of the canopy. I THINK, emphasized THINK, that the deck was slightly below the 2x3mm edge. (Remember, on WB2 I did not follow this configuration at all.) As far as the mast hole goes (I am sure you are referring to the mizzen), that stands at quite an angle, so the holes will not be directly above and below each other.
Click to expand...
Great I'll check out your build log in the morning. Thanks.

Jan
 
Just below. Piet's build.

JPG_1445_6224_bewerkt-1.jpg

My build

Final 2.jpg
Final 5.jpg
And now for the mizzen and why that frame had to be left in place.

微信图片_20220129163202.jpg
Note the extra 6mm walnut strip glued to the rear of the frame. That way when you file out the hole, there is enough meat left.

微信图片_20220129163142.jpg
Brilliant design @pietsan Piet! The filed-out portion acts as the perfect guide to establish the correct mast rake!

微信图片_20220129163211.jpg
 
Frank48 said:
Hi Henry, I really appreciate Your information but I am a little skeptical of the construction, sorry, Frank
Click to expand...
Funny enough @Frank48 Frank, I also found the same phenomenon here:

NSM.png
This is the hydrodynamic sailing report on the 1606 Nao Senhora des Martires - a Portuguese merchant ship. Note the hollow cheeks towards the stern - in exactly the same place as those on the WB.

Jan, my apologies for hijacking your log and posting more here than my own. I suppose it's the teacher in me coming to the fore.
 
Heinrich said:
Funny enough @Frank48 Frank, I also found the same phenomenon here:

View attachment 393260
This is the hydrodynamic sailing report on the 1606 Nao Senhora des Martires - a Portuguese merchant ship. Note the hollow cheeks towards the stern - in exactly the same place as those on the WB.

Jan, my apologies for hijacking your log and posting more here than my own. I suppose it's the teacher in me coming to the fore.
Click to expand...
Hi Henry, this profile is perfect but on the model it is not so, excuse me can you review the harmony between drawing and model? Thanks , Frank
 
Frank48 said:
Hi Henry, this profile is perfect but on the model it is not so, excuse me can you review the harmony between drawing and model? Thanks , Frank
Click to expand...
Good morning Frank,

Your vast knowledge on subjects related to shipbuilding is highly appreciated and no offense is meant, but apparently you have reasons to believe the lines of the Kolderstok model are not correct.
I think it would be beneficial to us all if you could share the reasons you have to doubt the hull's surface definition. It would also help considerably if you would be willing to share pictorial information, supporting your claims.

With utmost respect,

Johan
 
RDN1954 said:
Good morning Frank,

Your vast knowledge on subjects related to shipbuilding is highly appreciated and no offense is meant, but apparently you have reasons to believe the lines of the Kolderstok model are not correct.
I think it would be beneficial to us all if you could share the reasons you have to doubt the hull's surface definition. It would also help considerably if you would be willing to share pictorial information, supporting your claims.

With utmost respect,

Johan
Click to expand...
Good morning Johan , Thank you for the trust, my observation is that the line of the side is not harmonious compared to the drawing that posted Enrico, notice the two pictures you can see the difference, I hope I am wrong .Frank

4d0b0c9b-4e39-4271-87af-e1a28c4b9388.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top