- Joined
- Feb 18, 2019
- Messages
- 685
- Points
- 353
Not sure now, and today is a different day, I am as confused as you were yesterday.
BUT you are right the scale is around 1:68. My mistake.
G.
Last edited:
Xebec Le Requin real size?
- Thread starter Bluestone28
- Start date
- Watchers 6
BUT you are right the scale is around 1:68. My mistake.
G.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2021
- Messages
- 24
- Points
- 28
btw ok i take 44m value and 1:68 as my reference, thanks a lot again!
Like that i could add (at the end 'cause there are still some work before that!) crew to bring some life to this small nice ship.
and it's cool as we are near the 1:72 scale used a lot on the miniatures world!
And it will be another research to find right uniforms, and, as we are in mediterranean area, the sailors had surely a bit tanned skin!
apart that a 18e sailors are maybe all the same, apart the officers of course!
after cleaning work, some repair, a hard work on rigging (rigging is particulary tired and threads are very fragile)
(that will be a big challenge for me!)
next, i will add missing cannons (+pierriers) and oars, repaint them, and surelly redo the bas-reliefs and some missing parts like Lions and the bow figure...)
i thing i will let the sails like that (maybe a careful cleaning, as they are very fragiles too)
and touch maybe nothings else (no other repaint apart on bas-reliefs).
what do you think of that program?
some idea about cleaning sails?
thx again,
Eric
Like that i could add (at the end 'cause there are still some work before that!) crew to bring some life to this small nice ship.
and it's cool as we are near the 1:72 scale used a lot on the miniatures world!
And it will be another research to find right uniforms, and, as we are in mediterranean area, the sailors had surely a bit tanned skin!
apart that a 18e sailors are maybe all the same, apart the officers of course!
after cleaning work, some repair, a hard work on rigging (rigging is particulary tired and threads are very fragile)
(that will be a big challenge for me!)
next, i will add missing cannons (+pierriers) and oars, repaint them, and surelly redo the bas-reliefs and some missing parts like Lions and the bow figure...)
i thing i will let the sails like that (maybe a careful cleaning, as they are very fragiles too)
and touch maybe nothings else (no other repaint apart on bas-reliefs).
what do you think of that program?
some idea about cleaning sails?
thx again,
Eric
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2021
- Messages
- 24
- Points
- 28
ok so i mesured the distance between perpendiculars and it seem it's about 42cm... if the real ship size is about 37m between perpendiculars,
it means that the scale is 1:88 right? (ghosh! this scale story! )
thanks,
Eric
it means that the scale is 1:88 right? (ghosh! this scale story! )
thanks,
Eric
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2019
- Messages
- 685
- Points
- 353
Try working with the width.
G
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2021
- Messages
- 24
- Points
- 28
yes thank, the real ship width is about 8.4719m right?
my model width max is about 13 cm... so 1:65? so there is something wrong somewhere!
my model width max is about 13 cm... so 1:65? so there is something wrong somewhere!
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2019
- Messages
- 685
- Points
- 353
According to the book from the monograph of Le Requin (ANCRE), which includes part of the plans supposedly reproduced at 1:120 scale.
- The overall length of the hull, from one end to the other, including the railing at the stern but excluding any part of the rigging, is 37 cm. So if you convert that to full scale that would give you: 37 cm x 120 = 4440 cm (44.4 m). But you have to keep in mind that the drawing is shown as a double page in the book: I cannot hold the double page absolutely flat so this dimension may be slightly off, but it should give you an idea.
- The width of the hull is 7.3 cm. Converted to full scale: 7.3 cm x 120 = 876 cm (8.76 m)
From previous posts, the scale of your model came to 1:68 with a length of 65 cm, a width of about 13 cm.
Now if you convert the full size measurements as calculated above to 1:68 scale, here are the resulting dimensions:
- Length 44.4 m : 68 = 0.652(9411765) m or 65.3 cm
- Width 8.76 m : 68 = 0.128(8235294) m or 12.9 cm
Anyways, You may draw your own conclusion.
G
Hopefully I did not screw up this time....
- The overall length of the hull, from one end to the other, including the railing at the stern but excluding any part of the rigging, is 37 cm. So if you convert that to full scale that would give you: 37 cm x 120 = 4440 cm (44.4 m). But you have to keep in mind that the drawing is shown as a double page in the book: I cannot hold the double page absolutely flat so this dimension may be slightly off, but it should give you an idea.
- The width of the hull is 7.3 cm. Converted to full scale: 7.3 cm x 120 = 876 cm (8.76 m)
From previous posts, the scale of your model came to 1:68 with a length of 65 cm, a width of about 13 cm.
Now if you convert the full size measurements as calculated above to 1:68 scale, here are the resulting dimensions:
- Length 44.4 m : 68 = 0.652(9411765) m or 65.3 cm
- Width 8.76 m : 68 = 0.128(8235294) m or 12.9 cm
Anyways, You may draw your own conclusion.
G
Hopefully I did not screw up this time....
Last edited:
We have a planset review of the Jean Boudriot monograph Gilles just mentioned.
Maybe you want to take a look? Here you can see also the drawings including cross sections and every time for converting a person shown having a yard stick in hand
Maybe you want to take a look? Here you can see also the drawings including cross sections and every time for converting a person shown having a yard stick in hand
Planset review - LE REQUIN - Xebec - 1750" - scale 1:48 - by Jean Boudriot & Hubert Berti
Planset Review: LE REQUIN - Xebec - 1750" - scale 1:48 by Jean Boudriot & Hubert Berti translation into english by David H. Roberts booklet available in french, english or italian language available at ancre: https://ancre.fr/en/monograph/18-monographie-du-requin-chebec-1750-.html...
shipsofscale.com
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2021
- Messages
- 24
- Points
- 28
Hi Gilles, thanks a lot for your time...
yes at 1:68 it seem good,
btw i still don't understand why if we took the "between perpendicular" size (37m in real)
and my model mesurement between perpendicular, 42 cm, we obtain 1:88 and not 1:68....
yes at 1:68 it seem good,
btw i still don't understand why if we took the "between perpendicular" size (37m in real)
and my model mesurement between perpendicular, 42 cm, we obtain 1:88 and not 1:68....
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2019
- Messages
- 685
- Points
- 353
Your measurement is likely to be wrong because (looking at the photo of your model) if the dimension of the overall hull (excluding any rigging component) is 65 cm, 42 cm is too small. The parts of the model in front of the stem and back of the sternpost cannot possibly be 23 cm.
G
G
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2021
- Messages
- 24
- Points
- 28
i'll post another picture of my model with mesurment on it, to be sure we all talk about the same thing!
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2019
- Messages
- 685
- Points
- 353
To figure out the scale of the model, you need at least one measurement from the full size dimension, but you also need to know what these measurements are, especially know where to take them on the model.
I am going with the data from the monograph where basic full size measurements are listed. and they are:
(dimension in French feet and Inches - 1 foot = 324.8 mm or 32.48 cm, 1 inch = 27.1 mm or 2.71 cm)
- Length114 feet 2 inches = 3702.72 cm + 5.42 cm = 3708.14 cm or 37.08 m
- Breadth = 25 feet 2 inches = 812 cm + 5.42 cm = 817.42 cm or 8.1742 m
Because the length is the length between perpendicular and as such it may be difficult to figure out on the built model, you can better estimate the width, although here again you need to know that this measurement is taken excluding the outside planking and that it should basically be taken at deck level, so you need to exclude whatever is above the deck as it should be taken at the beam level.
These full size measurements were given earlier including what they represent: post # 9 (https://shipsofscale.com/sosforums/threads/xebec-le-requin-real-size.8671/#post-206484)
As mention earlier, I do have the English version of the monograph (but not the plans associated with it) and I can look at some of the plans reproduced in it at the scale of 1:120 (supposedly) . But here again I cannot be certain of accuracy as the English version is supposed to be printed slightly smaller that the original French version: so I can only estimate and that is why I went right to the full size measurement (the source) listed in it.
G.
I am going with the data from the monograph where basic full size measurements are listed. and they are:
(dimension in French feet and Inches - 1 foot = 324.8 mm or 32.48 cm, 1 inch = 27.1 mm or 2.71 cm)
- Length114 feet 2 inches = 3702.72 cm + 5.42 cm = 3708.14 cm or 37.08 m
- Breadth = 25 feet 2 inches = 812 cm + 5.42 cm = 817.42 cm or 8.1742 m
Because the length is the length between perpendicular and as such it may be difficult to figure out on the built model, you can better estimate the width, although here again you need to know that this measurement is taken excluding the outside planking and that it should basically be taken at deck level, so you need to exclude whatever is above the deck as it should be taken at the beam level.
These full size measurements were given earlier including what they represent: post # 9 (https://shipsofscale.com/sosforums/threads/xebec-le-requin-real-size.8671/#post-206484)
As mention earlier, I do have the English version of the monograph (but not the plans associated with it) and I can look at some of the plans reproduced in it at the scale of 1:120 (supposedly) . But here again I cannot be certain of accuracy as the English version is supposed to be printed slightly smaller that the original French version: so I can only estimate and that is why I went right to the full size measurement (the source) listed in it.
G.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2019
- Messages
- 685
- Points
- 353
Furthermore....
If you want to restore the model you have, add details, etc.... I do go back to my original suggestion... you can purchase one of the two options I listed earlier, the plan from the AAMM or the monograph from ANCRE. It will be a good investment and further you knowledge in this vessel.
The reason is that the model seems like a decently accurate piece of work and if you want to add to it, the parts to be added or restored should match the rest of the model. Looks like you need to add at least parts of the rigging at the front, including a new jib-boom.
And in the end, when someone builds a model for display, it is a good idea to include some indication of the scale somewhere. You just never know where your model will end up in the future.
G
If you want to restore the model you have, add details, etc.... I do go back to my original suggestion... you can purchase one of the two options I listed earlier, the plan from the AAMM or the monograph from ANCRE. It will be a good investment and further you knowledge in this vessel.
The reason is that the model seems like a decently accurate piece of work and if you want to add to it, the parts to be added or restored should match the rest of the model. Looks like you need to add at least parts of the rigging at the front, including a new jib-boom.
And in the end, when someone builds a model for display, it is a good idea to include some indication of the scale somewhere. You just never know where your model will end up in the future.
G
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2021
- Messages
- 24
- Points
- 28
ok great! thanks a lot,
so this is a side view of my model :
i added the total length (65cm) and the between perpendiculars length (42cm)
and yes you right, i mesure with your indications, the width and i obtain about 10.5cm (so without anything above the deck)
- so for the between perpendicular Length we got more and less 1:88 scale (37.08 / 0.42)
- and for width we got 1:78 scale (8.1742 / 0.105)
that seem to be quite close... is still don't know the exact scale but maybe it's between 1:88 and 1:78...
so this is a side view of my model :
i added the total length (65cm) and the between perpendiculars length (42cm)
and yes you right, i mesure with your indications, the width and i obtain about 10.5cm (so without anything above the deck)
- so for the between perpendicular Length we got more and less 1:88 scale (37.08 / 0.42)
- and for width we got 1:78 scale (8.1742 / 0.105)
that seem to be quite close... is still don't know the exact scale but maybe it's between 1:88 and 1:78...
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2021
- Messages
- 24
- Points
- 28
yes, i saw the ANCRE monograph, but it's a big amount of money for this type of project...
btw thanks all for your advices, i will publish things regulary to show how it advances.
btw thanks all for your advices, i will publish things regulary to show how it advances.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2021
- Messages
- 24
- Points
- 28
good news i found the Ancre monograph with a good price!
According to the Ancre monograph, the Requin had a design length of 115 pieds du roi, but her measured length as built was reported at 114 pieds 2 pouces; a little maths indicates that this corresponds to 133 pies de Burgos by Spanish measure - perhaps the difference is because the second measure is "inside the wood", as Gilles Korent said above, but I suspect it's principally a reflection of the fact that her Spanish builders worked in Spanish feet. Regardless, the Requin's length works out at about 122' by English measure.
Similarly, her design beam was 26 pieds du roi, her measured beam 25 pieds 2 pouces, or 29¼ pies de Burgos - so a hull width of approximately 27 feet. Her hold depth's even more confusing - the designed depth was 8 pieds, the measured depth was 8 pieds 8 pouces, but I think the reconstruction uses the lines taken off her sister-ship Indescret, which had a shallower hold just 7 pieds 10 pouces deep. The difference here is quite pronounced, ranging from 7'6" to 9'3"...
Maybe that's some interest to someone, and if I'm wrong about anything, feel welcome to say so!!
Similarly, her design beam was 26 pieds du roi, her measured beam 25 pieds 2 pouces, or 29¼ pies de Burgos - so a hull width of approximately 27 feet. Her hold depth's even more confusing - the designed depth was 8 pieds, the measured depth was 8 pieds 8 pouces, but I think the reconstruction uses the lines taken off her sister-ship Indescret, which had a shallower hold just 7 pieds 10 pouces deep. The difference here is quite pronounced, ranging from 7'6" to 9'3"...
Maybe that's some interest to someone, and if I'm wrong about anything, feel welcome to say so!!
Yes, that's precisely what Ancre's text about Le Requin is using - apologies if I didn't make that clear.
The problem is that official documents disagree slightly - wooden ships almost always have a discrepancy of a few inches between the design size and the actual size as built, and in the case of Requin, parts of the reconstruction follow her sister ship, which was slightly different again, but for which there are more detailed records...