[berth44]

Heaps of canyons on this babe!, great job Steve.......I'll build one when I'm dead and gone, give me something to do in heaven!!.........Dave

[bluedot0]

You'll be waiting years to do that then........Phil

[berth44]

So very true Phil, (I hope!!) but I think my AL Cutty Sark will do for a 'serious' model of a sailing ship for me...I'm not sure how my Bounty will favour either, but it's not really a 'serious' model, it's probably a lot worse that the Endeavour, but as no one else is building it, it'll be as the instructions say, it'll be a 'fun' build and that's it, not aiming for a 'museum' piece here, but there again, it'll be as good as I can make it with what I have!!........Dave

[bluedot0]

I'm sure you will do a fine job on the Bounty.......Phil

[berth44]

"Harr"..Aye to be sure Phil, that I'll do.."yarrr".........Dave

[bluedot0]

Yarr...cool yarrr......Phil

[berth44]

Nice to see we're back to being quite ..."Mad" Phil, to all the wannabee pirates out there, it does help on this 'ere forum, we like a laugh, it's not the most serious of forums on the planet,, but it does have some of the best model makers and their individual work is superb......."Harrrrrr"...........Dave

[SkyFire]

Avast me 'earties, do not be forgettin' speak like a pirate day be coming September 19th of t'is year.

[shipaholic]

Hi everyone, I haven't done anything on the model the past few weeks but I am getting ready for later by preparing a plan the same scale as the model (1:51) by enlarging the drawings in AOTS. This will help when making the masts and spars to get them to the correct dimensions.
If you enlarge the drawings in AOTS here's how to get the correct scale for the model:

1/16in = 1ft drawings enlarge 376%
1/8in = 1ft drawings enlarge 188%
1/4in = 1ft drawings reduce to 94%
3/16in = 1ft drawings enlarge by 125%

There is a mistake on page 88 of AOTS, it says the drawing is 1/8in = 1ft but it is really 3/16in = 1ft

Attachments:

[shipaholic]

With the original draught. Note that this drawing in the AOTS has the foremast with the wrong rake. It is raked back slightly but should be vertical.

I just got issue 53 yesterday and in it was a packet of brass rings with a note saying that they thought the rings supplied previously for the hatch covers may be a little large to be correct scale. Haha maybe the people at Eaglemoss have been reading my posts here (see my previous post about the ridiculous size of the rings)

Attachments:

[SkyFire]

Think that also came up on the FB group, which has several members of staff from the ANMM on it.

[shipaholic]

Really Anthony? I didn't see it mentioned on FB. Anyway the replacement rings are still too big!

[lthump]

Thanks Shipaholic, I would not have known that the fore mast was vertical except for your comment. I would have gone with the aots book and that would not be correctable later It is good to have a forum ;D

[SkyFire]

I could be wrong then, but I'm sure I saw something about them - goes off to have another look.

[shipaholic]

I'm being extra careful to mark out where the main wale will run before I start the top layer of planks. I measured the distances on the draught plans then pinned some planks in place to get the curvature. I believe the correct position and run of the main wale influences how good the ship will look, just like the bulwarks as previously mentioned. Its one of the things that annoys me about the AL Endeavour I built, the plans were wrong so the main wale doesn't curve upwards enough towards the stern. Looking at the instructions in issue 51 on how to lay the planks leads me suspect that the main wale will be too low at the stern if you do it how they say.

Attachments: