|
Post by tromp on May 14, 2019 16:12:14 GMT
Not sure if this has been seen here yet, so check this out
I don't speak Swedish but I loved every minute of it.
Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on May 13, 2019 15:56:32 GMT
Hi all, as from today I too am moderator of this forum and will assist Clayton and Matti in sorting things out here. I have deleted some of the unwanted posts and will drop in on a daily Basis in the future to kick-out any unwanted guests. Feel free to report posts that might be inappriopriate. And now bck to the new Vasa kit! Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on May 4, 2019 19:08:57 GMT
Is there some way to filter out the vape ads and other crap which people are posting into this forum? It would be nice if someone did Fred . Is there any way of contacting admin? Martyn I already have. I too, think it's very annoying. Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on May 1, 2019 18:47:08 GMT
Thanks for that Fred. Another thing I noticed is that the foremost pair of foremast and mainmast shrouds were protected by leather sleeves, most likely against damage from the sails rubbing against them.
Here's a close-up. You can even see the seams:
On the foremast shrouds these sleeves spanned roughly the space between seven ratlines which on the model was about 14cm which equates to 3m in full-size. The mainmast lower shrouds had these sleeves too, apparently none of the upper mast shrouds had them.
I tried this out on my model, though my sewing isn't high class, this was only an experiment.
Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on Mar 11, 2019 18:55:58 GMT
Hi all,
We have here an image of the Hohenzollernmodell's main-mast fighting-top photographed from the rear looking forward. My descriptions are in German, "Want" is the German word for shroud, "Seitentakel" is the hanger of the winding tackles. We have nine shrouds on each side. Starting on the port-side shrouds 1 and 2 are a pair; starboard-side 1 and 2 also: Port-side 3 and 4 are a pair and starboard 3 and 4 also etc,. etc. Shrouds 9 port and stb are also one pair, these are the last to be rigged. In this Image one can see that shrouds 9 are to topmost and also the rearmost shrouds. Directly underneath that are shrouds 7 and 8 on the starboard side. If this is the case then the first shrouds to be rigged must have been port-side 1 and 2. However, in all books I have that deal with 17th century rigging, nomatter which Nation, is said that the first to be installed were on the starboard side.
Here's a close-up which might help identify details:
Is it known in which order the shrouds of Vasa were rigged? Looking at the two Images it is almost certain to me, that they started rigging the shrouds on the port-side first. If the last pair to be rigged were 7 and 8 before 9 on the starboard side then it only makes sense that the first to be rigged were 1 and 2 port-side. Any thoughts are welcome.
Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on Feb 24, 2019 19:48:56 GMT
Hi Jormae, that looks really good! I would be tempted to paint the model in its true colors, but before you mess everything up - leave it as it is. You could try oiling a scrap piece of wood and then painting over it, just to see how the paint reacts to the oiled surface and then decide how to proceed further.
Regards Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on Feb 3, 2019 13:01:00 GMT
Hi Martyn,
could it be you mean the messenger ports? These were on both sides. If you do a Google-search for Vasa plans you'll come across a starboard side view which will show where it was located on this side. The position might have been slightly offset on the port-side, perhaps Fred can tell us more.
BTW Keep up the good work, you're doing a great Job!
Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on Jan 8, 2019 20:31:21 GMT
Hi mi5, if you really want to replicate each and every plank, then your in for quite some task! Every plank was different. The port-side was not a perfect mirror image of the starboard-side. On site material was used that was available. They never would have shortened a plank to make it match its opposite plank on the other side. The material was far too expensive for that. Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on Nov 25, 2018 18:16:15 GMT
I don't know if this has been posted here before, but I came across these in the web:
The set is available on Ebay:
www.ebay.com/itm/253414589012
However, on Taobao (Chinese Amazon) it is available for about one third of the Ebay Price. You would need to find an Agent to deal with the transaction though.
It is a very good set, as far as I can tell. This in combination with a scratch-built 1:50th scale hull sure sounds tempting to me.
Regards Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on Nov 8, 2018 18:00:52 GMT
To get the Frame pieces to fit tightly against the inside of the hull planking a slight amount of beveling is necessary as the curvature of the hull is different at any given level. But not to an extent that some People want to see. The picture above tells me that "B" would be correct, wheras "A" is the largely accepted version. Even for a Shell-first built ship. Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on Nov 7, 2018 18:43:06 GMT
Thanks for that Fred. I have just spent a great weekend in Stockholm and was at the museum all day Saturday and Sunday. I was amazed to see that some of the upper deck gunport sills have been removed exposing the frames. As far as I could tell none of the frames had been bevelled to follow the shape of the hull. It seems that all are perfectly square or rectangular in cross section.
Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on Nov 1, 2018 8:51:49 GMT
Hi all,
I have a question regarding deck clamps of 17th Century Dutch ships, maybe someone here can shed some light on this (fredhocker perhaps). The was a debate going on in another Forum recently where someone said that the Ends of these clamps were butt joined. Here you can see on the Image of my Hohenzollernmodel copy that the ends are indeed carried out this way, but the joints will be covered later by knees or steunders.
However, this modern Illustration here shows a different approach (circled in red): a scarph joint.
I couldn't find out in any of the books I have what way these joints were carried out on Vasa. Any input is appreciated.
Thanks Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on May 11, 2018 14:54:01 GMT
Maybe you simply are in the posession of more material than I am. I surely hope so. Why?
How can you say :"...when you don't know what the original actually looked like?" I would say that about 80% of the hull has been measured fairly accurately, all I am planning to do is to build as good a model as I can with the material that Winter left us.
Kind regards Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on May 4, 2018 15:09:53 GMT
I think we need to be grateful for what Heinrich Winter did. We have to take several factors into account: A: he was working alone and B: the model was taken away from him as the bombing of Berlin increased. I think that we can get pretty close to the original hull with the information we have, but we will never get it spot-on! Without Winter's legacy we would be miles away from that.
Kind regards Peter
|
|
|
Post by tromp on Apr 26, 2018 15:36:36 GMT
Hello Jules, no, Frame 17 indeed came from the Wagner plans from the book, Plate II the centre cross section: Here the Anstieg is 11°. Indeed what is labelled as 17 in the book was used for other Frames, but for which I can't tell anymore. I simply don't remember, it is nearly five years ago. I know Werner Bruns' attempt to redraw the Hohenzollernmodell frames. Surprisingly his main Frame 17 has an Anstieg of 13°. Kind regards Peter
|
|