|
Post by fredhocker on Mar 9, 2017 9:00:50 GMT
Sorry, useless computer error logged me out in mid-message. Although the mizzen mast does not survive, we can reconstruct some of its dimensions from the partners and a surviving crosstree. It was smaller than the foremast, so I have no reason to doubt that it was also a single pole like the foremast. It did not need the oversized hounds of the fore and main, since the mizzen halliard tye is a single rope, which usually passes through a sheave slot in the mast. The hounds were probably added timbers in any case, as making them of one piece with the mast would require a much larger tree, of which a substantial part of the length would be wasted. The foremast drawing here is not completely accurate, since it shows the current diameter of the pole, which is somewhat smaller than originally. The hound edges should not project beyond as the drawing shows. Fred
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Mar 9, 2017 8:34:40 GMT
Hej Peter and Reinhard,
Winter's description of the model's mainmast results in a shape similar to the mainmast on Vasa, except that as drawn here the hounds are faired into the cross section of the mast more completely. On Vasa, the hounds are more clearly an added element to an essentially round spar (see the drawing below of the mainmast for details).
The foremast originally had the same cross sectional shape as the main, but was constructed differently, as a pole with separate hounds. The fore- and mainmast hounds are overlarge on Vasa, since they have to house the sheaves for the halliard tyes, which are rigged in the English manner. See the attached drawing of the foremast for comparison.
The mizzenmast does not survive, so it is not possible to say how it was made.
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Mar 6, 2017 7:56:49 GMT
Dear Peter,
The short answer is no. Both the fore and main masts are original and preserved to their full length (the lower masts). The foremast is a pole with scabbed on hounds, while the main is a made mast. Both taper in diameter more or less equally from the partners to the hounds (it is actually the typical "bulged" taper one expects in a mast), but the addition of the long hounds adds width. I suspect that what you are seeing on the Hohenzollern model is a representation of this or something similar. The hounds reach from the underside of the top about a third of the way to the deck and taper gradually, so they expand the width. I believe I have posted a drawing of the mainmast on this site before, and it should show you what I mean.
The so-called Amaranth model in the National Maritime Museum just up the road, a rigged model of c. 1660, has masts that taper in diameter, with long hounds, as well.
Fred
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Mar 6, 2017 7:21:12 GMT
Hej Jörgen, The current status is the same as it was about a year ago. I have text and illustrations ready t go, but the Swedish state system requires expenditures this large (layout, printing and distribution) to go out for tender, and our tendering department has been having a problem formulating the terms. I had the latest in a long series of meetings on this last week, not sure when this will move forward. Once the tender is out (April???), it will take about three months to complete the bidding process to select a publisher, and then about six months to produce the book. I will let everyone know once we have a publisher. At least on this schedule, the book should be out before the DeAgostini kit gets to the rigging stage!
Fred
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Feb 14, 2017 7:45:33 GMT
Hej Arno,
I suspect you mean the gunport hinges. We do not have any direct evidence for their thickness, as all of them corroded away completely, but other iron hardware of similar size for which we do have evidence suggests that they were around 6 mm thick.
Fred
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Feb 13, 2017 11:53:56 GMT
Hi Reinhard, Translation is fine! The wooldings are made of rope 25mm in diameter, wrapped around the mast for a height of 440 mm, more or less. There are four of them below the spiral iron bands which secure the lower ends of the hounds. I think that there were wooden wickets (hoops) nailed to the mast above and below each woolding to protect them from the parrels when raising and lower the yard, but I cannot be entirely sure, since the modern wooldings on the reconstructed mast obscure some of the surface I would like to examine. The evidence for the mast coat is very sparse, but if it existed, it was simply nailed down to the mast pad or held down with a wooden hoop nailed through the cloth into the mast pad. The mast pads are not in very good condition, so it is difficult to be sure exactly how the coats were set up. In any case, there are no wedges at the weather deck level, so the coat would be wrapped directly around the mast. The sheaves for the halliard tyes are different on the fore and main masts. On the foremast, they were made of wrought iron, and there is not enough evidence to allow much of a reconstrution. Other wrought iron sheaves were made as the attached drawing shows, so I would guess the ones in the foremast were similar. Based on the size of the slot, the diameter was about 320 mm, and the thickness about 70-75 mm. The main halliard tyes ran on cast bronze sheaves, 440 mm in diameter and 83 mm thick, weighing about 44 kg each. They turned on iron axles 25 mm in diameter. See the attached photo for the form. Fred Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Feb 10, 2017 7:58:48 GMT
Hej Reinhard,
If I understand correctly, you need to know how much of the mast is above the main deck and how much below. As it stands in the museum today, the distance from the main deck to the underside of the mast cap is 17.59 meters, although there has been some settling of the decks. The original height above the deck was probably 17.45 meters or thereabouts. This leaves about 9 meters within the hull.
Fred
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Feb 1, 2017 8:34:01 GMT
Hi Thomas,
De Agostini do not discuss their marketing plans with me, but I know that they usually market their products on a country-by-country basis, with different approaches in each. When we were developing the kit, Germany was one of the markets mentioned as a possible venue, but I cannot tell you what their plans are. One of the issues that comes up in their discussions is whether their basic "part works" system of weekly or monthly subscription rather than selling the whole kit at once works. Part works schemes generally do not do well in the United States, for example - modellers there want to buy the whole thing at once, in a box. The American market is more heavily influenced by kit collecting, as opposed to building, than other markets, as customers amass "stashes" of kits faster than they build them. If DeAgostini wants to sell there they have to wait until they have produced the whole kit, and then develop packaging and distribution. The part works approach is normal in Italy, where buyers are conditioned to subscribe on a weekly basis. Here in Scandinavia, the kit is being sold in monthly increments (basically four weekly installments in one envelope). Not sure what format they are using in Poland, but I remember that Poland is a good market for them.
You could always investigate buying the Italian, Polish or Scandinavian version (I am receiving the Scandinavian version, which has amounted so far to nine monthly packages). The instructions are so well illustrated that the text might not be a issue.
Fred
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Jan 19, 2017 8:48:19 GMT
Good shape.
Fred
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Jan 2, 2017 8:59:01 GMT
Nice!
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Nov 22, 2016 7:32:39 GMT
Cool idea! What did you use for a mould/master?
Fred
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Nov 21, 2016 9:08:49 GMT
Hi Vlad,
The holes in the carriage cheeks are, on average, about 60 mm in diameter. Fragments of breechings were found in many of the carraiges, and these are usually a four-stranded rope 44-52 mm in diameter, although there are a few examples of three-stranded rope of similar diameter.
Fred
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Nov 21, 2016 7:50:42 GMT
Hi Terry, The bolts had more or less hemispherical heads about 50-55 mm in diameter, so on the Billing model they will be a little less than 1 mm in diameter. As Peter notes, they are not disposed in regular lines but reflect the internal arrangement. There are 28 stations along the hull where the deck structure (beams, knees and riders) is attached to the hull, which produce vertical groupings located between the gunports, plus horizontal lines at each deck where the waterways are bolted through the sides (one bolt between each pair of beams). I attach to this post a plot of the bolt heads on the exterior of the starboard side to give you an idea of distribution. Fred
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Nov 21, 2016 7:22:12 GMT
Hi Peter, Manwayring says some interesting things that do not seem to be borne out by other evidence (his comments on whipstaffs, for example). The logbooks make it clear that striking topmasts was a normal evolution, at least in the navy, but it does not seem to be done only in the absence of searoom (although perhaps more often there). The main advantages would be lowering the roll center of the ship and increasing stability, since the only sail area available is in the courses, and the weight of the topmasts is lower. Once reefing was introduced for the topsails, these could be used more effectively as storm sails and topmasts were left rigged.
Fred
|
|
|
Post by fredhocker on Oct 14, 2016 6:35:21 GMT
Hi Terry,
The images I post here are ones that I make especially to answer specific questions from the forum members, and I am happy to make and post these, but it is a more efficient use of my time, and better for modellers in the long run, if I concentrate on getting Vasa II into print rather than simply dump images onto the net without context or commentary. I can post the 1980 model plans here as PDFs, since they will fit within the file size limits (in fact, I have already done so), but starting to dropbox lots of large images is not a good use of my time. The resolution of the PDFs as posted here is appropriate to the level of detail in the model plans, so I do not think that we need to find lots of gigabytes of space elsewhere.
Fred
|
|