StarDestroyer.Net BBS

This is my first attempt at scratchbuilding; carracks are a ship type perhaps nearer and dearer to my heart then even my beloved pre-dreadnoughts.

In the Conway's History Of The Ship volume "Cogs, Caravels, and Galleons", length and beam, among other dimensional tidbits, are given for a carrack listed in the Timbotta Manuscript, 140 feet by 38.6 feet.

This gives a length to beam ratio of roughly 3.6:1, a tad on the narrow side from what I've read about carracks, but it's exactly the ratio that Bjorn Landstrom gives in his book "The Ship" for a ship of 125 feet in the same manuscript.

The stempost is mentioned as being 51 feet above the keel, and 12 feet taller then the sternpost...I've been a little dismayed by the appearance of my work so far, the amount of freeboard seems extraordinary, but the height of the stem above the waterline scales out to 34 feet; guesstimation makes me think that 16 feet of draught is in the "acceptable" range...

Here's the Timbotta Manuscript illustration I'm using as my guide:

The amount of curvature in the sheer strake seems excessive to me, too excessive; I'll be playing around with that.

Masting and rigging will be based on WA's "Kraeck" woodcut of circa 1468, with some free interpretation as needed/desired.

I began with seven layers of .020" Evergreen stock laminated together, and roughed some lower hull contours into it forming a raft.
Doubting the dimensions I mentioned above, went with a straightforward 3:1 length to beam ratio.
It didn't look "right", yet I persevered and began adding and shaping by eye some templated onto the raft.

It was looking even less satisfying.

I pared about .080" of beam off of my beginning, creating a very slab sided and awkward looking thing, with ratios more fitting for an 18th century frigate, so I re-introduced some beam in the form of slabs of .020" stock slapped to the sides, remembered that I didn't take into account the amount of overhang the stempost has in the overall length, so I removed the appropriate amount of stern, and went to work with the sandpaper to achieve this hull shape, up to the upper deck:






A little forward motion with the fitting of the of the stern counter piece (correct term?) with the tiller opening:


You can see where I've marked the locations for false ribs that will be visible; I'm only going a semi plank-on-frame route; it uses less plastic, mail order is my only source for Evergreen stock, and I'm impatient!

Awesome! I have an interest in Venetian history as well as model shipbuilding. What you are doing is something I'd very much like to try, although I'd probably start with something easier.

What kind of materials are you using for your ship? What is this 'Evergreen stock'?

Evergreen stock is a styrene plastic sheet. They make several different thicknesses, and several shapes.

It's much softer than the styrene you usually find in plastic kits, and is easy to work.

Their website.

I don`t know much about historical ships, but if that illustration are to scale this type of ship seems to be seriously unstable. With stern and stem so high it would also have excessive windage making it impossible to sail windward.

Sky Captain wrote:I don`t know much about historical ships, but if that illustration are to scale this type of ship seems to be seriously unstable. With stern and stem so high it would also have excessive windage making it impossible to sail windward.

Carracks were notoriously bad sailers, especially later, more extreme versions with multi-decked forecastles.
A Portugese seaman, on seeing one of those 16th century types, is quoted, allegedly, as saying "May God have mercy on the man who built such a ship."...

Another Portugese account states that the ship in question was "rock-steady in all conditions", however.

Little update:

One minute I'm on the verge of pitching this thing in the garbage, and the next I'm thinking I'm onto something...


Anyway, got the hull planked, the main deck painted, and some paint splashed on the hull to see which direction I might go with it...

Little bit of forward motion:

Attaching and shaping the sloped "weather deck" to the forecastle:


Planking the gap:


Starboard side:


Planking "weather deck":


Planking trimmed:


Anchor tackle crosstimber in place, detail molding on weather deck, inboard stringers and wales attached:


Another view:


Trimming the quarter deck to size:


Looking forward:


Quarter deck with crossbeams faked in, companionway mounted, main deck cargo hatch cover being planked, and main deck windlass:


Mmmmm, tiny:

The hull planking looks kind of rough, but the main deck looks great. The scale wood effect is really well done.

Simplicius wrote:The hull planking looks kind of rough...

It is.

Being my first scratchbuild, the learning curve is pretty steep. It honestly looks a little better IRL than it does in magnified photos.
Also, once the vertical fender strakes, chainwales, and an actual paint job are applied, the planking will either look better, or stand out like a turd in a punchbowl.

The very few 1/700th scale sailing ships I've seen done by other people normally use a solid hull; I didn't have the material to go that route, so I tried framing it. Attaching the different levels of wales first caused me untold grief, too.

Next time, next time, next time...next time will be better

So, I'm working on this thing again...my deadline is October 1st. Here's a phone pick showing progress.

Man. I just love Carracks.

Good luck on finishing it...can't wait to see it.

Where are the turbo lasers?

Man, the patience to do that... Love projects like that. Looks fucking great Frank. Keep it up..

The fine work is amazing, could you post a size comparison picture ? A carrack model in 1/700 must be tiny.

Raesene wrote:The fine work is amazing, could you post a size comparison picture ? A carrack model in 1/700 must be tiny.

Here it is with a Bic lighter, Combrig's 1/700 kits of HMS Dreadnought and the Borodino class battleship Orel..it's about 5.3 centimeters long.

Thanks for the kind words, guys.

Looking good, that’s a lot bigger compared to the predreadnought then I was expecting, but then I have to keep reminding myself how stubby you can make a slow warship. Any chance you can rupload the image you are using as the basis for her again, it seems to have died on imageshack.

Stunning. It must take the hands of a surgeon to work with such small pieces. That's what I call art.

Do you think you might do a galley (bireme, trireme type) next?

Mr. Skimmer:

I think I may have gone overboard in trying to "rationalise" the sketch, the sheer line especially.

ComradeClaus; I do indeed intend to do more early ships at some time. Lots of ideas, lots of choices. I'm partial to early Greek biremes and Roman heavy galleys, and would like to do a Renaisance war galley, as well.

What the hell... ?

Frank Hipper wrote: I think I may have gone overboard in trying to "rationalise" the sketch, the sheer line especially.

Thanks. I dunno on going overboard, your ship looks still looks like something that could be built. I know the drawing styles back then tend to exaggerate... everything, but a massive shear does make some sense.

That drawing is beyond exaggeration and is down right Escher-esque.

The model is pretty good. Apart from the fact that Carracks did not have a 'mirror', but a round stern, it is very well executed. You have a fine hand for these minor details that make a model look real.

I believe you used this image as reference, as the similarity is rather significant.

I makes the stern look kind of 'squarish', but the round stern was a design trademark of the Carrack - the underwater hull was nearly symmetrical. The later models might have foreshadowed the emerging of the Galleon, but 1450, this was not the case, yet.

Actually La Croix, I've never seen that particular picture before, it's very useful for details of rigging.
One merciful thing about modeling a mediterranean ship of around 1450 is you don't have to deal with ratlines in the shrouds, they don't appear in depictions of southern shipping until the last decades of the 15th century.

Thanks!

In that age, sails were uncomplicated enough (mostly just one sail per mast) to allow just lowering the spar to secure them, so no one needed them. Sailors used to just climb up the rigging if they needed to get up or used a rope ladder.

When the sails and spars became bigger, and more numerous, it was easier to just get up there to do stuff instead of hauling the thing up and down, so ratlines were done. Sailors still found them less convenient than the ropes for a long time...

http://books.google.de/books?id=eol1e_O ... &q&f=false
Has some nice sections on it (page 65ff), but in old German print. (You might be able to read it or find someone. - The book is fascinating - especially when he rants about how the depictions of artists can't be used as facts, citing examples, on page 42/43.)