Well, I've started off with building a new Frigate to replace the Surprise, and she shall be larger, sleeker, and more powerful. So far, her hold is deeper, which allowed for an orlop below the mess deck. Here will be the magazine, the cockpit, and the cable store. Overall, she's about 2 bricks taller, 2 studs wider, and about 30 studs longer. I've spent the last few days reading over ship plans, as well as the basics of 18th century marine architecture. Here, the light should really bring out some of the contours, and it was especially in the stern where I made the most improvements.

Wow! The ship hull shape looks a lot better. Good luck with the rest of your ship!

Well the picture is quite blurry, but from what I can see the hull shaping looks quite promising indeed. I do think however you should lower the lowest line of bricks at the keel astern, so that the transition from the keel to the underwater part of the stern becomes smoother.

Hope to see some better pictures soon! Keep it up!

This is a perfect example that a bit of research really pays off.

The hullshape looks very good, and together with the former Surprize, I think this is very promising

I'm glad to see you got in back together!

Merry Christmas!

As some of you may remember, my pictures in the past have been of poor quality. However, today, for Christmas, my Mum gave me a digital camera. So, here are some higher quality pictures of the H.M.S. Athena (working name).

I haven't been working on her much, but another thing that I got for Christmas was a book on the anatomy of the USS Constitution:). I'll probably have some new posts soon.

~Horatio

P.S.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure how to resize- I'll need some help with that (never had that problem with my old camera!)

Edited December 25, 201113 yr by Horatio

. . . my Mum gave me a digital camera.

Thank god. I've always wanted to comment on your ships but have never been able to pick anything out. Your pictures are much better but I think they'd look better taken in natural light. There's a bunch of resizing tutorials here but a neat trick is just to stick this in front of your URL: http://i.tinysrc.mobi/800/600/. Anyways, I'm excited to follow this WIP, I think it's the first minifig scale Surprise I've ever seen. Have fun and merry Christmas!

Great to see more pictures! I agree that it will not be a lot easier to follow your MOc since the earlier pictures did not do it justice.

Well, I've pulled her out for the first time since Christmas. I found a better way to do the headrails, which now look much more realistic. Tell me what you think:

Edited January 13, 201213 yr by Horatio

Whilst the pictures are a little blurry I think they look quite nice. This one above I particularly like. They look very realistic. I think I should like to see a photo from head-on. Keep up the good work.

Since this post, I've finished the orlops and the hold, and I'm starting on the tumblehome. Once that's done, I'll get a nice picture of the bow head on. Also, how many studs should be between the posts that hold up the beams? Right now, I have between 4 and 5.

Also, how many studs should be between the posts that hold up the beams? Right now, I have between 4 and 5.

Ummm well I guess that depends how wide the ship is. (I'm assumed here the "beams" you're talking about are the beams that run the width of the ship.) On an actual frigate you have a row of stanchions just inside the bulkheads and then a row running down the middle of the ship (in line with the masts). Let's pretend your ship has a beam of 24 studs. To be accurate you'd have 3 rows of stanchions running the length of the ship. One would be centered (in line with the masts or running right along the keel-line), so 12 studs in. The other two would be something like 4-5 studs in from the outer bulkheads. However, I think you really have to just put them where they are needed in order to make sure you have the support you need.

Great job so far. I like how you incorporated the figurehead into the ship.

I also like the fact that you're using yellow gunports.

The only thing you should fix IMO is the headrails.

Perhaps you're still working on it, but I think it should be more curved towards the bow (like here for example).

I am not done with the headrails- it was more the overhead view that I was glad with. As for the posts, my frigate is a little narrower (19 studs at the widest point), so I only have two rows. Based on the planking technique I used, they turned out to be 4-6 studs apart.

At this point, I've finished the structure from the bow to the edge of the quarterdeck. Once I finish the Wardroom, I'll work on the Great Cabin above, then I'll start work on the masts.

Also, does 19 studs wide by 17 bricks high sound accurate? Or is she too narrow?

I am not done with the headrails- it was more the overhead view that I was glad with. As for the posts, my frigate is a little narrower (19 studs at the widest point), so I only have two rows. Based on the planking technique I used, they turned out to be 4-6 studs apart.

At this point, I've finished the structure from the bow to the edge of the quarterdeck. Once I finish the Wardroom, I'll work on the Great Cabin above, then I'll start work on the masts.

Also, does 19 studs wide by 17 bricks high sound accurate? Or is she too narrow?

I really don't think there's enough information here to rightly say.

What I can offer you are the measurements for an atypical British frigate. (These dimensions are from the HMS Surprise.)

Beam (that being the width): 32ft (10m)

Height (of rig): 130ft (40m)

Length (on deck): 135 ft (41m)

Length (@ waterline): 114ft (35m)

Now those are the dimensions in non-LEGO terms. If we take a bare-bones minifig to represent a standardized height (that height being 6ft (2m)) then when we lay him/her down on his/her back we see that he/she comes to just short of six studs in length (not factoring in any other height adding accoutrement, i.e. head-wear, epaulets, etc.). Therefore, I think it's safe to say that a scale of 1ft:1stud is a very firm basis to hold to.

So with all that, I think the most accurate dimensions would be something like 30-32 studs across. That is quite a bit, and I think it should be noted that there are VERY few, if any, examples of people using a strict scale for building. LEGO is all about representation. So keep 19 studs for the beam. You just need to make sure the other dimensions are proportionally accurate. [i.e. 19 stud beam; 69 studs long (@ w/l); 78 studs high (the height here being to the mast tops); ~11 studs high (from the w/l to the weather deck). ]

If you have 17 from keel to weather deck that sounds about right. I'd say stick with what you got, and she'll only get better.

_____________________________________________________________

edit: changed typical to atypical for fear of pain inflicted by flaky pastries!

Edited January 15, 201213 yr by Foremast Jack

I'm not sure if it makes a bit difference, but I wouldn't consider HMS Surprise, ex-L'Utiné a typically British frigate.

I'm not sure if it makes a bit difference, but I wouldn't consider HMS Surprise, ex-L'Utiné a typically British frigate.

Ummm I don't know. I guess it depends on the time period you're talking. Late in the war she was definitely a little on the small size, but when she was built I think it's fair to call her typical. I think you are more referring to the fact that she was a French capture and therefore not even British? 'Tis true, but I don't think there's anything wrong with using her as a basis, when I don't have much information to really narrow down the choices of schematics.

You are right though, I probably shouldn't have used the word "typical".

I'm not sure if it makes a bit difference, but I wouldn't consider HMS Surprise, ex-L'Utiné a typically British frigate.

Actually, she's more based on the HMS Trincomalee. There's a little bit of the Surprise in her, and also some of the USS Constitution as well, but I used the Trincomalee's plans mostly (and some of the plans from this book: My link)

She is British, though.

On that note, did British ships have spanker masts?

What do you mean by spanker masts?

Like Foremast Jack said, measurements are always difficult in LEGO.

Personally I think Teddy used a good scale, although it was in metres/centimetres.

He used scale 1:39 (minifig scale), so in that case, when you use Trincomalee as an example, the beam should be about 31,2cm.

The length accross the gundeck should be 117,5cm (in real it's 45.834m).

That would mean the beam should be about 40 studs and the length accross the gundeck about 148 studs.

Trincomalee was slightly bigger than HMS Surprise but it seems to me that the arrangements are about the same.

So I think you could do something in the middle for your ship. Good luck!

On that note, did British ships have spanker masts?

From my knowledge there's no such thing as a "spanker mast".

There is a "spanker." That being the fore-and-aft gaff-rigged sail from the Mizzen Mast (in the case of a frigate). The "spanker sail" attaches to the "spanker boom" (the lower beam) and "spanker gaff" (the upper beam) not "mast."

I'll try to find a picture to upload in the case it's unclear here.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Got a picture for you:

P.S. The Spanker is sometimes called the Driver

Edited January 16, 201213 yr by Foremast Jack

Whoa- I didn't realize the Trincomalee would be that large in Lego- I knew that the Constitution was heavy, but 148 studs long on the deck! Right now, she's about 98 studs.

As for the spanker mast, it's the smaller mast aft of the mizzen, on which the spanker is mounted. The Constitution has one.

Here's another picture on the progress:

As for the spanker mast, it's the smaller mast aft of the mizzen, on which the spanker is mounted. The Constitution has one.

You're going to have to show me a picture of what you're talking about. Every picture I see of her has only the three normal masts (Fore-, Main-, and Mizzen-) there's no fourth. The picture I have in my previous post shows the spanker and how it is mounted. If that's not clear or what you're referring to, I'll need a reference to something.

Ah now I get what you mean, it's the beam you can see here right behind the mizzen.

It's called snauwmast in Dutch but I don't know the English name.

Well I think you don't need to add that one.

Trincomalee and Surprise didn't have one and as far as I know it wasn't normal for British frigates to have one in 1800.

It was quite common for (Dutch) brigs to have one, but I don't know any British frigate with this mast.

Ah now I get what you mean, it's the beam you can see here right behind the mizzen.

It's called snauwmast in Dutch but I don't know the English name.

Well I think you don't need to add that one.

Trincomalee and Surprise didn't have one and as far as I know it wasn't normal for British frigates to have one in 1800.

It was quite common for (Dutch) brigs to have one, but I don't know any British frigate with this mast.

I still wasn't sure what I was looking for after following your link. However, since I have another name to go with, I took a look around. I finally know what you're talking about.

Yes, I've never seen let alone heard of this mast on a British frigate.

It does remind me of a reference from one of the Aubrey/Maturin novels where Jack rigs up a false mast (using a large piece of rope) on his ship as a ruse de guerre. However, I believe he was on a brig at the time. I'll have a look and see if I can't find it.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ahah! I found it!

In English it's called the "Horse" and holds the "Trysail." It was only native to the Snow (so far as I can tell). (The ship is named a Snow (or Snaw) because of this "mast" it would seem. The Dutch name seems to be much more indicative here, so I'm inclined to believe it was a dutch term originally that came over into English and defined the ship's type because of it's uniqueness.)

So the answer to your question again is: "No, a British frigate did not have a horse or snauwmast. It did have a spanker, but it was connected directly to the mizzen-mast."

Edited January 17, 201213 yr by Foremast Jack

The English name for 'snauwmast' is indeed spanker mast, it is a second mast directly behind the mizzen mast and is used to connect the Spanker sail to.

When I searched the Dutch I came across quit a view examples.

but searching for English examples I only came by this one;

Click

This man is building a model of the USS Constellation and it uses a Spanker mast.

clearly visible on the picture when you click the link.

And on this page he is actually calling it a spanker mast, on the bottom part.

Here is a picture of the real constellation seen from behind.

I just noticed the previus post got edited while I was searching for information and making my post. And not for the first time Foremast Jack is right, snow mast it is. (but apparently spanker mast is used to)

Bart

Edited January 17, 201213 yr by Bart