Released Frigate "Rossiya", 1728

[Post Captain]

I'll have to look into that more. I'll see if I can find any specific drawings.
Edit: I found several options, but it's impossible to say which one was used. I'll post images tomorrow.

 

[Post Captain]

Here are two options:

Spoiler

The following two go together.

Spoiler

 

[Armada]

OK, judging by the way the bowsprit is oriented, I'd say the second option might work best. Once I get it modelled, I'll post a screenshot showing how it looks.

 

[KrisWood]

The first is more period correct for this ship. She would have been designed along British lines, possibly even by British shipwrights or ones that studied under them. This was before the British started imitating French designs, as in the second one.

 

[Armada]

Interesting, thanks Kris. If that's the case, the bowsprit will meet the mainmast just below the main gundeck.

 

[Armada]

Here's another update, combining a few things from recent discussions.

I've finished the bowsprit base and added the riding bitts, and moved the stove back a bit (though it might need to go further?).
Haven't done the hawse holes yet, but before I do, I'll need to know how the hawses are laid out when the anchors are stowed.
You'll also notice the support beams now, which make the ship a bit more structurally sound.

The other thing I did was finish off the stern, tidying up the decorations and adding a lantern and glass for the windows.
I changed the materials from 'blinn' to 'lambert', mainly because the former looked too shiny at some angles to make screenshots clear enough. It won't make any difference when in the game, though.

One thing I'm not happy with is the mast texture. I'm currently using Desk.tga, and up close, it's a stark contrast with the smoother PotBS wood textures.
I was thinking of modifying Desk.tga to use some of the PotBS wood grains, which would not only look better on this ship, but many other ships in the game as well.
I'll be adjusting the deck texture soon anyway, so it would make sense to kill two birds with one stone.

 

[Post Captain]

It's amazing how much better the interior looks with those added details. The stove looks fine where it is, I think. I still need to upload the deck textures, and find out about how the hawses were stowed. That one will be a little more difficult, since there aren't any frigates or frigate-like vessels in California that stow their anchors in a the traditional manner. The only two vessels in the US I could think of that would do that are Bounty and Friendship of Salem. I might be able to find something in my books.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

Looking very good indeed!
The only thing I was thinking is that the resolution of the mast textures is a bit low, but that is not an issue with this specific model of course.

 

[KrisWood]

Ok I see how your bowsprit connects now. It'd be more similar to the second one because this is a single decked frigate. Sorry, I misunderstood your initial question.

It would be a pair of bitts with a board between them. Look at my Lyon hoy for an example. The bits might continue up to the forecastle deck to make bits there, too, which also makes them support beams for the above deck.

 

[Post Captain]

Both diagrams were of frigates. ("Single decked" isn't necessary-all frigates have one gun deck. A vessel with more than one gun deck is a ship of the line." I think they would both work. There would just have to be some kind f lining where the bowsprit meets the gun deck.*

The manger is missing on the model- I don't know if you've gotten to it yet.

* There should also be a lining where the masts meet the weather deck. I'll get a picture of Pilgrim's next Saturday, since it is done in the traditional manner. It's a hard one to describe, so I'm not going to try yet.

 

[KrisWood]

In 1728 a frigate was any ship with a continuous gundeck. This included single through three deckers. The classical idea of the true single decked frigate as we think of it today did not come about in the British navy until the capture of the French frigate that became the basis for the design of HMS Unicorn 1748.

 

[Post Captain]

Cable/hawse: 1/2 inch thick for every foot of the vessel's beam (width).

Only one anchor should have a hawse permanently attached to it. In this case, since this vessel was in use in the northern hemisphere, it should be the one on the port side. The largest port anchor should also be the heaviest of all the anchors. This has to do with typical weather patterns in the hemispheres due to the Coriolis effect. The hawse would be moderately loose, and it should be run through the hawse hole, lay on the gun deck, make one turn around the bitts, and go down into the hatch. I'll post pictures tomorrow. It's bed time here.

In 1728 a frigate was any ship with a continuous gundeck. This included single through three deckers. The classical idea of the true single decked frigate as we think of it today did not come about in the British navy until the capture of the French frigate that became the basis for the design of HMS Unicorn 1748.

Never ask me about in depth technicalities from before the year 1750... I can still tell you why sprit topmasts were inneficient...?

I could still argue that I was right... both illustrations were from after that date. Or I could argue that we're both right. Or wrong. Or that Hylie Pistoff is right. Or that Captain Armstrong is completely wrong. Or that... oh, never mind.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

Or you're all wrong and I'm right.
(I didn't even say ANYTHING on the subject, so yeah, that's REAL likely. )

 

[Post Captain]

Or maybe you're right that we're all wrong about you being right to begin with?

Anyway... You can either plug the unused hawseholes or leave them open. I'd recommend leaving them open since the gun ports are permanently open as well.

 

[Hylie Pistof]

Hey, how did I get into this? This does clear up one thing for me. The FWzP is sometimes referred to as a frigate, and I never understood how this ship could be a frigate.

 

[Post Captain]

By "modern" standards, it isn't. It isn't by the standards that came before the ones KrisWood gave either. It could very well be a frigate by the ones he did give, which I'm assuming were dominant when the ship was built.

Hey, how did I get into this?

I'm not tired enough to think of a sufficiently nonsensical answer, I'm afraid.

 

[Pieter Boelen]

 

[Armada]

Ok I see how your bowsprit connects now. It'd be more similar to the second one because this is a single decked frigate. Sorry, I misunderstood your initial question.

It would be a pair of bitts with a board between them. Look at my Lyon hoy for an example. The bits might continue up to the forecastle deck to make bits there, too, which also makes them support beams for the above deck.

Right, I see what you mean. I'll add the bitts and see how it looks.

Cable/hawse: 1/2 inch thick for every foot of the vessel's beam (width).

OK... the measurements from this website, which I have verified in Maya, state the beam as 31' 6".
Unless I'm very much mistaken, that suggests that the hawse thickness should be 15.5 inches! Isn't that a bit TOO thick?

Only one anchor should have a hawse permanently attached to it. In this case, since this vessel was in use in the northern hemisphere, it should be the one on the port side. The largest port anchor should also be the heaviest of all the anchors. This has to do with typical weather patterns in the hemispheres due to the Coriolis effect. The hawse would be moderately loose, and it should be run through the hawse hole, lay on the gun deck, make one turn around the bitts, and go down into the hatch.

Wow, I didn't expect weather patterns to affect this kind of thing. That's fascinating.

 

[Post Captain]

Those lines were pretty huge. They consisted of three large right-laid lines twisted around each other to make a left-laid line three times as thick. They had to take an enormous amount of strain, but were made of relatively weak hemp. That would explain the thickness. I'll check for exceptions when I get home today. I know that the hawses presently on Victory right now are smaller than the 1/2 inch rule dictates, but that could be due to a lack of the proper material.

 

[Armada]

Well, I made a quick mock-up of a 15.5 inch thick cylinder, and on this ship, it looks disproportionately huge to me: