IonAguirre

Im also more fond of two than of three deckers.

Here is the Lines plan of the NSM Montañes: Based upon the plans and study for the "Ildefonsinos Class" by D. Jose Maria de Juan Aguado, Coruña University, Spain. As I said above, the Montañes is not a class, but a single ship. She was designed by D. Julian de Retamosa who took the former Ildefonsinos class, by the Architect D. Jose Romero F. Landa as the starting point. Those ships were quite nice and smart at sea, but the Montañes, overcame them and started a new concept in ships design. Those rounded bows and sterns that were normal before, were changed by the very sharpened ends of the hull that we all know today. The Center of gravity was lower at the same time that the freeboard to the lower battery was improved. She was slightly longer and narrower, but had better stability. It all means a stronger, faster, more seaworthy and better manouvering ship. The Montañes can be taken as a major step from the traditional to the modern ship. Note the very "V" shaped hull when compared with other ships of her time. Main frame Regards

Hi Cpt Sanchez: Yes, I am. The best translation is Naval Architect :-) Wind: Yes, of course. When I started the project, I found that the plans that were admited as "the right ones" were wrong. By only making a few numbers from them, things didn't fit with the ship particulars declared by her Architect and further Captains. Hence I had to rebuild the plans. As the ones I started from are owned by the Naval Museum,I can only share my owns. As many times happens, both versions almost look the same at first sight, but their behaviour would be very different when built. Julian de Retamosa was the most revolutionary and may be the best Naval Architect at his time. He solved some shipbuilding problems that had been hanging over for centuries. I thought it was a matter of historical justice, making the study and finding a ships line more closed to what he designed. The Montañes was not a ships class, but one ship whose design was based on the Romero Landa "Ildefonsinos" class, that resulted quite good ships. General arrangement, rigging ... etc can be taken from that class. I'll attach the linesplans and some information this afternoon (I have all of it in a backup drive at home). Regards

Hi Guys: I'm JMLVQZ, the author of the Montañes study that is quoted above. First of all, thanks for appreciating the work. If any tecnical information related to this ship is required, don't hersitate asking for it. Note: It has been funny to read the automatic translation of my original writting. Hahahaha, really funny.

As I cant find a place for posting Artillery related data, here you have one that may be useful: The carriage weight can be assumed the same for all guns as the size differences are very little. Shot elevation is measured in degrees from the horizontal plane. Maximum efective range is given. Most common guns for all fleets were those designated as 24 pounds. A remark: CORRECTED TABLE. Please note that the density difference can be solved by taking into account the Bore-Ball allowed clearence.

A correction to the Spanish list: NSM Montañes: Launched 1796

Thanks Wind, but no way. The "forum" jumps a message saying Im not allowed to use that file extension in this forum (using Imgur). Have tried almost all "standard" file formats. Anyway, I'll try posting only one pic just IN this same post, if it works, I'll include the tutorial. I made the test and IT WORKED ¡¡ Thanks a lot. Lets Go with the tutorial ..... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, hope this could help users interested on hull modeling: NOTES: The concepts below can be used with any software able for NURB surfaces modeling. In order to remark that even from low quality plans a nice hull can be modeled, Im using one of the pics included in this same thread. First thing to be taken into account: How accurate is the model wanted to be ? Fairing the curves and surfaces of the hull is a headache. If what concerns about the hull, is its "look", and not a technical accurate description, my advice is following, what was done at the shipyards before the XVIII Century. Lets try to define the hull from a very short number of curves using what was known as the "Flat Stringers" method. PIC -1- By using a sideview picture as a pattern, draw the keel and rabbet lines. Albeit the ship may have a big number of frames(structural concerns), most hull shapes can be defined from a very short number of them. A good practice is .... The less the better. The hull taken as example, can be almost completly defined from 4 or 5 sections. A quarter, two central, and a bow section. One more, defining the transom is a good choice. The location of the frames is mostly perfomed from experience and by carefully studying the hull, but Central frames: at around 1/6 of the Keel lenght, settled astern and ahead from the Main/middle section. Quarter frame: The last frame astern, that fully lies on the keel. Bow frame: The last frame ahead, that lies on the joint, between the stem and the keel(Stem foot). Transom frame: The one that defines the transom shape. Mark their locations on the rabbet line at the side view. Those marking points/lines, will be later used for 3D framing possitioning. I've labeled them as A,B,C,D. Drawn in red PIC -2- Some transverse reference lines are also required or ... we'll not be able to fit the scale, when changing to the front view. Midships keel, Deck, bulkward and water lines marks, have to be drawn athwardships.(see picture 2, drawn in red) PIC -3- Now its time for frames drawing. At the ship's plan front view, locate the frames that fit at the previously choosen places. With low quality scans , this may be a problem and the choice of the frames, may be either a matter of tray and error, or of guessing. Once the choice made, and by using the backgrownd as reference, draw the frames . It doesn't matter the transverse plane where they are drawn, becouse we will "slide" each one to its corresponding mark on the keel or rabbet line. The background location and scale for this “front” view, has been derived from those "athwardships" red lines drawn before at pic number 2. PIC -4- Select each frame and move to their previously marked locations along the keel/rabbet line. For this case a second sidewise translation has been required due to the keel beam (midplane keel drawing in red, translated copy in black). At the front view of ships plans, frames are drawn ....Port halve-> Ahead of main; Starboard halve--> Astern of main, in order to avoid messing the lines. Hence, when translatin to the 3D world a simmetry operation must be done for some of them. (We want all frames at the same halve of the hull) PIC -5- Due to the low quality of the scaned image some frames have been "scale corrected" in order to fit with the Top view. Note that the scaling procedure has only affected the breadth of the frames. It has been a 1D scaling procedure. PIC -6- All lines have been hidden, excepting those required for the hull modeling. The ship's body now looks to be almost defined, but some stringers are required in order to increase the quality of the hull "skin". PIC -7- This is the key of the "old" traditional design method. Once some key frames where built, a number of flexible flat boards where fitted along the hull at different vertical distances from the ships bottom. Main (normally midship) frame was taken as reference for placing the boards. Those boards where gently lied on each frame, allowing them to freely bend, and so, the shape of all remaining sections could be derived by direct measurement. We are going to use a "virtual" approach to this method. See picture -7- At the side view, and using the background as a guide, lets draw a number of longitudinal members in such a way that their points are restricted to "lie" on each frame, starting at the stern post rabbet, and ending at the stem one (Orange). The shape of the stringers must be such that they gently run from end to end of the hull with fair curves seen from any view. Drawn in orange at the picture. Side and plan views show fair, smart curves for all stringers. PIC -8- The same from a 3D point of view Now all guide curves required for the main body modeling are done. Depending on your software the procedure will be different. For me, its a simple matter of "Surface through curves net" NURBS modeling. PIC -9- By using the NURBs surfacing tools of your software, and using the previously drawn curves the hull gets almost done. If frames are duly choosen and corrected, and stringers well faired, the hull results correct at the first attempt. At picture 9, some lines(frames) and blue ones (waterlines) can be seen. Those lines are a "result" and not a building tool in the software I use. ADVICES: For Hull modeling NURBS methods a lot better tha Mesh ones. If one stringer is choosen along the waterway board, it can be later used for the main deck building. COMMON ERRORS: Using too much frames. As I said at the beggining the less the better. If a high accuracy is required then the Job is a lot longer. COMMENT: May be waterlines look to sharpened at the bow. Including one more frame ahead can solve the question. Kind regards.

Trying to post a hull modeling tutorial, but Im not able to attach any image. How to do that ?

Maximum speed for not planning ships goes around: V= 0.4 x SQRT(g x LWL), where g= 9.81 m/s², LWL= waterline lenght (meters) and V is speed in m/s. Hence, the longer the faster. Regards

HI all: Yes, ARMADA has two meanings, WARSHIPS FLEET or NAVY, and nothing else. And yes the literal translation is Armed, but this meaning is not used in Castillian when related to ships. Armada, taken as armed, would have to be translated as a qualifying adjective, related to a female that carries a gun. This is just another case when literal translations make no sence. The San Felipe presented in this post, is not a galleon, but a XVIII ship. I dont know if there existed a galleon with that name, but, this one isn´t.

Hi again: Well, a very good free alternative to DelftShip or even to Rhinoceros, is FreeShip, located at the hydronship website. Hull modeling is a little bit more tricky than with Rhino, but the results are very good (In the quality range of DelftShip). Then "Draftsight (free) + FreeShip(free as well), can do the hull work. Once the hull modeled, and exported, any 3D software, Blender like, can be used. Regards

Hi Guys: I'm that JMLVQZ who made the 3D model of the HCM Montañes that is inluded in this list. Its been quite a nice surprise finding my drawings here. Thanks for your comments. About the ship: .... Lord Nelson said the first time he saw the ship ... "My God, she manouvers as a frigate but fights as a First rated" Kind regards

Hi all: Im new to the forum, hence, hi again. My work in the real world is inside the Naval Building industry. Hence, my advice for the suitable software for ship's hull modeling is "Rhinoceros" combined with AutoCad(payed) or Draftsight(free). With both softwares, profesional quality accurate hull models can be obtained. Max, blender and similar softwares, albeit can give very nice results, only allow for "artistic" modeling, with no accuracy. Regards