Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Rob

Members2
  • Content Count

    73
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Rob

  1. The main reason why the dutch launched stern-first is simple:

    The flat tuck will bounce when sliding into the water, creating uncalculatable rolling to the sides.

     I assume you mean bow-first, right?

     

    Just a guess:

     

    The bow has superior flotation than the stern, so if you are concerned about the depth of water at your building site (as might be the case in the Netherlands or the archipelagos of the Baltic), you should launch bow-first to avoid running aground.

     

    Edit: Also, the shipyards that build in drydock look like they are building larger, more modern warships.

    That is a interesting and logical thought. The ship being build in Stockholm was the Vasa, which we all agree on is kinda big :). Can it be, because the English were more industrialised, that they build ships in a more industrial way. I know from reading "De Zeven Provincien"* that the English started building ships from blueprints kinda early in the Age of Sail, and the Dutch didnt catch on to that until the end of the 17th century. So that could possible explain the less industrial look of the Dutch and Swedish shipyards. What do you think about this?

     

    Why should a ship be build in a drydock, what are the advantages?

     

    *: https://issuu.com/otteblom/docs/boektest

     

    Ps: The shipyards are indeed from different time periods within the age of sail

  2. Hi, i am doing research on shipbuilding in Europe in the Age of Sail. I found some pictures, which i will show below. The first one is the Woolwich Dockyard, the second one is Holmen in Denmark, the third is Rotterdam in the Netherlands and the last one is Stockholm Shipyard

    You can see the difference in how the ships are build. The difference in how the shipyard looks especially came too my attention. It looks as if the English and Danish made use of some sort of drydock to build their ships, in contrast to the Dutch and Swedes. 

     

    Can someone explain why some ships are build in some sort of drydock and others are just build on a flat plane near the water?

     

    I also noted that the Dutch and Swedes build their ships with the bow towards the water and the English and Danes build their ships with the stern towards the water, why is that?

     

    I hope some of you can help me with this and maybe explain the difference in shipbuilding throughout Europe.

     

     

    post-2784-0-43405100-1461842425_thumb.jpg

    post-2784-0-00468200-1461842433_thumb.jpg

    post-2784-0-81592400-1461842438_thumb.jpg

    post-2784-0-88428300-1461842447_thumb.jpg

  3. Also, a round bow provides that all-important buoyancy. And that's significant not just for decelerating by pitching, but for keeping seawater where it belongs. Sharp ships were especially sensitive to weight carried near the ends (guns), which could make them vulnerable to hogging.

    Never thought about it this way, so that must be why they preferred a round bow. Also considering that the North sea and most parts of the Atlantic ocean are quite rough seas, that is probably the reason for the sturdy design.

     

    I should really buy some books about this and just read my little bits of spare time away. :)

  4. Later period: Frigate built was popular. Just adjust height in hold to an integer height of the standard cargo intended (sugar, tea would have different heights and need different ships for efficient carriage, so east and west indiamen were built differently.

    Frigates where used earlier, just not so popular in the british navy. Very common in the french and dutch navy. At least that is what i know from my research.

    Interesting difference between east and west indiamen, didnt know that.

     

    A more v-shaped hull wouldnt necessarily reduce capacity, it will if you keep the same depth inside the ship. But a more v-shaped hull will improve the handling in open seas. I think a more flatter bottom would mean that the ride woud be very rough. I am right on this?

     

    I have another question; Why did most ships from that period have a very round bow? Why didnt they use a sharper bow, that would improve speed, right? Or is the construction of a sharper bow harder?

  5. I am thinking about buying some of those books, i had a look at them and the seem very good. I already knew there where no reall development, and that it was mostly a trial and error process in the early days. But there had to be some theories right? I know i sound like i dont know anything, and that is true :) I want to learn about stuff from that period. I am mostly interested in early 1600 to 1700.

     

    For example, what if you needed to build a merchantman. and not just any. But one that could cary a fair amount of goods and it had to be the fastest in the world. What would be the theory behind building such a ship?(beam-to-lenght, draft, shape)

     

    Does anyone have some good historical digital readings about this subject? I have difficulty in finding anything because english is not my first language, and nautical slang is everywhere.

  6. Hi,

     

    I am very interested in the development of the shape of a ship hull between 1600-1800. I have been searching the internet but cant seem to find what i want. I will sum up some question and i hope someone can help me. Wouldnt it be interesting to discuss this topic?

     

    1. How did the shape of the bow, hull and stern develop in this period?

    2. What are the most common design for ships in that period? and not just for ship of the line or frigates but for all open water vessels.

    3. What does i certain shape mean for the perfomance? What are the advantages and disadvantage of certain designs?

     

    I hope this will start a discussion, because i cant be the only one interested in this.  ;)

  7. Well of course a ship from the right period, low poly count. From what i can remeber 24k for medium size ship, like frigate. But please ask around because i dont know for sure.

     

    The whole ship, without interior and sails and such. Also only the transom structure should be modelled for example, so no decorations whatsoever. The impact on the poly count would be extreme of you should do that.

     

    Specific ship in mind?

  8. Anyone read this document? http://www.gahetna.nl/collectie/archief/pdf/NL-HaNA_4.MST.ead.pdf

     

    There are a lot of Dutch ships in this document, you can use the numbers from the ships to search the database of the "Nationaal Archief".

    Here is a list for example http://www.gahetna.nl/collectie/archief/ead/index/eadid/4.MST/node/c01%3A0.c02%3A0.c03%3A0./open/c01:0.c02:0.c03:0.#c01:0.c02:0.

     

    If you want me to post individual ships just let me know, because this is quite overwhelming.

     

    Ps. Also it is all in Dutch...

    • Like 1
  9. @CommodoreWesley, It seems the data regarding this ship is not very clear so it seems to me that this might not be the best choice. Although what you say about she not needing a name necessarily is completly true. But i know that i am more driven when i not only look the looks of something but also its history. I shall have to think about this.

     

    @SteelSandwich, I totally agree on that, and yes she is beautifull. See my reaction to CommodoreWesley. These are also some nice ships, i assume that you know more of these ships specifically. Is that right? I also heard that you are working on a little project called the "Zeven Provincien"  ;) and that i could contact you via teamspeak. Is that a possibility sometime? maybe better to PM about this...

     

    I saw that list with Dutch ships and that sparked the start of the start of this project and it surely satisfies my needs. XD

     

    Ps. Just a little note to the community of Naval Action! You are an awesome bunch. Keep it going!

  10. As some might know this was originally planned as a model build of the Minverva, well things have changed. SteelSandwich helped me find a more documented beauty. The dutch 36 gun frigat Frederika Louise Wilhelmina, 1789. I am really thrilled to start this and will keep you people updated during my project.

    post-2784-0-85303800-1450955286_thumb.jpg

    • Like 1
  11. This ship is so beautifull, those smooth lines. I want to get to know more of this ships history, i already read somethings on wikipedia. But that may not be the best source.

    Thank you for the information and the picture, that can probably help me a lot. I will also try to contact Maturin the coming weeks. Will probably start a WIP on this forum some time soon.

     

    Thanks again.

    • Like 1
  12. Nice guidance there! i am probably going for the frigat "Minerva". I have already read a book about the whole shipbuilding process and it was done here in The Netherlands. According to that book it was quite different from lets say the british. Very interesting book, shame its only in dutch. So after reading that book i know better understand everything involving that beautifull era.

     

    In case you are someone else wants to read it(http://issuu.com/otteblom/docs/boektest/1), you should learn some dutch  :D

  13. Totally agree! i will keep practicing. You can only model it if you have enough reference, which is the case with the "Zeven provincien". But most of the ships from that period have a very limited amount of reference or just general information available. But some people on this forum seem to have acces to all kinds of interesting stuff. Also sail plans seems to be pretty rare to get, for most ships at least.

     

    So i am doing some research now, cause for me its important to model something i like. Otherwise i lose interest.. something  :mellow:

     

    Thanks, i will post my progression here! Or is there a better place to post this? a different topic maybe?

  14. i had the same feeling that i started out too difficult.. I am thinking about starting with a schooner or brig. Maybe that is better. The coming weeks i will start with something new and use your feedback, which was great btw, and build something better  ;) .

     

    Did you learn it yourself? or is this your job? cause it seems you are experienced  :)

  15. So i started modeling a ship a year ago, which proved to be a bigger challenge than i initialy thought. I followed the tutorial from pirates ahoy(http://www.piratesahoy.net/threads/ship-hull-modeling-tutorial.17259/) and got the following result.

     

     
    What do you people think? i know there are a lot of things i can improve but right now i dont know where to start and what is most important. You could say i lack experience :)
     
    Any feedback and help is greatly appreciated!
×
×
  • Create New...