Tomms123 Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 It looks nice Good work Bungee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BungeeLemming Posted April 9, 2016 Share Posted April 9, 2016 more recent (I hid my older post to not spam this thread) http://imgur.com/a/VtPvC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malachi Posted April 16, 2016 Share Posted April 16, 2016 20-gun Privateer, Architectura Navalis Mercatoria Plate XXXVI (slightly edited by yours truely) Dimensions (imperial) length P/P: 116' 7'' breadth: 30' 7'' draught aft: 14' 3'' length-to-breadth ratio: 3,8 Armament: 20 6-pounders 32 3-pounders 2 4-pounder bow chasers Crew: 220 Probably my favourite plan in the ANM, because this is exactly the type of vessel I like the most, small, fast and packs quite a punch. And it shows very innovative features for the time the draught was made (early 1760s) like a flush deck and the diagonal bracing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 Malachi, friends don't let friends fully arm their spar decks. But yeah, 1760, wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTMatt Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 Malachi, friends don't let friends fully arm their spar decks. Its looks like a good privateer. The stern rake will be endless and you will never need to worry about sail tagging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malachi Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 Its looks like a good privateer Well, you find the plan for this ship in the 'Privateer' chapter of the Architectura Navalis As a bonus, it has one hell of a nice hull shape: Don´t mind the square bow, I was just curious how the plan would look like in 3D, so this just a quick and dirty model I made yesterday. Theoretically, the 32 3-pounders could be omitted and the 20 6-pounders could be upgraded to 8-pounders (with 1430 pounds to spare). Now that would be a nice and powerfull privateer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTMatt Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 20 9 pounders sounds great especially with bow chasers. I'd throw a recommendation on it in next years voting just because I love baby frigates. Though I do wonder if it will be speedy enough and not rather sluggish like the snow. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BungeeLemming Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Just gonna throw this in here: http://www.finemodelships.com/ship-plans/Chapman_Architectura_eng.htm I have no idea why I didnt see this bevore edit: there was an option to have it in english language. So I swapped the link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Nice, I've never seen the book compiled in one place like that before. Chapman really like large merchant vessels. Humble cats and hagboats the size of Trincomalee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dareaperz Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 I'd like to know if anyone has managed to find blueprints for either Rikskronan (Kronan II) or Konung Karl. Those are two big ships that I would really enjoy seeing in-game, although I haven't found any real "blueprints". Only pictures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BungeeLemming Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 no shipplans but a documentation on the "Dygen"'s wreckage they found. A Gustav Adolph class 4th rate. One of which I currently model.-> http://sh.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:885919/FULLTEXT01.pdf also the deckplans for the Bellona/ Venus are to be found here and here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BungeeLemming Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 so I am getting closer to beeing finished. The outside is done but the gunport lids which I will do somethime later this week. http://imgur.com/a/fliPa http://imgur.com/99UC14P The colourschemeis now according to the ship model here If not, please tell me edit: http://imgur.com/6RL6iRT edit edit: http://imgur.com/a/W6wLE http://imgur.com/R904Ifu 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BungeeLemming Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 all right. after months of work, a metric arse ton of work into my first ever 99% ready model here she is: https://skfb.ly/Pn9W please ignore the glitch in her stern gallery as well as on her stern gunports. Those come from the upload page. 99... where is the 1%? the helm is missing. And maybe I make a rudementary stove. who knows.. edit: apparently each gunport of the upper gundeck is glitched. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 The screen is pitch black and flashes a purple silhouette of the ship when I change the view around. o.o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BungeeLemming Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 Im sorry to hear that but at least I can give you some images. http://imgur.com/a/ERY8P the great feature of sketchfab is that you can go round with a camera view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlavDeng2 Posted June 6, 2016 Share Posted June 6, 2016 The screen is pitch black and flashes a purple silhouette of the ship when I change the view around. o.o What browser did you use? on Firefox i had your issue however on chrome it is perfectly fine, and i really like the model bungee, looks nice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 The SoL draughts have three stability points marked on them. I assume that the bottom one is is Center of Buoyancy, and the middle one is Center of Gravity. Is the top point the Metacentre at some given angle of heel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malachi Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Never noticed the three points on Chapman´s late work. The bottom point is B/Center of Buoyancy, the other two points should be the metacenters for different load waterlines (cf. Plate XXI, Fig. 5, ANM) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Never noticed the three points on Chapman´s late work. The bottom point is B/Center of Buoyancy, the other two points should be the metacenters for different load waterlines (cf. Plate XXI, Fig. 5, ANM) Are you sure? Why would the middle point be a different size if it was just another metacenter? That book on Chapman that you recommended has the answer to this question, but I returned it to the library. If both upper dots are metacenters, isn't it more likely that they are for different angles of heel? The difference between them seems extreme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malachi Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Hm, maybe. Are you sure? Why would the middle point be a different size if it was just another metacenter? The bigger dot for the main load waterline? Here´s the plan of the bark, also with 3 dots: http://www.sjohistoriska.se/ImageVaultFiles/id_2185/cf_1045/21.JPG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Hang on a minute, because I thought I understood the whole metacentre concept. When you aren't heeling, there is no metacentre at all because there is no righting arm. So when Chapman rights that a privateer should have a metacentric height of 6 feet, he must be envisioning a specific angle of heel. How do we know what that angle is on his plans? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BungeeLemming Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 My bet goes on malachi. Chapman calculated his ships empty and fully loaden. Hence the two dots can very likely be the two differently weighted centers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malachi Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 When you aren't heeling, there is no metacentre at all because there is no righting arm. So when Chapman rights that a privateer should have a metacentric height of 6 feet, he must be envisioning a specific angle of heel. How do we know what that angle is on his plans? That´s the stuff that´s in his Treatise. All metacenter calculations are for a 3° heel, if I remember correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 That´s the stuff that´s in his Treatise. All metacenter calculations are for a 3° heel, if I remember correctly. Huh. That information doesn't seem like it would be very relevant from a stability standpoint. Maybe for gunnery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maturin Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Huh. That information doesn't seem like it would be very relevant from a stability standpoint. Maybe for gunnery. Wait a minute, I see my mistake. I was inclining vessels in my head and convinced myself that the metacenter would be different at various heel angles. But it isn't. http://www.cruisingonstrider.us/Metacenter.htm Mental geometry is hard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.