Author Topic: Hull #1498 Restoration  (Read 107942 times)

Erick Singleman

  • Registered Member
  • *
  • Posts: 172
    • View Profile
    • Erick's Wooden Boat Pics
Hull #1498 Restoration
« on: September 08, 2009, 05:10:26 AM »
I have seen many 12 1/2s of various vintage, but i have yet to see an oar lock socket arrangement where the oar lock is on a separate mahogany block adjacent to the coaming like th eone on my boat.  I am thinking that this is not original.  Anyone seen one like this?



Also, I took the bow hardware off tonight and the bow chocks are apparently joined through the stem by a pin.  In my case the pin was steel.  I thought this was odd since it was completely corroded.  Shouldn't this be a bronze pin?

BTW, like the flying buttresses on the coaming?

« Last Edit: September 08, 2009, 05:12:13 AM by esingleman »
The wife says I can have a mistress as long as her ribs are made from white oak.

Steve

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 804
    • View Profile
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2009, 12:16:44 PM »
I have not seen an oar lock socket arrangement like this before.  It could have been done by a prior owner? 

What is the 'flying buttress' for?  Maybe a motor mount bracket?  Is there a similar arrangement on the port side?

Your boat would have been fitted with the later-style bow chocks.  Do they look something like this?



After mid-1936, HMCo switched to this style and subbed them out to a contactor rather then cast them in-house.  I would have to crawl through my notes from an MIT visit, but as I recall the casting cards specified bronze.  Many boats from this era had steel hardware, which causes me to speculate that, though bronze may have been written in the casting cards, the actual contract may have not been specific. 

Is it that your chocks are bronze but the pin is steel?  I would probably replace it with a bronze pin.


Adam

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #2 on: September 08, 2009, 03:12:31 PM »
Minx (Ex Target) has them just bolted to the coaming. She is a 1938 (although after the Hurricane HMCo. re-built her - and it was my understanding they used a number of "non-standard" items and construction).




Erick Singleman

  • Registered Member
  • *
  • Posts: 172
    • View Profile
    • Erick's Wooden Boat Pics
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #3 on: September 08, 2009, 05:54:35 PM »
I have not seen an oar lock socket arrangement like this before.  It could have been done by a prior owner?  

What is the 'flying buttress' for?  Maybe a motor mount bracket?  Is there a similar arrangement on the port side?

I can post more pictures later, but it is apparent that one of the previous owners added the buttress pieces (two starboard and two port), and an extra side brace at the aft end of the coaming, and probably this oar lock block in an effort to strengthen the coaming.

Your boat would have been fitted with the later-style bow chocks.  Do they look something like this?

No, I apparently have the original style bow chocks



After mid-1936, HMCo switched to this style and subbed them out to a contactor rather then cast them in-house.  I would have to crawl through my notes from an MIT visit, but as I recall the casting cards specified bronze.  Many boats from this era had steel hardware, which causes me to speculate that, though bronze may have been written in the casting cards, the actual contract may have not been specific.  

Is it that your chocks are bronze but the pin is steel? YES I would probably replace it with a bronze pin. Yeah, that is the way i am probably going to go.

I also don't understand why the drifts in the transom are steel.  I am planning to use bronze for those as well.


« Last Edit: September 08, 2009, 05:56:29 PM by esingleman »
The wife says I can have a mistress as long as her ribs are made from white oak.

Erick Singleman

  • Registered Member
  • *
  • Posts: 172
    • View Profile
    • Erick's Wooden Boat Pics
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #4 on: January 05, 2010, 11:44:11 PM »
Hi everyone, here is an update on my latest accomplishments:

I built a steam box back in October, when i was making the station molds.  You may be curious about where I got the shapes for the molds.  It is a combination of shapes obtained for my boat (at bulkhead stations where the shape is held by the plywood), a few tracings the museum let me make, the mystic plans, and another set of plans from a woodenboat forum member who had the Mystic plans computer lofted, and a lot of measurements from my boat. The result is a hull shape that I believe is representative of the original hull and within the variability that exists from boat to boat.

I began beveling the molds for the aft section of the boat in preparation for the steam bending of the frames.  I can only set up half of the molds at a time because i am running out of room in the shop, given I have the boat in there as well.  I also cut out and planed the framing stock and gave the inside edges a roundover.  They were milled from "green" white oak that was cut in August and purchased in September.  They did dry some near the surface to a moisture content of 16-18% so i soaked them for a week, and then primered them.  They are now wrapped up and waitng antother week or so before the first steam bending attempt.

I am currently in the process of shimming up the molds in a few places so that a batten runs fair across the boat from stem to stern. this is very time consuming and tedious.

While doing this, I thought of an interesting dilemma.  According to the book "How to build the Haven", it was the Herreshoff method to bevel the molds so the frames do not have to be beveled. However at stations 6, 7, or 8, or 20 ,21, and 22 where the bevel is significant, the frame will be at an angle to the floor timber where it is to be attached, and therefore not flush.  If you attempt to fasten the frame to the floor timber without inserting a small wedge shaped piece you will either have a loose mechanical joint, or you will force the frame away from its intended angle. Either way not good.  I am thinking of inserting some kind of a wedge unless anyone has any other ideas???

I have added a few more pictures on my shutterfly site at: www.erickswoodenboatpics.shutterfly.com
The wife says I can have a mistress as long as her ribs are made from white oak.

Steve

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 804
    • View Profile
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #5 on: January 06, 2010, 04:09:58 PM »
The boatbuilder/instructor I was working with to restore a BB15 observed that boatbuilding is all about problem-solving.

Here is a photo of one of the 3 sets of original HMCo molds, on a strongback in Aladdin's Cave at Mystic Seaport.  Besides for the bow, where it gets a little tight, it doesn't look like the molds have much of a bevel.

Forum member Bob Perkins is also working on restoring a 12 ... mybe he will chime in.


Erick Singleman

  • Registered Member
  • *
  • Posts: 172
    • View Profile
    • Erick's Wooden Boat Pics
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2010, 04:36:24 PM »
Well, I (with a little help for my friends) steam bent about one third of the frames to the new molds this past weekend.  It went surprisingly well.  We were able to get the frames tight to the molds using cable ties and at some points bar clamps.  And we only broke two of twenty frames.  Not bad for a first time.  Good thing we had a carbonmonoxide detector set up though.  Although we had widows open for ventillation, it was apparently not enough, it did go off once after about two hours.

We opened the garage door and let in some fresh air and were good to go.

I have added some pictures and a little blurb on my shutterfly site:   www.erickswoodenboatpics.shutterfly.com
The wife says I can have a mistress as long as her ribs are made from white oak.

Adam

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2010, 04:59:40 PM »
What great pics Erick! For someone like myself who is a real novice at this its a wonderful learning tool. Keep 'em up!

BTW, great shop....I hear a little CO^2 makes you stronger ;)

Steve

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 804
    • View Profile
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #8 on: January 26, 2010, 05:30:02 PM »
Nice work, Erick.  The molds look great.

Adam

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #9 on: January 26, 2010, 07:21:15 PM »
Question(s)....If I remember correctly, MIT allows someone to build just one 12 with the plans. So I assume one can not re-sell them, - as well as any offsets, molds, etc. that come from the build...? Is that a correct assumption?

What about if someone is doing a resto (as Erick is) on there own boat. Can someone take offsets and sell them? Can someone sell the molds they made? Assuming of course CCSB doesn’t get wind of it (I am being hypothetical!).  What about if someone else was doing a similare resto - can Erick give them the molds to use?

I would think that those Molds of Erick’s are rather "valuable"....Not that I'm suggesting anything mind you...just curious.... ::)

Steve

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 804
    • View Profile
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #10 on: January 26, 2010, 09:34:51 PM »
MIT will not sell plans for the 12-1/2.  They do have one line drawing from 1938 but do not have the offsets, etc.  I am not sure they are willing to sell copies of this drawing.

Mystic Seaport will sell you plans they drew from taking the lines off of NETTLE (I believe Maynard Bray did the measuring), but they will only provide the offsets if you can produce a letter from Cape Cod Ship Building authorizing them to do so.  Getting that letter of authorization is no small feat, as CCSB is very protective of their intellectual property.  It has been done, however.

Bill Harding used 3 H12s to take the lines form which Edy & Duff produced the molds for the Doughdish.  I also know that Artisan Boatworks will build you a brand new boat, and they took measurements from several boats as well to draw the lines.

The net of all this is that molds do exist, mostly from the hard labor of individuals taking a seemingly infinite number of measurements.  There are always people looking for such molds, so I am sure there is a market for them.  One must be careful as to the wording used in advertising them, however.  Anyone can build a "faithful reproduction of a Herreshoff 12-1/2".  However, CCSB may send an attorney over to visit with you should you choose to call it an authentic "Herreshoff 12-1/2".

The following is in the Documents section of the Registry:

http://www.herreshoffregistry.org/doc/CCSB_Rights.pdf

Erick Singleman

  • Registered Member
  • *
  • Posts: 172
    • View Profile
    • Erick's Wooden Boat Pics
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #11 on: January 27, 2010, 03:57:51 PM »
Steve,

I had some email correspondence with Maynard Bray several years ago regarding the accuracy of the Mystic plans.  Although he was working at Mystic Seaport at the time, he did not take the measurements, the fellow who's name is in the drawn by box on the drawing did.  I believe his name was Allyn, I don't have the plans in front of me.  I was at Mystic one time, and was happy to see that Mr Allyn had a dingy named after him.

Regarding the accuracy of the plans, his response was that Mr Allyn was a very capable individual, and he trusted that the work was done correctly.
The wife says I can have a mistress as long as her ribs are made from white oak.

Adam Langerman

  • Registered Member
  • *
  • Posts: 210
    • View Profile
    • Herreshoff Designs, Inc
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #12 on: January 27, 2010, 04:26:15 PM »
Not to stir the pot too much, but the technology exists to measure the original model.  That might cut down on the accuracy debate.  Adam Langerman

Steve

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 804
    • View Profile
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #13 on: January 27, 2010, 05:49:04 PM »
Adam:  I presume you are talking about the planimeter-like device that HMCo used from the beginning?  No doubt, that would yield the most accurate results.  But I think the issue around what CCSB will take issue with still exists, no ?

Adam

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: Hull #1498 Restoration
« Reply #14 on: January 27, 2010, 07:52:29 PM »
Not sure I ever posted this - (Abridged version) - (Adam L. may know more...) But several months back Scott Rohrer showed me some very neat technology for taking lines off a hull (I gather from the correspondence never before used).... Seems they are working with the US Parks Service to make the R boat "Pirate" a Federal Landmark status. To do this they needed to file her lines and they didn’t like what they were getting with conventional methods (which he called a "wand" - where a helper spots various points on the hull and those are converted into a plan ), so the head honcho in DC parks department sent over some techies with a new super-accurate system of using remote sensor/transmitters placed around the hull and reconciling scanned readings through a central station.  It literally took billions of 3-D (XYZ) points and was combined to make images.

I gather it was a huge success - and appears a paper is being written about the method. Tax dollars at work - how’s that for a stimulus package....I get the picture there is some guy at NASA scratching his head asking where the heck he put that thing.... ;)