Foremast Jack

Are you saying the he should have used a different piece for the arms? The whole purpose of the MOC was to use a single piece as much as possible.

It's cute. I like the rings around the gun-ports.

Works fine for me.

Yes, just finished reading that before I saw your post. I see the technical difference, but I don't personally find it to be an issue in real life. It's of little consequence really. As far as the crash. You can place the two pieces together in "free space" but when you try to move them as a pair the program crashes.

I don't spend much time in the LDD forums, so forgive my ignorance at the use of the word "illegal" here, but I don't understand why it wouldn't be allowed. As far as them lining up, there's no difference in setting 2 1x1 bricks side by side. I'm not really trying to press the point, since I feel this is getting off-topic for this thread. I've dealt with not being able to use them together this long, there's no reason I can't continue. I never knew it was purposefully causing the program to crash in past though.

I see there was no bug fix for pairing and

I like all the technic pieces on the cathedral spires. Gives the illusion of intricate stone-work.

I'm with Andy here. The great thing about LEGO is taking a set, finite number of pieces and using your imagination to come up with something that doesn't seem expected, but is still a recognizable representation. While I'm all about them making new molds I think Andy has it right here when he says, "I suspect some people are setting themselves up for disappointment though." I have no doubt there will be new molds, but the simple fact of the matter is, LEGO will not make new molds when they have another piece already in existence that gets the job done. As I was saying, that's what LEGO is all about.

Ah, okay. I thought your shrouds were both the shrouds and backstays. Whilst I'm still inclined to say that whole mess of cordage should be moved aft, you know your vessel much better than I; so it is entirely at your discretion how she is made. She does look a lot better though with that fourth shroud/backstay on. Well if you're looking for an English bird the first two that pop to mind are the Lark and Nightingale. Now are either of them fitting names for a ship? It's hard to say. But as you say, you may want to take that feathery conundrum off the prow and see what else may fly to mind.

She looks pretty good. In your other thread about buying an official one you talk about her being in all her splendid glory. Yours isn't big enough yet to satisfy that.

I really don't think those metal posts support the deck. If they are removable it kind of defeats the purpose of them being there. Posts like that (as a say above I don't think they support the deck) I'm really not sure what they are used for or if they have a specific name. Posts like these do support the above deck and they are called "stanchions". A picture of a mast. Those are pikes to repel borders. Whilst it is possible that they could have stored around the mast I've only ever heard of them being stored on the gallows (for a frigate), like I say above, but I definitely don't know everything.

Well I seriously doubt they would ever make the HMS Endeavour seeing how its size would demand a very high price-point. Also, I'm inclined to believe that since the HMS Dauntless gets more movie face-time (and is the exact same ship) that was LEGO to make one it would be the Dauntless. To answer your question: if one was made and had enough detail to make it worth the money, yes, I'd buy it.

Looks great! Made me laugh cause this is what I first thought when I saw this picture.

Yeah, okay I thought this was the case. Thanks.

While she does look more impressive with all those gun ports, it's not the most historically accurate thing. Besides I really don't think you need to reduce the spacing to squeeze in more guns. I think once the full length of the gunwale is made you'll have enough. But I guess we can only wait and see.

I wasn't saying that her mast was too far forward. I was talking about the Main Channel. I'm including a picture so there's no confusion. I can understand that. Was just pointed it out, in case it was accidentally over-looked. I absolutely love how you paired an inverted 2x2 round plate here to create perfectly squared capstan bar holes. I see you're using spears as bars with the blade inserted, if you haven't already tried, would you see (at least for me) if the butt-end fits in that space? I think it works in one way but not in another. I think it's fitting cause hawks are swift flying birds. And I've no doubt that Hawk can really fly before the wind. At the same time though, hawks are also predators, so if she's an unarmed merchantman, then I could see a problem. Ultimately, I don't think you need to change the name if you don't want.

Well I don't think that's too bad really, seeing how your LEGO ship is only about 60% of what the scaled length should be (based on your model the Unicorn). Unfortunately you can't just add length because the length to width ratio will be off. You could see about building gun-ports in the bow quarters. That would add another two overall. Plus once you get aft a bit more, you may find room for two more. I'm sure the flag pieces are too short for your liking, but are you also referring to my suggestive brick-built covers? I did want to make them 3x3 (as opposed to 2x2) by didn't put a lot of time into the problem. I want to make sure you feel this is your ship.

Good work reducing the height. Might I suggest you think about brick-built gun-port covers?

This may seem a "noobish" question, but how can you tell which minifig is in the package? Do you simply squeeze, rub and feel for some defining shape, or is there some kind of indicator on the exterior?

Yes, I meant to make it clear with my previous post that seeing how you're the captain of your ship you can make her lime green and hot-pink if you'd like. If you're happy with white and have enough pieces for it, then that's certainly what I would do.

Yes, they were removed when not in use. (A fully shipped drumhead would take up nearly the full length of beam on deck.) When not in use they were stored on what is called the gallows. This was the cross-grated area around the hatchways in the waist of the ship. (Under the skid-beams: the place the ships various small boats were stored). note: this is for a frigate or other "flush-decked" ship. Ships of the line were a bit different. The bars there being stored on the appropriate deck usually on hooks hanging from the over-head.) I would also like to take this opportunity to shamelessly plug my capstan tutorial. I think you mistook his meaning here captain. By "post" he means "bar" not "stanchion" as I believe you take him to mean. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ edit: I think I read and spoke a bit too hastily. Captain Blackbeard I think I actually misunderstood his question. As Blackbeard pointed out, on a frigate (or other ship where the drumhead was on the main deck) there was nothing to obscure the capstan bars going round. On larger ships of the line, that immediate area was simply designed so that nothing was in the way at the height of the capstan bars.

I'm glad to hear it. I really don't think it should be too difficult. When I was knocking up that little section in LDD I purposefully made it to match a section of gunwale from your pictures. Went ahead and made a copy of one section of your gunwale using the technique I would use. This is an all but perfect blending of what you have and how I would adapt it. (this version is 2 plates taller than what you have). I leave its use entirely up to you.

These are going to be so amazing! I simply cannot wait to see one of the minifigures completed.

There was no real official criterion for colouring of the ship. It was solely at the discretion of the captain. The right honourable Horatio Lord Nelson used a distinctive yellow and black stripe, with the gunports being black (off-setting the yellow stripe that encompassed them). After the Battle of Trafalgar this pattern became the unofficial standard. Thus named the "Nelson Chequer." I would refer you to a photographic catalogue contained in the index for some fine pictures.

Aye aye, sir! edit: accidentaly quoted you. I'm realizing I quote more from habit of clicking the "reply" button within the last post, as opposed to the general "Add reply" at the bottom of a page.