kurigan

Eurobricks Knights
  • Content Count

    987
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About kurigan

  • Rank
    Fresh Pirate
  • Birthday 06/16/1981

Spam Prevention

  • What is favorite LEGO theme? (we need this info to prevent spam)
    Classic Pirates
  • Which LEGO set did you recently purchase or build?
    Ship in a Bottle - 21313

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    DavStaz
  • Website URL
    http://s199.photobucket.com/albums/aa244/kurigan_the_red/

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    New Jersey

Extra

  • Country
    USA
  • Special Tags 1
    https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/uploads/monthly_05_2011/post-273-130570789147.png
  • Special Tags 2
    https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/public/style_images/tags/redcoats.gif
  • Special Tags 3
    https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/public/style_images/tags/ship_expert.png
  • Special Tags 4
    https://www.eurobricks.com/forum/public/style_images/tags/tag-pirate_facebook-bronze.png

Recent Profile Visitors

6731 profile views
  1. OK, guess I misunderstood. What @Bregir is referencing is this now infamous shot of me holding Reckless aloft by her mast. I'm kind of, really, sick and tired of it being brought back up to be thrown in my face, particularly because it seems everyone misses the point. It's not just that she can be lifted up, but that the hull is heavy (2.5lbs) and unbalanced while the mast is raked back. Despite all the sheer force this applies to the mast, made only of stacked bricks with no reinforcement and combined with my unconventional hull technique, there she stays, taught and together. I am not handling her delicately, nor did I get the shot in one take, either. There's nothing to be ashamed of here. I'm proud of this build and there's no reason not to be. I achieved what I set out to, and learned a lot in the process whilst proving my theories about rigging to scale. You don't like it? I don't care. I try to be nice, I try to be helpful and all I get are these little jabs in return. Ya got a method that works for you, great! Good Day Gentlemen
  2. Thanks for the assist, I think. I kind of like the way you put it. I do try to use the emojis to dissuade any sense of indignity or arrogance on my part, but it's hard to be both helpful and concise while while finding ways to convey joviality. "Perfectly inelegant" I'm gonna use that
  3. But, it's not... You've got block and tackle, or something arranger to look like it, already in place awaiting the shrouds, so they can't be functional. That's the whole basis to my system. All the block and tackle (pullies, eyes, etc.) are functional. Some builders have used the 4624 deadeyes in a manner similar to yours here, where they were all tied to uniform length ahead of time, but only for the look. It's fundamentally different. My only point is that you complain that yours is a delicate configuration, but I don't have that problem. Once I start taking up tension on the deadeyes I can push, prod and bump the rig around all I need to get it done; much like the real thing. I mean, whatever, you do you, just don't go putting my name on it if it's not gonna be what I do As fir the ratlines, that's a good plan. Couldn't remember where I saw that done, but there's Wellesley chiming to jog my memory. Cheers Mate! Dave
  4. @Thomas Waagenaar Alright, ya got me. Seeing builders struggle drives me nuts. The whole point to a community like this, is to not have to reinvent and struggle through each step on your own. I know I never finished it, yet, but I did make a tutorial on my system and it could really help here. essentially, if you do something like what I describe there in, your rigging won't be so delicate, and you can shove it this way and that as you work. also, though I didn't get nearly that far in the tutorial, the secret to rat lines, is that in full scale they aren't tied directly to the shroud, but are lashed in place with a third piece of rope. I started doing it this way with thread on Reckless, and though the result was pretty spectacular, I was short on time and went for good old overhand knots. Cheers! Dave
  5. Indeed she is looking good an i too am eager to see her in living plastic.
  6. Well, honestly, I'm not going to tell you to change anything, its all up to you. I will suggest that you may have too much tumblehome at the front, but with the stud.io screen grabs I really can't be sure if I'm seeing it right. So, I offered an image and a explanation so you can check it and decide for yourself, instead of reporting back to me, since it's not my build, you're in charge. If what I think I'm seeing in stud.io is correct, those green sections near the bow should stand more vertical. Just a note to all and sundry: If you do manage to engage me in conversation, I'm not going to use terms, with out explanation, that I'm sure you can't just google. I'd rather you go find the explanation on your own in most cases as my personal experience shows that it will, more often than not, lead to a greater understanding of the subject and provide context, particularly with reference to other terms in the same category. I know that, not everyone, wants to become a "ship expert" but I see little sense in eschewing a greater understanding anyway. What's it hurt to learn a few terms, or spend a few minutes chasing a search engine rabbit hole on ship terminology if you come out the other side a bit better well informed? Also, if you repeatedly search the same topic, a smart engine like Google, will learn how to filter your results so you can find better sources over time Cheers! Dave
  7. @Justsomebrix "Tumblehome" is the progressive reducing of the ship's width, above the water line as to improve the center of balance. The resulting shape makes the hull look like a horse shoe in cross-section. The taller a hull is, the more tumble home is apparent, typically; that is, until about the mid 19th century. As for around the bow, someone figured it out and I apologize that I can't give credit because I forget who, but there is a way to continue tumblehome around the bow. It's something to do with the spacing of the hinges. If they are placed deeper inboard than the whale it creates a small gap that can be exploited as such. It's useful when you get in to very large ships where there is still some of that curvature up forward. On smaller vessels, it's rarely necessary so I use what's essentially the method laid out in the CGH tutorial. Dave
  8. OK, first off: Yes! That's exactly what I'm on about my friend. If you're "book smart" that's great and I truly envy you, but if you're not, or you're not yet that invested, popular models (especially kits from reputable companies) are a great source of information as everything is already there at scale and much of the research is already done. It never hurts to know the subject matter more in depth, but when just starting out or doing a one-off build, it isn't really required. Le Cerf is a great choice. Now I can look at what you have and know for sure that you really are on to something. With out that reference I might have said that she's still too narrow, but Le Cerf is long for a cutter, so it just kind of looks that way. You do seem to have her proportions down, though. Great job! I have my own way of achieving the illusion of the ship's counter rising above the water. The method you're using isn't entirely dissimilar so it may help. A row of 3937-3938 hinge bricks makes for a crease where the tumble home above leans in one way, while the counter below bends the other way. It needs some kind of support structure below. With my bending method it's simple as I only need one point of contact to keep the hinges at the right angle, but I'm sure it's quite doable here as well. It would be simpler than putting up a bunch of images or trying to explain any further is to just say, have a look around my photobucket and you'll see how I've approached both the transom and counter structures. I think the Green Schooner (Nonesuch) is most like yours in construction but see what you can garner from a look around. One thing I notice about your build as-is: You seem to have a significant amount of tumblehome continuing around the bow. Most vessels of this size/type from this era will have little to no tumble home (some, like Baltimore Clippers, actually have flair, that is the whale leans outward instead of inward) up forward. It's a really small, low rez image, but in this dorsal view you can kind of make it out. At about the second gun port you see less and less of the ships side until it's just the cap rail at the stem. Alright! It makes me feel like a million bucks when someone actually takes my advice, so thanks for that, mate. Thanks for sharing too, keep building. Cheers Dave
  9. kurigan

    King Kahuka's mouth

    Yes It's cheaper in the long run since they just do this for the tourist anymore
  10. kurigan

    King Kahuka's mouth

    Oh come on, it can get much worse It's not that bad, though I did just throw it together. A bit of double sided tape and some printer paper, then just draw it on. It's funny that this just came up again, though, as I kept this setup all these years. Cheers!
  11. kurigan

    King Kahuka's mouth

  12. @Justsomebrix Real quick. That's a cartoon. better than most but still not great reference material. The ship pictured does look to be of the same type as Cheerful 1806 of which there are plans available and many models, from kits and otherwise, on offer around the net. What you may notice first off is that she is still too narrow. I'd say about 4-6 studs wider would suit better. Just a guess, that, but just count the studs and do a bit of math. I also wonder at the height of the gunwale and those gunports. I know those frames look pretty slick, but I think they may be a plate or two too high and that affects the overall height of the rail. Look up Le Renard, a French replica cutter of a similar type. You'll note that though the ports are proportional to the ship, the whole thing, just isn't that big. An average size man is only about chest high to the cap rail. (I caution against using modern replicas as reference material. While they can be handy for understanding things like the real size of things as seen next to contemporary people in photographs, they are not always built or fitted-out in the same manner as the original and can lead you astray.) Dave
  13. @Justsomebrix Well, you don't express any particular concerns or ask and specific questions, so it's hard to figure on where to advise, especially at such an early stage and without reference. I always find that my best advice is more about a builder's approach, than it is about the build. ok I've been distracted too many time trying to compose this and not come off as a jerk and my train of though is lost. Basically this: With out some to reference, no one can really give you good advice. as far aw we all can tell, you're working from a vision in your own mind to which we are not privy. If you continue on that path, best to ya, but it will be entirely up to you how successful your build will be or not. the best y=thing you can do though is gather data. you don't need to be a book worm per se. just a simply set of plans or even just some models to design off of can be enough. But instead of relying on others to correctly assume what it is you're trying to achieve, hold up something real-world and say "I'm trying to make this" even if you wind up deviating here and there along the way. what sort of vessel will this be, a from when or where? in general terms, it looks as though this hull will be way to narrow and sit to high in the water (you addressed that I see). I can see you're on to something ship-like, but what it is I'm not sure. I could guess cutter and start advising based on what I understand about cutters in general, but your vision and mine might not quite line up. I'd tell you to look up known vessels like Alert or Cheerful. but then, you may say "nom those aren't even close. they're the wrong type and century, this'll be a polacca, duh..." then where are we? Anyway, I'm off track again so I'll just drop it, in the hopes that I've made my point in a way that easy to understand and digest. Cheers Dave
  14. kurigan

    King Kahuka's mouth

    Why not a sticker with a toothy grin, similar to the newer version, which would have hid the sprue mark, but was canceled by Lego late in development, as was often the case back in the day?