Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'deck planking'.
Found 3 results
Hi, I'm currently working on my first kit (Pickle by Caldercraft) and have a question relating to the false deck which in this case will be partially visible on the finished model. I'm at a stage where it should be glued into position (according to the instructions), but without any planking (which should be done at a later stage). This seemed weird, so I had a look at other people logs (of the same kit) and realized that basically no one followed the instructions on this matter. I've decided to do the planking before I glue the deck into position, but am a bit overwhelmed by different techniques that people use to make it look more realistic and basically don't know what to do. This relates to: Caulking. I've seen people simply use a permanent marker along the edges of the planks, but am a bit worried about messing things up. Can I use a pencil instead? How will it react with the varnish? Won't I end up with graphite smeared all over the thing? Plank meeting points pattern. I'm sure there's a term for this that I simply don't know. The plans suggest using the 'three butt shift system' for the deck, with max. plank length at 29' (140 [mm] in scale). Should I apply the same principle for the false deck? Nails imitation. I like the look of the wooden nails and thought about using the toothpick technique, but I'm not sure if this is in any way accurate in relation to this particular ship. If it is: What should be the diameter (I was thinking about 0.4 [mm]). If it's not: Should I use actual metal nails instead? Also - is there something that I didn't think about / missed? Thanks in advance for any help.
I am new to the forum and to ship building. Well sorta new. I began the Swift in 1999. Life and work conspired and the Swift went into storage after the bulkheads and main deck planking were completed. I recently dusted off the box and started again. I have the rigging left to do. I made a ton of mistakes. So far I have been alone to sort the probems out. But at this point I'm not sure about things. So I Googled them. And that lead me here to your forums and build logs. They are a Godsend of information. I've just mounted the main and fore sails to their respective masts. Next I'd like to mount the Jib on its halyard and stay (correct terminology?). I am studying the plans to understand exactly where each line goes. My plans don't have much detail. For instance I found that the flag and throat halyards have to feed through little holes drilled into the masts. NOWHERE are these holes indicated on my plans. I only found out about them by looking at pics in Gabe K.'s build log. Great log BTW!!! When I worked the hull I got my first big surprise: As I know more than one Swift builder has discovered, the bow profile you get, does not match the required stem post contour. A little wood putty? Not hardly. Way too big a gap to span safely. I used little blocks cut from a spare bass wood plank and glued them into a random mosaic pattern to build out to the needed profile. You can just see the little squares in two of the hull photos. That did the trick. My first big thrill came with planking the deck. I included 2 photos of the planking. I was inspired by "Historic Ship Models" by Wolfram zu Mondfeild and "Ship Modeling from Stem to Stern" by Milton Roth. I don't know if a Virginia Pilot ever had a deck like mine, but the books made it seem plausible, I like it, and at ths point its here to stay. Even so I would appreciate any feedback on the deck and it appropriateness. So if this is an error, I will know better next time. Next surprise was due to a big mistake I made in the bulwark planking. I did not check to see if I had enough plancking to do the bulwarks. As a consequence of using a complex planking pattern on the main deck, I ran short of planks to do the the outer bulwarks. BUMMER. I contacted AL for more. The wood was cheap. The shipping was not. I conserved the few remaining original planks to randomly intersperse with the new ones. The new blanks are much lighter and have a much tighter grain than the 16 yr old originals. Going down it looked horrible but on completon is hardly noticeable. When I had to get the replacment wood from AL, I ordered twice the wood that I needed "just in case." Good thing as the shipment got mangled during transit ruining a third or more of each plank. But the extra wood covered the loss. Note the hull pic with some bulwark planking done, you can see the the hull is waiting for new wood. BTW this has the best veiw of the mosaic used to fill in the bow. Another consequence was spare time while waiting for new wood. So I decicded to build the deck houses. I planked the houses with the narrow sepalia (mahogany like) strips. When the new wood came in I switched back to hull planking, where I finished the upper bulwarks straight way and dived into the 2nd hull planking proper. Here I made a big mistake, for the lower hull I continued to use the narrow sepalia planking that I'd started with on the deckhouses. The wide sepalia planking was the correct stuff to use. Needless to say I ran out of the narrow planks. Too far in to it to back out, I devised a jig that let me cut the wide planks into narrow ones. This allowed me to finish the hull. A comment about mistakes like this: They make you feel really stupid, but sometimes they workout. The narrow planks fit around the hulls compound curves much better than the wide planks ever could have. Plus it just looks better and probably is closer to scale. Checkout the finished hull pic. The Sapalia (mahogany look alike) really shines and is just gorgeous. Lesson: Take your victories where you can. Also note the mix between old and new Mukali (bass wood like) in the upper bulwark. Not too bad given the disaster it could have been.
After studying the deck planking diagrams as shown in both the AOTS books 'Diana', I am looking to follow these books as closely as possible, but there seems to be a little discrepancy with the planking diagrams and what I have taken to be 'common wisdom' from this site, namely the use of a 'butt shift' pattern. The AOTS books clearly show a staggered deck termination, but clearly show which beams these are terminating, suggesting a sound principle behind this. These are clearly well researched and authored by people far more knowledgeable than I....but why the discrepancy? I've tried to illustrate below not wanting to infringe on copyrights. Planking pattern per AOTS Diana _________________________________________________________________________ _________________I________________________________________________________ __________________________I_______________________________________________ _______________________________________I__________________________________ _____________________________________________________I____________________ _________________I________________________________________________________ vs. Commonly referred to butt shift pattern (approx only) _________________________________________________________________________ _________________I________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________I____________________ ______________________________I___________________________________________ _____I____________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________I_______________________________ _________________I________________________________________________________