TomShipModel

Members
  • Content count

    104
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About TomShipModel

  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    East Brunswick, New Jersey
  • Interests
    All things Nautical but my primary interest is Sail between 1750 and 1815. Previous builds include Sloop of War Wasp, Screw Sloop USS Hartford, Training Ship Empire State (all scratch Built) as well as Destroyer Escort USS Camp (scratch built excepting the hull from an old Revell kit - Long Story). Current Build in HMF Liverpool built 1757 at 1:96.

Profile Fields

  • Full NRG Member?
    NRG Member
    MSW Member

Recent Profile Visitors

177 profile views
  1. Good Day Martin, That is a great Idea. I have Longridge's book, but it has been so long ago that I didn't remember that detail. Thanks for sharing that. I've placed and removed the masts several times, and I'm sure that I will be doing it several times before I rig shrouds etc. The method that you use prevents enlarging the wood. Best regards, Tom
  2. Thanks for the link Frank. I understand that a lead block, or some other way to get the line to come in from the side or bellow the timber head would allow the use of the tugboat hitch. So, if I have a line coming from above the belaying point, I'll put a lead block on the deck. This hitch for sure would work. I'm working with a ship built in 1757 and I'm modeling it as it would be in 1777-1778. AS best as I can find from what I've read, belaying pins weren't in use at that time in the Royal Navy. I have a further question that I think I know the answer to, but I'll ask those who know a lot more than I on this subject. The timber head passes through a rail (as you see on the background plan of Culloden on MSW). I'm thinking that the line would NOT pass under that rail before hitching to the top of the timberhead. Is that correct? Also, I'm assuming, that belaying by simply wrapping the line around the rail would for sure never be done. All the best, Tom
  3. Frankie, A very good explanation. Although I've belayed many times, this is the first time that someone clearly defined the how and why as well as the number of turns etc. Question though: If you are belaying to simply a timber head, that is, no underside, how do you belay? Depending on type of ship, and period, belaying pins might not have been used. If belaying was simply to a timber head, what is the correct way to belay? Thanks all, Tom
  4. I do not use glue when I install the masts or spars. There really is no reason to. Yes, if you broke one, it would be one less problem to get around. Except for the lower yards, everything was able to be taken down at sea. You really don't need to glue anything as the rigging will hold everything together. Regarding the lower masts; I install wedges to keep them relatively tight at the deck. In full scale, there are also wedges where the mast passes through the deck. This allows me to adjust mast rake as I rip. Tom
  5. Druxey, Thank you for that information. Very interesting that there was the forerunner of I guess a dependent care account back then. Tom
  6. Thank you Michael. Well done.
  7. Good morning everyone, I am contemplating putting sails on my current project, HMS Liverpool of 1757. The model is 1:96. If I do sails, I'm going to use silk span. Somewhere on MSW, I read a method of using silk span, and printing the tabling and sail plan using an inkjet printer. I did a word search of the forums and did not find it. Frankly, I don't remember if it was a separate topic or a build log. It looked very promising. So, hopefully one or more of you have a better memory that I. Thanks for any and all help, Tom
  8. Chuck, My prayers are with you and your family. Family is always first; especially at times like these. There is nothing that anyone can say that makes it better, but remember all the good times. Tom
  9. Good morning all. I've seen this model up close. Very well done as others have said. Tom
  10. Excellent job. The detail is very good, especially the rigging etc.
  11. Ron, Thank you for posting the video. I haven't use an airbrush at all up to now but I do have two. At some point I will give it a try. I wish that I had seen this video before I got the air brushes because I had no idea what I have and why they would work or not. Now I do have the guidance that I need, and chances are the airbrushes that I have might not be the right fit. Anyway, this video is a must for anyone who is even thinking about using an air brush.
  12. Good morning all, As said previously on this thread, I second that you keep both. I have both and do occasionally use the Preac for very fine work, and when I'm too lazy to change blades. To be totally honest though, I haven't used my Preac in a while. The Byrnes saw I use almost every day that I'm working in the shop. Before I had my Byrnes saw, I made gratings with the Preac. The gratings for my current build (1:96) were made with the Byrnes saw. As far as blades go, Thurston in Rhode Island is first rate. I've used them several times and never been disappointed. This is doubly special because most of their business is with professional jewelers and the like. No order is too small. Their customer service is tremendous. I've ordered from them on Monday, and got blades on Friday of the same week. Google their website to access their catalog and request a quote. In a day or two you have a quote and instructions on ordering. They are first class and the blades are excellent. The three most used power tools in my shop are all be Jim Byrnes. The saw most of the time, followed by the disc and thickness sanders. I have sheets that I first thickness as needed and then cut on my Byrnes saw. Best regards,
  13. My condolences to David's friends and family. Rest in peace.
  14. The current state of traditional Museums and historical artifacts is indeed troubling. In 2005, I had the pleasure of having, what I believe was then called, a modeler's tour of HMS Victory. It was incredible enjoyable. Now, a recent visitor tells me that such a tour is no longer offered. The last time that I visited the Science Museum, in 2012, I was in an almost empty Nautical Gallery. No complaints by me as it was quiet and I spent many hours there. A curator was in the gallery and gave me what amounted to a private tour for almost an hour. Then, he proceeded to tell me that the entire exhibit was being taken down and put in storage. I asked why, even though I expected that I knew the answer. First, he told me to look around. See, he said, except for you and I, there is almost no one here. Look at how much space is devoted to all of those large battleship and cruiser models. We need the space for more current and important topics having to do more with science. After all, we are not the Maritime Museum. That collection has since been removed. Maritime Museum is now one gallery with one of each class ship and that's it. On this side of the Atlantic, The Smithsonian Institution American History Museum removed most of the models years ago and replaced many with "interpretive posters" with information that is very general and obtainable from the internet in most cases. You can see it in how some Museum Ships, USS Intrepid in NYC for one, bear little mind to what their original purpose was, and as others have stated, turned into an Amusement park. Thankfully, there are still very good ship displays out there, like in San Diego, but these are few now. You would however be interested to know that the last time that I was at Mystic Seaport, one of the docents mentioned to me that the most often received question that they got was, "Where are the models?" Mystic is now building a Huge exhibit hall. It's a little disconcerting that it is so, "modern" and a little incongruous with the rest of the seaport, but I'm told the plan is to fill it with models that are currently in storage. Is it possible that, just maybe, there might be a little turn around that realizes that even though some change is necessary, the old museum still has a place.
  15. Toni, The photo appears to be too large a file. Only one loaded.