Jump to content

maturin

Members
  • Content Count

    261
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About maturin

  • Birthday 04/16/1982

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Poulsbo, WA
  • Interests
    Bookbinding
    Mapmaking
    Nautical History
    Restoration & Conservation
    Fly-Fishing

Recent Profile Visitors

770 profile views
  1. Thanks all for the great advice and feedback. Particularly Cathead's words about this being a great beginner kit, which confirms my own feeling that earlier failures were a lot to do with inexperience and poor kit choice. Since my last post, I had a productive weekend. I went ahead and just looked over my situation still a bit worried that I had removed too much material during the fairing process but also noticed I did not line the last three aft bulkheads with the bottom of the building jig, but with joinery at the center (duh!). This resulted in those last three sitting far too low. Looking at the building jig with the keel attached I could see some pretty obvious issues with more than half of my bulkheads no longer meeting the appropriate plane along the rabbet. Had a moved forward and attached the ribs, they wouldn't have meet properly. The below images should illustrates what I mean... The above image illustrates how low the aft bulkheads ended up. I pulled those off, rather successfully without breakage, and refit them. After going over several rather desperate options, I decided to back fill a bit and re-fair these areas. Taking some thin stock I glued it down and brought the bulkheads back up to their intended heights onto the upended building jig, in some areas requiring two layers: After being satisfied with this fix-up I then turned my attention to the transom, which has been much maligned. I took some thin veneer, cut to an average width of the hull planks and glued them on and stained to match the keel: After fitting the transom and the keel and bit of very minor re-fairing I started in on the frame bending. I took the above advice in parts and wound up carefully selecting 15, 10" lengths that seemed the most uniform without knots or other obvious weak points. I boiled these for 15 minutes and applied them in one piece starting at the keel and working my down the each side separately. I did not glue them until after they had moderatly dried, simply applying a small bit of glue above the sheer tabs. I noticed that giving them a minor bend in two directions revealed the grain pretty readily as they obviously seemed more interested in bending in one direction over the other. I only ended up with three for the boneyard. Im leaving them over night to dry as I write this: A again with the keel replaced and glued over the frames. The alignment of the frames to the rabbet is really nice now and Im pleased with how everything turned out. The net effect on the net few steps (planking) is yet to be seen, Im sure there will be some. Though I think I can manage those issues when they come.
  2. This is great stuff... I had a moment of panic last night as I was peering over my fairing job and still wondered if I hadn't taken too much off. Though as you say, it may be that Ive yet to take ENOUGH off. Its hard to say. Ill look for the bevels as I begin planking. For now, Im just fitting and testing the keel and thinking about the process of bending the frames. I think Im somewhere between soaking in boiling water at the outset but leaving to soak over 24 hrs and then using heat applied with a tool as I bend them in one piece. Perhaps these photos will help the experienced eye judge wether my fairing is adequate to continue. NOTE: I also realize Ill need to continue the fairing down past the sheer tabs to prohibit any problems with the ribs. Thankfully, looking at my photos as I wrote this reminded me.
  3. Hi All (Again) First let me say that this is probably the third build-log Ive started since joining NRG and MSW back in 2014. Some of those early builds are still with me, and one in particular Ive tried twice and which went so irrecoverably badly that Ive tried to forget the whole affair and have since stuffed in a "box of shame." Much of my early failure (to complete) has had a lot to do with over-ambitious kits and a level of perfectionism that Ive found somewhat debilitating at certain steps. Also, Ive found that learning this stuff is very difficult in a vacuum, and with little to know organized groups in my area its hard to find more seasoned modelers to learn from. Also, when things start looking really bad (to me) I find it somewhat difficult to carry on. Mostly, however, my forward progress has been difficult due to having small kids, a full-time job, a long commute and an ever repopulating "honey do list" and other assorted house-ownership projects. My interest has remained steadfast though, and my kits never fully stored away. I think this was an intentional thing, as I just couldn't bear the idea of walking away. All that said... here we go again. Ive bought quite a few kits and read about a thousand build-logs and feel (finally) that this kit might be the perfect level of beginner that I won't find it too challenging but also not so easy that Im just bored. Ive been blow away reading the logs of others and really want to joint the ranks of having "completed" a build. Ive had a pretty good start, and I think Im ready to start my log. Unfortunately I had earlier decided NOT to log this build as I'd failed to move forward with my others and I was worried the same thing would happen with this one, but as Ive moved ahead pretty well and found a window in my schedule I think I can actually do this. For this reason my early photos were never taken... As for my goal, myinterest is not so much in the Bounty (1784) launch as it is in the Discovery (1789) launch. As some may be aware, the Puget Sound was named for Peter Puget, 3rd Lieutentant of Discovery during Vancouver's survey of the Pacific Coast. Being originally from the area and currently living and working here my interest in this particular boat is deep. Puget surveyed much of the lower Sound from a Launch not unlike that of Bounty's and many (including the Center for Wooden Boats) have built their versions of the Puget "Longboat" on the designs of the Bounty's "Launch." Ive yet to determine why Bounty's is a "Launch" and why Discovery's is a "Longboat." In either case, it seems the McKay plans and the other original Bounty launch plans Ive seen are much more accurately represented by the MS kit than the clinker built "Puget Longboat" that is claimed to be based on the Bounty launch. (See Here). Im not sure how the builders of that replica decided that the transom should be so different or that it ought to be clinker when the original plans are so obvious. But there it is. I referenced the plans I saw at Cap'n Rat Finks build here and I think posted in other builds elsewhere. I don't recall reading anywhere that the Bounty's launch was a clinker built boat. In either case, my build here won't deviate from the MS plans aside from paint/finish and a couple details that others have somewhat universally adopted (transom finish and installing cherry frames as a single piece). Thanks for reading. I started as many others have in reading the entire manual first, which I wholly recommend and reading many build logs (in some cases, repeatedly) which I think may be even more valuable. I counted, cleaned and attached the sheer tabs as prescribed. After squaring and installing the bulkheads I then installed the bulkhead reinforcements. I then faired the hull as best I could. A point I'll make here is that my fairing went extremely well as did the cleaning, sanding and construction of the keel. I realized in my past projects that part of my problem with fairing is that I was paying too much mind to the goal of a step, and not so much to the description. For example... instructions may say something vague like "Fair the hull with a sanding stick..." and in many logs you may see nicely faired hulls and a sanding stick in the background. One may think, I just need to sand the hull into shape... no big deal. How wrong I was. The key part I missed was the "sanding stick." Sanding blocks, or sponges or a piece of paper in your hand will not work as well or at all when compared to a long, flat and hard plane upon which the sanding paper is attached. Foam or cushion of any kind will result in a slightly rounded edge and ultimately an unseemly wide joint between two pieces. This took me too long to realize. Fairing went extremely well when I used a 5-6" long, .5" square dowel. No unsightly seems, and a pleasant experience overall. I will endeavor to weigh all points of instruction with equal gravity. It is not so much the goal as it is the way you achieve it. Since fairing Ive laid some spare balsa battens to check the hull and at this point am pleased. I am almost certain I removed too much material, but am trying very hard not to over think this and let my worry of making a mistake keep me from moving forward. Something tells me there is quite a lot of maneuvering as you go that may not often be obvious to beginners. So... if I have indeed removed too much material I shall deal with the planking issue when it arises. My new motto, a badly built model is still better than a half finished hulk on a garage shelf. Ive also decided to go with a painted/stained hull as others have done. So Ive managed to come up with a weathered look that I like. Using 1:1 Driftwood / Special Walnut Miniwax, applied after a pre-stain and all applied separately. I've been able to get a nice color that I like. I wanted the keel a bit darker than the planking so Ill likely change this ratio up as I move forward. Unfortunately the photos make it look a lot richer/redder/darker than it really is. Ive got to carve the rabbet and get the transom sorted out this weekend. As well Ill be attempting to steam bend a few frames after a good soak. Looking forward to it. Thanks all.
  4. What building dock is this? Nice work so far, but this was my first question.
  5. I agree, its really in these details that impress! Also very much enjoyed your brief bit about the treenailing, Ive found that much of the treenails Ive seen look somewhat out of scale, but your's looks well suited. I also appreciate that they aren't overly dark as some tend to be as well.
  6. This project is really moving, I wish I had this kind of progress! Thanks for sharing the link on those little saw-blades, Ive been searching for a solution just like those myself. Ordered a few just now...
  7. My entire professional life has been devoted to the longevity of books and bound materials, Ive published on the issue, run a lab dedicated to the conservation of such materials and teach. I read almost everything on a screen, check out all my library books via E-Book and often scan items I want to save into a digital form. I dont have space, the back strength or the patience to devote to "things" like books. I read more than most people, utilize my library more than most and work in a library YET I loathe lugging around books... Ive just done too much of it. That said... My personal collecting habits are with books. I own an extensive library of Maritime Heritage, Age of Sail, Ship Modelling and avidly seek out and purchase books on these subjects, particularly first editions. I own hundreds of books, but my own proclivities are as a librarian, with a specific purpose. I won't waste valuable shelf space or modeling money with the latest overly-expensive hardback Stephen King or Tom Clancy when I can check it out at the library, read it completely, and not have to carry 5lbs of paper anywhere (as a bus-boat-train-bike commuter, yes all and in that order and everyday this is extremely good for my back). So it can go both ways... there is nothing wrong with digital consumption, you just have to find what works for you. If it doesnt at all, fine. However, I submit that many folks that have had a bad experience probably just haven't found the right tool. I value the library as a resource, and because the publishing houses are going digital so are the libraries and to my mind the local library is one of the only things that we get back for our tax dollar that is worth its weight. It is sad to see some of these smaller publications going the way of the dinosaur though, however I hope folks dont consider ending their interest and support of these efforts simply because they are no longer available in paper. People work very hard, often at little profit to provide these things and are not likely making a concious decision to screw you by choosing to go digital... I understand that ultimately these decisions lie with the publishers, but remember there still is a little guy at the very end of that long and corporate string who is hoping the decision doesnt drive you away.
  8. I teach a materials permanence course to graduate art students at University and often lecture on the longevity of "aging" techniques. I can point to (if interested) numerous academic articles dealing specifically with the acidity of using tea, tannins or other plant based materials for this purpose. While truly holding their "age" through numerous artificial aging tests, they ultimately do lead to the fastest molecular breakdown of cellulosic materials (i.e cotton and linen thread/rope). In conservation of artifacts we often use Golden and/or Liquitext acrylic paints as they are scientifically formulated for archival use and light-fastness. As JerseyCity Frank also pointed out they do a marvelous job particularly with aging threads and fabrics. They do not have degradation products and have been proven in artificial aging tests to hold their color. Throw a bit of beeswax dressing over the newly toned thread and you have a great modeling material. I cant speak to Chucks thread source, but can say that it can sometimes be better to avoid aging all together go with something that already has the right look and tone. OEM products often do this well... A final comment Ill make is that I see so many ship models ruined by "over-aging" so my personal opinion is dont do it you dont have to...
  9. S.A. Cavell "Midshipmen and Quarterdeck Boys in the British Navy 1771-1831" Is an excellent source for the early lives of english naval officers.
  10. Another addition to the library...
  11. The contemporary evidence supports both scenarios, though I would say that there are two types of contemporary evidence and they support two accurate scenarios. However dubious we might be with regard to the practicality of a below-tiller arrangment, Chucks research is sound. It seems like there is a bit of reinventing the wheel here, let us not forget that these are 18th century models. Of course it was "impossible" to sail with that arrangment, thats why it was changed. Read Lavery's book as was suggested. It was also impossible to build pyramids, until they did. Now we do it differently, and cannot concieve of how they did it then. Its impossible without cranes. The detractors it would seem are making the very same discovery that mid-18th century sailors made: tacking and gybing the boat is difficult if not impossible with the traveller located below the tiller. That does not mean that wasnt done or that models reflecting it are inaccurate. I for one appreciate the level of detail and research and can see (without being expert) that the contemporary evidence and primary sources support Chucks original schematic as possible if not likely. I actually appreciate that, with regard to model making, this particular model represents an interesting historic anamoly. I am reminded that we dont fully understand how such things like the Pyramids, Stone Henge could have been built with primitive technology, YET they were, though probably with great difficulty. Likewise, though it seems impossible to sail a boat with a below-tiller-traveler arrangement, it actually was likely quite possible, though probably very difficult. Not an expert sailor by any means, but I do sail and I do have a boat, and I can concieve of a way to sail the boat (though not gracefully, and not sharply) with this arrangment. If I just needed to sail in a straight line, say from my ship to shore and wouldnt be doing a great deal of tacking... well... its possible.
  12. Gosh I hope so...I had been looking forward to ordering some of their wood or a upcoming project. (hi, by the way, Im in Poulsbo, we are practically neighbors.)

About us

Modelshipworld - Advancing Ship Modeling through Research

SSL Secured

Your security is important for us so this Website is SSL-Secured

NRG Mailing Address

Nautical Research Guild
237 South Lincoln Street
Westmont IL, 60559-1917

About the NRG

If you enjoy building ship models that are historically accurate as well as beautiful, then The Nautical Research Guild (NRG) is just right for you.

The Guild is a non-profit educational organization whose mission is to “Advance Ship Modeling Through Research”. We provide support to our members in their efforts to raise the quality of their model ships.

The Nautical Research Guild has published our world-renowned quarterly magazine, The Nautical Research Journal, since 1955. The pages of the Journal are full of articles by accomplished ship modelers who show you how they create those exquisite details on their models, and by maritime historians who show you the correct details to build. The Journal is available in both print and digital editions. Go to the NRG web site (www.thenrg.org) to download a complimentary digital copy of the Journal. The NRG also publishes plan sets, books and compilations of back issues of the Journal and the former Ships in Scale and Model Ship Builder magazines.

Our Emblem

Modelshipworld - Advancing Ship Modeling through Research
×
×
  • Create New...