Hank

Thanks for the comments...so far. The Frollicky One is being mailed a box of soap with which to wash his mouth out with as his insolence will not be tolerated on this otherwise Proper Forum. Monty Python antics will NOT be allowed on this thread!! LOL!!!! (I haven't figured out how to do Smileys or I'd add one or two!!) Joe - One of the factors in our buying this property was the shed itself. Didn't add/subtract in the value of the property, but since it was there, that helped make the decision. YES - AC/heating will be added next year as well as insulation in the walls and probably some type of inexpensive paneling on the inside. That's one of the reasons for redoing CORRECTLY the back window - it was framed/installed by an idiot and needs to be outta there!! Continuing the voyage: A couple of notes left out of the initial post - the sub panel is wired for 50amps with 6 slots. I have 15A going to the equipment shed (lights/recept) and the remaining here in the workshop for lights, receptacles, and eventually HVAC. My intent is to keep things simple and most, if not all my model power tools can be run off a single circuit. I will probably put a 20A CB on that circuit and that should work out well. I've thought about a built-in vacuum system and will discuss that with another of my modeler friends who has a nice shop in place and is knowledgeable about these systems. When we renovated our house last year, the old laminate flooring was removed and is stacked in the front of the shed - I didn't take a count of how much is there, but hopefully, enough to do the floor in the shed and that will save a bundle! Not exactly my favorite color (dk. brown) but the cost can't be beat!!! Exterior-wise I plan to build a 8'x8' front porch and remove the old ramp which doesn't match up with the new double door unit that was installed early last summer (2018) to replace the rotted out original single door. Next spring/summer will also be the time to paint and later next year perhaps re-roof with proper eaves, etc. So, it's one step at a time and eventually I'll be back building models - here's a couple other up to date photos of the shed/shop and also one of it's primary occupants once it's finished: Exist. 8' fixture relocated. No further overhead lighting planned at the moment. Sloop of War PEACOCK will be one of the primary residents of the bldg. once the shop has passed it's builder's trials! Tomorrow afternoon (after the bird has been consumed) I hope to get out and get a bit of caulking/sealant applied around and under the front door unit. Time permitting, possibly some further electrical work, as well. Hank

We bought our retirement home in 2018 and in so doing were forced to downsize. After renovations and a new sunroom in the back, we still had "stuff" and the only place to stuff it was a 16'x22' shed in the very back of the yard. Of course, as originally planned, this was going to be my modeling workshop but we all know how these "desires" soon go south - at least for a while anyhow! We've been living here now 12 months and to be honest, a lot has taken place and I'm finally at the point (and place) to work on the old shed. Here is the starting point: I did add power back in June by having my electrician bury #6 wires out to the bldg. (and a newer yard equip. shed to the left) where we installed a small sub-panel which powers everything out back: I actually started work on the interior late last month after rearranging "stuff" so I could begin in the front right corner of the bldg. I better mention here that some of the "stuff" is all my ship model tools, parts, stash, books, plans, etc. and the rest is "our stuff" - usual accumulation of things that will never be used again!!! I got power (lights) on about a month ago by re-wiring an existing GFCI/switch/Florescent fixture and then started locating receptacles on the left side of the bldg. Oh - I've already created a CAD layout that's been re-worked over the last year or so into its present layout. So, I actually have a plan to go by, albeit changes as reality dictates how things are done! It dawned on me a couple weeks back that all this "stuff" needed a place to go and a fellow modeler and friend mentioned wanting to build a similar storage shed with loft. BINGO!!! Lights flashed and the word was - L-O-F-T!!! So, with his trailer to carry our loot from Lowe's, we spent an afternoon and built a 8' deep loft from side to side in the back of the shed: Yesterday I once again relocated "stuff" back to the left side to continue the receptacle wiring around the back to the right side. That's where I'm at now. We've loaded up the loft (last picture) with "stuff" that is NOT modeling related to get things somewhat manageable on the floor. I hope to reframe and replace the back (broken) window and add two windows to the right side of the bldg. and that will probably happen in December. For those interested, all the wiring is 12/2 and lights are LED fixtures with the exception of the 8' long original (and now relocated) florescent fixture. I've allowed in the ceiling area for expansion of lighting by putting a junction box adjacent to the 8' fixture. Comments welcomed! Hank

I'm no expert, but I've never seen any documentation at all that would indicate there were no gun port lids. Most accounts I've read shows them as hinged from the top (one piece) not the upper/lower lids as the ship has currently in place. Hope this helps,

Tom, I'm PMing you on your msg. etc. but thought I'd reply to your above commentary. I do know about DOS - My first computer was a Wyse 286 running MS-DOS (1986), the version I can't recall. I took a class in 1985 in Wilmington NC at Cape Fear Tech on ACAD rel. 2 and as I was using Intergraph IGDS CAD at DuPont, couldn't get past the awkwardness of ACAD and having to take 3-4 steps to the 1-2 steps in Intergraph. Hence, when MicroStation came along (1987) I took that path and although spending the last 3 working years doing .dwg files, all were done using MicroStation. As you say, if it works (Better😁!) don't fix it!!! Size & Scale - Ah, Yes - when I started my PEACOCK project in 2006, I chose 1:48 scale and ended up 6 years later with a huge model ship & display case (6' lg x 2' wide x 42" tall) sitting under wraps in the garage - at least until my model workshop is up and running and I'll move it there. If BOSTON ever gets underway, it will also be 1:48 scale, but only the lower masts/top - no upper works. It would approx. be the length of PEACOCK, I haven't run the numbers yet. See my PM. Hank

Tmj, A worthy endeavor, I commend you for your desire to show CONNY as she started her wonderful career!!! Although my preferred CAD program is Bentley MicroStation v8i, I'll let you slide on using AutoCAD here!!! LOL!!! I use v8i for all my modeling drawings (CAD). Years ago someone else built a CONSTITUTION in her 1794 appearance and I've always thought that this was how she should have been modeled. My only suggestion to you would be to use a common scale (1:72 comes to mind) as the overall size probably drives your decision on this. Good luck with CAD drafting of the plans. If you need a really clear copy of the original configuration of CONNY, send me a PM and I'll scan in Plate IV (CONSTITUTION Class Frigate) - 1945 copy from the Knox book Barbary Wars, Personnel & Ship's Data 1801-1807. It will be interesting to see how this project develops!

Wayne, I guess if I did go forward with BOSTON (at a later date) I could envision something along those lines. I laid in a very nice stash of boxwood prior to 2010 as well as some pear, white holly, and a couple other nice modeling hardwoods. I guess if we're going to continue a hull discussion it should be over on the hull forum, etc. So, you're from Norfolk? I was just there for a DD reunion in Sept. and was aboard BB-64 for a morning (not enough time, but did get some research done). Did enjoy the waterfront tour, downtown, Nauticus, and the Chrysler Museum. Had some good food at the seafood restaurant on the pier at Va. Beach!!!

OK, I own up to it - I was at Bayer in 2003 and took an existing Excel spreadsheet and rewrote it for the Fox documentation and data entries. I thought I had done that, but it's been so long ago that I had forgotten about it. I actually took the file to my mobile home down east to work on during evening hours with paper copies of the Fox notes that I had printed out. The spreadsheet was intended to put all the early U. S. N. naval ship information in one place for easy access. Well, how about that???? Thanks Wayne for pointing that out - I can only verify your above comments by looking at my original spreadsheet file Properties and concur that your findings are close (actually eybdd @ Bayer Pharmacuticals) - I was in the CAD group there for 18 years. I can't recall who it was that gave me the already created Excel file to use as a template. Note - even today I find it easier to copy an existing Excel file rather than trying to set up from scratch an entirely new spreadsheet - just too much work and too little spreadsheet experience. Hank

Ah, Sherlock Frolick has solved the mystery!!!! Huzzah!!!! (I'm glad he admitted to it, because I was starting to think that I 1) was loosing my marbles 2) had done it myself!!!)

I seem to have that EXACT same spreadsheet....but with many more ships listed! But, I can't recall when I came up with that or who may have created it. Thanks for sharing - verifies the info I have on file. USS FROLICK - I do indeed have that book, as well - but, as you mentioned, not a lot of usable info for the modeler. Hank

Jaager, You must have been reading my mind 8 or 10 years back!!! I also came up with the 24 1/4" R/S on the framing, as I was originally planning a POF model. However, I think with this knowledge "in the bank", I would choose to make it a POB with an rough elliptical opening on one side to show the actual frames. Somewhere along the center part of the hull where the frames are all identical to save time & effort but yet expose the interior. I also have the same ref. materials and one cannot do without Steele's "Bible" to lay out the basics!!! Her scantlings are documented in Josiah Fox Papers (#773) to a certain extent and would aid the modeler in sizing & location of gunports, etc. I have just now looked at my BOSTON computer folder for the 1st time in years - I have already created a dozen or so CAD files on various parts of this ship, and all are "in progress" so to speak. I think I last worked on these back in 2011 or thereabouts. "USS FROLICK" and I were in a weekly conversational mode at the time regarding research, etc. One thing we tended to agree about is that BOSTON and ESSEX were very similar in size/tonnage, etc. as well as both being constructed roughly during the same time period. We came to the conclusion that both yards would have consulted each other in some form or another in order to get their respective ships in the water and while ESSEX is fully documented, she could provide some general layout suggestions for recreating BOSTON which lacks any deck plan or interior layout elevations. I've got to be careful not to let this resurgence of interest cloud my already full plate of models once I have a space for resuming work!!! Hank

Well, glad to know that I'm not the only one who thinks BOSTON might be worthy of some study, etc.! I have a digital folder with CAD files I've drawn up, but I haven't "dusted them off" in quite a few years. S. Duffy (USS Frolick on the forum) and I were talking about this research this morning - he wondered if I was still interested in pursuing anything - we'll have to see about that! Good luck, and I'll keep up with your various posts from time to time! Hank

Sailing Anthony, Curious about your question re. U.S. Frigate BOSTON (1798) - Are you planning on building a model of her and if so, what information have you been able to turn up other than the well-documented stbd. side elevation of her in Chapelle's HASN and the 1945 copy of this draft provided in the Knox book? Let me note here that the U.S.S. prefix did not come into use anywhere until well after the War of 1812 and more probably in the 1820's. That's just one of my pet peeves with early USN Naval History terminology, etc. All U.S. naval vessels were called "U.S. Frigate" or U.S. Sloop of War", etc. I spent quite a bit of time researching (or trying to) this particular ship in the early 2000's only to run into a brick wall when it comes to actual information on record. Besides the Knox book notations from Tripp's post above (which I also have) I think there may be some scantlings taken off of her by Fox in his papers (I also have those packed away). I know from the head historian of the USS CONSTITUTION Museum that there was virtually nothing written down that exists today, certainly with their archives although BOSTON was the follow on frigate to be built in Hartt's shipyard once CONSTITUTION had been launched. This particular small U.S. frigate has always appeared to me to have quite an attractive potential for a very nice model. Any info you could provide would be appreciated.

Ken, Just read over your build to date...You're right on track!!! This is exactly how I built my 1:48 scale Sloop of War PEACOCK back in 2006-2012 - POB construction, all scratch built. You noted on the photo of the bulkheads in place on the keel that the heights were more than needed. That's exactly what you want so that you remove material that is not needed rather than having to add material, etc. My build (which was on the old MSW forum and lost to eternity) covered the very same sequence of construction, etc. - keep up the great work, I'll be looking in on this from time to time. Hank

Popeye, My project at hand is actually converting a shed to a model workshop. THEN the shipbuilding will continue! Kevin, Ditto - got to have a PLACE to build things and right now that's not the case. I'll happen, it's just going to take $/time.

Old Collingwood & Kevin, I appreciate the nice comments on NEW JERSEY - Thanks very much. I will hopefully be back in the "shipyard" once I get a shed converted to a model shop and that is slowly in progress at this time! Hank

Popeye, Thanks so much - I do appreciate the kind remarks. Good luck with your NJ kit! Just remember that Patience is the best virtue when modelbuilding! Hank

Thanks, Chris! Much appreciated. Retirement - h.mmmmm- haven't figured it out yet! Working on it!!! Hank

The model is now complete (04/2019). It's been a few years since I've updated this topic and also had some other major changes in life: 1) We moved to a smaller, ranch style home in Nov. 2018 (Mocksville, NC) and I no longer have a model shop - at least at present - I will in the near future, but that is a work in progress. 2) I retired from Grifols Therapeutics Inc. in April 2019 and am currently working on home projects at both houses - hoping to the get the old one ready to sell and make the new one more livable, etc. We just returned from the May Wooden Boat Show & Model Exhibit in Beaufort, NC at the NCMM and I am posting some completed photos of USS NEW JERSEY (BB-62): This model took 7 years (give or take) and was a major project both research-wise and construction-wise to build. Anyhow, it's done and I'm sticking to that!🤩 FYI - To those who may have left comments since my last post in 2016, I apologize for not responding - my build is on The Ship Model Forum and I simply didn't have time to keep up with 2 modeling forums at the same time.

OC, I'll do that the next time I'm perusing other modeler's builds. Hank

David, In this case, it's a slam dunk - it's hard to describe without pictures, but the manufacturer really did a job on misshaping the hull. With as much detail as there is in the kit that's pretty much correct, one wonders why they messed this part up so bad. But then, this isn't the only kit in 1:200 they've screwed up. I would think that once you've created a part in any given scale in a 3D CAD file - and while I can't say for certain that this is how Trumpeter designs their kits - scaling up or down is a snap, literally. Yes, additional internal changes may be needed to beef up the integrity of the part, the actual shape should conform to the plans that you originally used. Unless, someone simply didn't care to check his work or the corp. management cut their development funds and they just went with a first round design that had not been verified. With wooden ships/boats it's a bit harder to tell whether or not the lines are fair & true. Hank

Ulises, Thanks - just what I needed to know! Scott, Thanks for the nice comment! Unfortunately, Trumpeter didn't get it right and it seems their other 1:200 hulls are no better. My other build using a Trumpeter ARIZONA kit as a conversion to PENNSYLVANIA also has inherent flaws. However, as I am planning on making a waterline display, this should not be a major factor as those flaws are for the most part below the waterline. Hank

Here's a question I guess I should post to the general crew - Notifications - what exactly do you do with them? I mean, it's nice to receive them, but ....I'm not getting it, I guess. Do I respond, or what?...and How? Please educate me on these - anyone! Hank

Kevin, To be truthful, it hasn't actually been discussed in several months. HOWEVER - it is on my BB Bucket List and time allotted, could happen one of these days! I've got a summer of med. procedures being scheduled (brain transplant, etc. - nothing dire, just need to be done) so this COULD be a fall or next spring type event - or ....later. Being in the active work force, I simply can't plan things too far in advance. The Admiral....you all understand - but, I'll keep you in mind. These sort of things DO happen from time to time, just takes planning (and $$!). Hank

Kevin, Thanks for the support! The hull is 1/2 way there - I still have the stbd. side to grind down to shape. Once that's done, I can establish the waterlines, bootopping, and start work on horizontal hull plate layout - this will be a bitch since these curvatures are guesstimates. A few of us have talked about a trip to Norfolk to take a survey by boat and record measurements of the actual ship's plate lines. It's still up in the air. Later, Hank

Yea, I've seen it. Entertaining, but hardly realistic. I did like some of the various interior shots of MO. Special Effects were really neat!