Keith_W

You can buy a Dremel, but others on MSW also use Proxxon and Foredom. When purchasing a rotary tool, these are (IMHO) the most important considerations:
 
- Price. Dremel is the cheapest and most available, Foredom costs the most.
 
- Chuck diameter. Dremel has the smallest chuck (which limits the size of the tool you can hold). Foredom has the largest.
 
- Flexible shaft. AN ABSOLUTE NECESSITY IMO. This allows you to hold the tool with a pencil grip and saves you from having to wrestle a large tool when performing delicate work. All three systems have flexible shafts as an accessory. With Foredom, you have a choice of many different shafts and heads.
 
- Tool bits. All accessories are interchangeable between Dremel, Proxxon, and Foredom - with the notable exception that larger diameter shank tools will not fit if your chuck diameter is too small (see point #2). Just because Dremel has the largest and most available selection of tool bits should NOT influence your decision. You can easily use a Dremel tool bit on a Foredom if you so choose.
 
- Smoothness. Proxxon and Foredom are said to be noticably smoother than Dremel with less rotational eccentricity. Important if you are carving very fine work but not so much if you are using your Dremel as a Drum sander or to cut bits of wood off.
 
- Foot pedal. Only Foredom has a variable speed foot pedal. This is important because your tool is not rotating when you apply it to the workpiece - increasing your precision. Both Dremel and Proxxon can be adapted with an "on-off" pedal, but this does not give you the ability to adjust speed using foot pressure.
 
I have a Dremel and I am happy with it. Good luck with your choice.

You can buy a Dremel, but others on MSW also use Proxxon and Foredom. When purchasing a rotary tool, these are (IMHO) the most important considerations:
 
- Price. Dremel is the cheapest and most available, Foredom costs the most.
 
- Chuck diameter. Dremel has the smallest chuck (which limits the size of the tool you can hold). Foredom has the largest.
 
- Flexible shaft. AN ABSOLUTE NECESSITY IMO. This allows you to hold the tool with a pencil grip and saves you from having to wrestle a large tool when performing delicate work. All three systems have flexible shafts as an accessory. With Foredom, you have a choice of many different shafts and heads.
 
- Tool bits. All accessories are interchangeable between Dremel, Proxxon, and Foredom - with the notable exception that larger diameter shank tools will not fit if your chuck diameter is too small (see point #2). Just because Dremel has the largest and most available selection of tool bits should NOT influence your decision. You can easily use a Dremel tool bit on a Foredom if you so choose.
 
- Smoothness. Proxxon and Foredom are said to be noticably smoother than Dremel with less rotational eccentricity. Important if you are carving very fine work but not so much if you are using your Dremel as a Drum sander or to cut bits of wood off.
 
- Foot pedal. Only Foredom has a variable speed foot pedal. This is important because your tool is not rotating when you apply it to the workpiece - increasing your precision. Both Dremel and Proxxon can be adapted with an "on-off" pedal, but this does not give you the ability to adjust speed using foot pressure.
 
I have a Dremel and I am happy with it. Good luck with your choice.

Sapphire, I bought my kit locally from Float A Boat in Ringwood. Their website is terrible, but they are a really friendly bunch. Much more friendly than that Modellers Shipyard guy.
 
http://www.floataboat.com.au/

Thanks Brian. I will be in Brisbane next week, so I can't bring it to the meeting We have some house guests at the moment, so I haven't been able to work on the ship. Then when I get back from Brisbane, i'll be off to London - my first trip back there in 10 years. Quite looking forward to it. Might try to persuade the wife to let me go to Portsmouth and the NMM

Hi Saph, when I built my Bounty Launch I compared a few of these models to AOTS:Bounty by Mackay. If you look at my build log you will find scans of relevant pages from different sources when I was checking historic accuracy (link in my signature). Here is a run-down of several different kits:
 
Artesania Latina Bounty Jolly Boat, 1/25 scale, 415mm length: http://www.artesanialatina.net/articulo.aspx?ref=19004&des=hmsbounty-jolly-boat-velas-cosidas
 
This is NOT the Bounty Launch as sailed by Bligh, rather it is an interpretation of the Jolly Boat, which was used for lighter duties. The plywood keel and ribs will be on display, and you will easily be able to see the laminations, so these should preferably be painted over. Otherwise, wood quality is typical Artesania Latina, meaning very good. Pre-sewn sails are included. Instructions are very good, featuring a full colour booklet and a sheet of poorly translated instructions - but this should be enough to help you build the ship.
 
OcCre Bounty Boat, 1/24 scale, 435mm length: http://www.occre.com/model-ship/bounty-boat.html
 
This boat is probably most accurate to the plans provided by Mackay. (Note that I did not say that it is the most historically accurate, because nobody seems to know what the actual Launch looked like). Every detail seems to be true to Mackay - the kit includes a bowsprit, windlass, and hoist. Also, rigging of the masts includes deadeyes. All these are absent on the Model Shipways kit. Unfortunately, again the keel and frame are cut from plywood, meaning that it will be on display. OcCre was founded by a group of former Artesania employees - so the wood is excellent. Instructions are also very good. I think that the sails are also pre-sewn, although my recollection is a little sketchy.
 
 
Model Shipways HMS Bounty Launch, 1/16 scale, 438mm length: http://www.modelexpo-online.com/product.asp?ITEMNO=MS1850
 
This kit deviates from the other two in several ways. It is the ONLY kit to be built over a plug. It is also the only kit to feature laser cut planking strakes, so you don't have to taper planks yourself. Every part of the boat is made of limewood. Limewood is a rather unattractive wood, although it is easily worked. You will have to stain it or paint it. I chose to do both. Instructions are excellent, BY FAR the best instructions you will ever see included in a model boat kit. Unfortunately, the kit deviates from Mackay and other sources in a number of ways, although most of these can be rectified by kit bashing. For example, the kit features gunwales - a feature missing in other sources I looked at (Mackay, NMM).
 
If you want a kit that looks closest to the Launch as set out by Mackay, I would recommend the OcCre. If you want an easily built boat, I would go Model Shipways. Good luck with your choice.

Keith, just found a read through your log, wonderful work and a great result - well done indeed.  I really appreciate you sharing your techniques!

Hi Saph, when I built my Bounty Launch I compared a few of these models to AOTS:Bounty by Mackay. If you look at my build log you will find scans of relevant pages from different sources when I was checking historic accuracy (link in my signature). Here is a run-down of several different kits:
 
Artesania Latina Bounty Jolly Boat, 1/25 scale, 415mm length: http://www.artesanialatina.net/articulo.aspx?ref=19004&des=hmsbounty-jolly-boat-velas-cosidas
 
This is NOT the Bounty Launch as sailed by Bligh, rather it is an interpretation of the Jolly Boat, which was used for lighter duties. The plywood keel and ribs will be on display, and you will easily be able to see the laminations, so these should preferably be painted over. Otherwise, wood quality is typical Artesania Latina, meaning very good. Pre-sewn sails are included. Instructions are very good, featuring a full colour booklet and a sheet of poorly translated instructions - but this should be enough to help you build the ship.
 
OcCre Bounty Boat, 1/24 scale, 435mm length: http://www.occre.com/model-ship/bounty-boat.html
 
This boat is probably most accurate to the plans provided by Mackay. (Note that I did not say that it is the most historically accurate, because nobody seems to know what the actual Launch looked like). Every detail seems to be true to Mackay - the kit includes a bowsprit, windlass, and hoist. Also, rigging of the masts includes deadeyes. All these are absent on the Model Shipways kit. Unfortunately, again the keel and frame are cut from plywood, meaning that it will be on display. OcCre was founded by a group of former Artesania employees - so the wood is excellent. Instructions are also very good. I think that the sails are also pre-sewn, although my recollection is a little sketchy.
 
 
Model Shipways HMS Bounty Launch, 1/16 scale, 438mm length: http://www.modelexpo-online.com/product.asp?ITEMNO=MS1850
 
This kit deviates from the other two in several ways. It is the ONLY kit to be built over a plug. It is also the only kit to feature laser cut planking strakes, so you don't have to taper planks yourself. Every part of the boat is made of limewood. Limewood is a rather unattractive wood, although it is easily worked. You will have to stain it or paint it. I chose to do both. Instructions are excellent, BY FAR the best instructions you will ever see included in a model boat kit. Unfortunately, the kit deviates from Mackay and other sources in a number of ways, although most of these can be rectified by kit bashing. For example, the kit features gunwales - a feature missing in other sources I looked at (Mackay, NMM).
 
If you want a kit that looks closest to the Launch as set out by Mackay, I would recommend the OcCre. If you want an easily built boat, I would go Model Shipways. Good luck with your choice.

I present, for your inspection and critique, my completed rendition of the Canadian Schooner Bluenose.
 
I tied the last knot at 1730 hour MST this evening.
 

 

 
Just to add a bit of authenticity and acquire official approval of the model, I asked my neighbor to come over.  He, being from Canada, inspected the model and gave me a thumbs up.
 

 
From start to finish this has been an adventure.  I am very pleased with the Model Shipways Kit and the quality woods and especially the building manual.  Granted, there are a number of improvements that can be made to any kit, but overall this is a well thought out product.
 
I’ve learned to bend and shape various woods, sew sails, and above all patience!
 
My next step is to complete the display case and mount the Bluenose.
 
To all of you that have followed this build and provided instruction, and inspiration, I thank you.
 

There is a huge difference in the dimensions of the grating opening on the quarterdeck, between the plans and the cutout provided in the false deck. As you can see by the photos, the cutout is much shorter than the frame I installed. The frame matches the size in the plans, which I chose to follow. The grating will be seperated into 3 equal sections. I also noted that the grating on the upper quaterdeck has the same issue.
 
Vince P.

Thanks for your replies Vince and Max. Looks like the hull below the waterline will be painted white. BTW, I like the look of timber as much as anybody else, but I like the look of a white painted hull. It makes the boat look a little more sleek, if you know what I mean. A bit like a two toned car

Thanks for your replies Vince and Max. Looks like the hull below the waterline will be painted white. BTW, I like the look of timber as much as anybody else, but I like the look of a white painted hull. It makes the boat look a little more sleek, if you know what I mean. A bit like a two toned car

Hi Keith,
 
I am doing the Royal Caroline at the moment. It would be historic accurate to paint the hull white below the waterline. This is right. But I like much more the color and the structure of the timber  - so I will leave it in natural condition (only some colorless semi-gloss lacquer). But I understand that historic accuracy is a very strong motivation to build models . But anyway - I would not use copper plates on this ship.
 
Cheerio
 
Max

Planking down to the keel is now completed. I have also cut out the second row of gunports. Here she is, all sanded down and ready to go ... while I ponder what to do next.
 

 

 

 
My ambition when I started out was to use no filler. Sad to say, I had to resort to the dreadful stuff. At least I didn't have to use much of it! Yes, I know it will be hidden by the second planking, but it would have given me a lot of satisfaction if I did not have to use any of it.

Planking down to the keel is now completed. I have also cut out the second row of gunports. Here she is, all sanded down and ready to go ... while I ponder what to do next.
 

 

 

 
My ambition when I started out was to use no filler. Sad to say, I had to resort to the dreadful stuff. At least I didn't have to use much of it! Yes, I know it will be hidden by the second planking, but it would have given me a lot of satisfaction if I did not have to use any of it.

Planking down to the keel is now completed. I have also cut out the second row of gunports. Here she is, all sanded down and ready to go ... while I ponder what to do next.
 

 

 

 
My ambition when I started out was to use no filler. Sad to say, I had to resort to the dreadful stuff. At least I didn't have to use much of it! Yes, I know it will be hidden by the second planking, but it would have given me a lot of satisfaction if I did not have to use any of it.

Just a little update to remind you that i'm still beavering away at this little boat. Not much to say except that first planking is almost finished up to the level of the second deck!
 

 

 

Planking down to the keel is now completed. I have also cut out the second row of gunports. Here she is, all sanded down and ready to go ... while I ponder what to do next.
 

 

 

 
My ambition when I started out was to use no filler. Sad to say, I had to resort to the dreadful stuff. At least I didn't have to use much of it! Yes, I know it will be hidden by the second planking, but it would have given me a lot of satisfaction if I did not have to use any of it.

Planking down to the keel is now completed. I have also cut out the second row of gunports. Here she is, all sanded down and ready to go ... while I ponder what to do next.
 

 

 

 
My ambition when I started out was to use no filler. Sad to say, I had to resort to the dreadful stuff. At least I didn't have to use much of it! Yes, I know it will be hidden by the second planking, but it would have given me a lot of satisfaction if I did not have to use any of it.

Planking down to the keel is now completed. I have also cut out the second row of gunports. Here she is, all sanded down and ready to go ... while I ponder what to do next.
 

 

 

 
My ambition when I started out was to use no filler. Sad to say, I had to resort to the dreadful stuff. At least I didn't have to use much of it! Yes, I know it will be hidden by the second planking, but it would have given me a lot of satisfaction if I did not have to use any of it.

Planking down to the keel is now completed. I have also cut out the second row of gunports. Here she is, all sanded down and ready to go ... while I ponder what to do next.
 

 

 

 
My ambition when I started out was to use no filler. Sad to say, I had to resort to the dreadful stuff. At least I didn't have to use much of it! Yes, I know it will be hidden by the second planking, but it would have given me a lot of satisfaction if I did not have to use any of it.

As of tonight, the hull is almost complete and will be ready for planking in a couple of days. I still need to shape the stern and bow fillers and bevel the bulkheads. 
 

 
I installed additional reinforcements for the top deck bulkheads. The frame is now incredibly rigid. 
 

 
I thought I would draw attention to a problem with bulkhead "F". I am not sure if other RW builders encountered the same problem as me - none of them have mentioned it at least. Note that bulkheads E and F are correctly installed with respect to the false keel. Also, the stringers for the main and middle deck run straight and true - they are so perfectly aligned that they simply fell in! Yet, bulkhead F has a pronounced 1mm step at the level of the fo'c'sle deck, AND the lower deck stringer is bent downwards. 
 
The exact same problem is present on the other side, so it's not as if I installed bulkhead "F" at an angle. Did any of you have this problem? 

INDEX OF PLANS
 

 
Sheet 1: Overview of ship
 

 
Sheet 2: Masts and Yards
 

 
Sheet 3: Decorations
 
   
 
Sheets 4, 5, 6, 7: General construction details
 

 
Sheet 8: Longitudinal and Cross section (for scratch builders) 
 
 
 
Sheets 9, 10: Deck furniture
 
 
 
Sheets 11, 12: Standing rigging
 
  
 
Sheets 13, 14, 15: Running rigging
 

 
Sheet 16: Mast and yard details
 

 
Sheet 17: Ships plan

Planking down to the keel is now completed. I have also cut out the second row of gunports. Here she is, all sanded down and ready to go ... while I ponder what to do next.
 

 

 

 
My ambition when I started out was to use no filler. Sad to say, I had to resort to the dreadful stuff. At least I didn't have to use much of it! Yes, I know it will be hidden by the second planking, but it would have given me a lot of satisfaction if I did not have to use any of it.

Planking down to the keel is now completed. I have also cut out the second row of gunports. Here she is, all sanded down and ready to go ... while I ponder what to do next.
 

 

 

 
My ambition when I started out was to use no filler. Sad to say, I had to resort to the dreadful stuff. At least I didn't have to use much of it! Yes, I know it will be hidden by the second planking, but it would have given me a lot of satisfaction if I did not have to use any of it.

She looks great, Capn! I remember when my boat was at the same stage, the feeling of relief that I had finished planking AND she still looked decent was palpable. Congratulations, that's probably the most intimidating part of the build over. Hopefully the rest will be smooth sailing.