Thistle17

I am not exactly sure what you mean, but if I perceive what you are asking I will answer this way. You must sand the sides flush with the bottom. The planking will reach all the way to the chine and the bottom, as stated, in the Dumas directions does not get (or need planking). The same sanding advice goes for the deck and sides intersection. Pay attention to the bow as well for a nice smooth intersect and that it is as true in sweep as possible. One last thing the PVC clad as it nears the bow at the chine was not a smooth transition because of the twist it has to make. it required some fill (not much). Don't forget to rough up the clad material before CA ing the planking.

Paul, you will find some places where the fit isn't exact. Whether down the seam, amid ship, or at the chine or bow. What we had to do was ensure as good a fit as possible. Gluing in "fillers inside if we had an unreasonable gap and filling all seams that were not quite right with EverCoat 2 part compound (use the blue hardener) . It adheres great and sands well. It's par for the course with this kit. There is no way that all of the parts fit like we all wish they would.Its the nature of the kit. I have built all types of models and I found this one to be a challenge due to parts, multi media material, using the wrong CA glue (low viscosity version was overused), used auto body resin for the uppers top coat (had to be sanded off #!?$!!!!). Well you get the idea. And, oh yeah, i didn't look like a "cool" grandpa with my grandson at times.

Think of it this way. You are going to lay down a layer of PVC clad and the definition of the "lines" of the hull will be defined by the fit. So with careful sanding you need to get a good solid intersect of the sides and the bottom. I wish they would modernize this kit and laser etch the parts. This would help and avoid the problems I am sure many of us have run into.

Paul unfortunately I tossed the label wrapper for the servo but I do know it is a Traxxas water proof micro servo. https://www.amazon.com/Traxxas-2080-Micro-Waterproof-Servo/dp/B002BE8672 isa link for a similar unit on Amazon. i do not recall it coming with a bell crank so check your accessories before you order anything.

Paul it is pretty tight under the rear seat compartment. I had to drastically hollow out a channel on the underside of the seat cushion so that the bell crank attachment to the servo would move freely. The bell crank arm is almost vertical and this was to get the rudder to move fully left and right. This was with the micro servo so I am guessing that the larger size is going to give you trouble.

Paul I built this boat with my grandson over last fall and this winter. We are presently at a stage where we need to coat the upper body with a clear coat. It will be a pretty model for him and should be fun to use. Anyway I don't want to dismay you, rather I think alert you that the kit I bought for him had die cut bulk heads which were not very well made nor accurate. Use a batten to true them up. Secondly they were a bit on the thin side so we added 'beef" to some to get a good landing surface for the PVC substrate. The next problem I have never understood was that the PVC substrate elements did not conform well to the bulk head to yield a completely closed hull. The hull planking went fairly well without much fuss save the fact that some planks did not easily match up with the former applied plank. Some sanding and some fill was needed. I highly recommend that you outfit the engine compartment early on while you can get at things. Also the rudder compartment. You can remove the parts while building , but plan your mounts like battery, switches, ESC etc. One last thing we used the foil that came with the kit to cover the rub rails and cut-waters. It did not go well. I have seen one other method that applied the material after the rub rail was on the boat. For the life of me I cannot understand how he got it to lay well and trimmed. I gave up and have made an MDF contoured board to which I am pinning 1/2 round styrene to and coating it with the foil. BTW since I screwed up the original foil I purchased anew at the hobby shop. It was of thinner gauge and ripped easily. So I ended up using aluminum heating duct tape. It is more sturdy. Again a fun kit to build especially with my grandson. Good luck. Hope this helps..

John your point is well taken. We will proceed with caution even if he decides to donate the kits. I wrote the owner of the kits a letter and rationale for our proposal based on perspectives provided here, feedback from club members and my own continued watching on e-bay. I have not set any expectation of the owners agreement with the donation proposal. We will see what we will see!!!!!!

Thank you all for your sage advice. I took your feedback to a sub group of our membership and we unanimously decided not to make an offer to purchase the kits. We did however propose to the owner that he donate the kits to our benefactor, The Military History Society of Rochester, to help raise monies for the continuation of this great museum. The owner in turn would be able to write off the donation on this years tax returns as it is a not for profit entity.

Sorry mike no kit like that in the mix.

USS Frolic There is a MM Rattlesnake in the mix. I will remember your post. Right now the individual wants to release the whole lot. I meet with 3 other members tomorrow and will see what they have to say. If it were my call at this time there is a less than 50% chance we will make him an offer (and then will he accept). There is a possibility that within the group some of the MS kits would be picked up. So it is a mixed bag. Standby..

Thank you very much to those who responded. I must say you are a wise body out there. I think I knew this but it doesn't hurt to be reminded. His kitchen table was piled almost 2 feet high with these models and I may have seen them through e-bay dollar sign colored glasses.. And yes they were stored in his basement and I noticed even the stapled pages showed signs of rust so I am sure they were there awhile. I have been an NRG member for 35 years and I think this forum is the best thing to come down the "ways" in some time. I will say thank you again.

This topic may have been covered by others but I have been unable to find references here. If someone can point me to a thread I'd appreciate it. Anyway i had put a post in a local hobby shop to entice new members. I did get a response from a gentleman who had about 25 models still in boxes. Most were Marine Model and Model Ship Ways. There were 4 or 5 Italian kits. It struck me as an odd collection since there were 2 sets of duplicates. I recognized the boxes for the MM, they were yellow. Most boxes were in decent shape. The Model Ship Ways were of near recent vintage as they were the boxes prior to their current 'blue boxes" but not the ones of the 1980's. I am guessing the MM were of late 1970's vintage and into the 1980's. All are solid hull. They probably have lead fittings. I am guessing the Model Ship Ways are 1990's vintage as most have laser cut bulkheads. He desires to sell all as a package. So I am wondering what is the common offer profile in terms of cents on the dollar one would offer? I am thinking our club would buy them and resell to start a small treasury fund, not that we would be looking to make a killing. Anyone, any thoughts?

I have been a long time woodworker and of late returned to model building. In the 45 years of woodworking I have owned 2 large stationary saws and one contractor saw. The kept table saw is now 35 years old and has been a work horse for me. The contractor saw is a name brand that is an excellent field saw but it is used infrequently, yet it still comes in handy. In modeling I have owned/own 3 model saws. The latest is the Byrnes saw. The prior, the Preac,was recently sold. The Emco add on saw has never been used because of its limits. The Preac was a decent saw for its day but I found it too limiting and falling short of some basic capability. So what is the point you ask? Buy the best you can afford even if you have to be patient in purchase. Amortize the expense over your lifetime and its pretty cheap.Quality tools are lifetime investments and endure. If they find no practical use in the future they are easily sold and the quality ones don't stay on the market very long. My Preac was on Craig's one day.

I have followed Chuck Passaro's method by making small sanding blocks that will span a minimum of 4 bulkheads. The blocks have a little handle (just a perpendicular block glued to the non sand paper side for ease of holding). He has also suggested making the sanding block itself have a slight contour (either concave or convex) to them. I then glue on, say 120 grit paper, and carefully sand. I then use 180 to finish off. Of course I have not mentioned the width of the sand blocks themselves. I made several of varying width given the scale and nature of the hull curvature. In regard to the bulkhead or frame rigidity I did add stiffeners to them so as not to break any. Even a temporary pinning of a batten or stiffener will help. Hope this helps.

We tried a slightly different approach on the lower rub rails of the model this past weekend and it seemed to work reasonably well. I have a roll of shiny aluminum heating duct sealing tape that is about 4 inches wide and comes in rolls starting at about 25 feet. We rolled out a section that had no crinkles in it and lopped it off. We then cut srtips about 3/8 inch wide. We applied the strips (which has adhesive on the reverse side) to the Stripstyrene 1/2 round molding. The half round was .125 in (3.2MM). The foil forms a "U" shape overlap over the molding. We then carefully sliced the excess off the back of the molding with a brand new razor blade. Any excess was scrapped off the back using the razor blade as a scrapper. It was then burnished and applied to the hull with med viscosity CA glue (brushed on). Imagine that it worked! With any problem you have to break it down and determine more acceptable methods. Even as I age I seem to have to learn that lesson over sometimes. Its on to the upper rub rail but the difference here is I will mock up a hull contour to address the inflexible nature of the foil. I will report back on its effectiveness. One last note the Stripstyrene only came in 13 in length so they have to be joined with a scarf joint. Any surface anomalies can be lightly sanded to smooth out the joint. This is required for the upper deck rub strip unless a better source can be found.

Thank you"gjdale". What a great site you recommended. I have tried the thinner chrome metal sheets(that they offer) and I found that the "foil" was so thin it easily abrades. So I don't think it will hold up under use. I also found if CA glue comes in contact it either tarnishes the foil or seems to eat at it. Never the less it is a great site recommendation. Thanks again and as you carry on with your build I will be watching.

I am building this model with my grandson. I have been a model builder off and on all my life however this one has its challenges.Among the sagas with this kit is the baffling method to trim out the rub strake (bumper) where the deck meets the sides. I bought some perfectly scaled Stripstyrene molding to apply. I have tried several methods to apply "foil" to the molding to make it look realistic but because of the curved nature of the hull from stem to stern it is not easily applied off the hull and then attached afterwards as the metal foil just doesn't stretch going from straight (off the hull) bent curved to apply to the hull. I gave up on the thin stuff from the hobby store and am using heating duct foil as it is a bit more formidable. Got any thoughts? Thanks.

JohnE for a short time I had a Comet which along with Ligthning's was a favorite on Lake Ontario and its bay. I always loved the Thistle and almost acquired one (to restore) about a year ago. Always loved the boat but now have to be satisfied with static modeling. Oh well!.

This is such a rich and unselfish forum for all aspects of this incredible pursuit. Thank you for your excellent response "MarkP"!

I am working on a model of a 1750's British frigate. In the stern area there is considerable rise from mid-ship. When looking at different drawings including the kit plans and other sources it appears that the sills are true to horizontal and the verticals are at 90 degrees rather than all elements following the cant of the deck. Which is correct? As an aside how, on the real vessels, did the guns not slide toward mid-ship in foul weather? Were the carriages built differently for these guns?

My model of A J Fisher's Bluenose built in the 1980's showed signs of fitting deterioration many years back. I removed the model from the case and removed many of the fittings save the mast bands since all the running rigging would have had to be redone. Recently I modified the case (a mahogany framed case with glass sides) by installing a hidden DC fan in the case bottom vented to the outside. It is on a programmable timer so the fan runs every 6 hours for 1 hour to evacuate the case. It seems to be working and I have no signs of further deterioration. Now I am aware of the history of these early fittings as referenced on the NRG site. My question is the following: "I have kept the removed fittings in plastic cases all these years and they show no sign of degradation, does any one have any idea why"? I am tempted to re-install in the modified case. Is my experiment just a delay of the inevitable? Thanks

DRW: I am very fond of this workhorse of the NE that has become a sought after pleasure boat. I was taken with this vessel when Jarvis Newman of Maine ( a boat builder) did an incredible restoration of "Dictator" (Friendship) in a special Time or Life publication in the 1980's. It was inspiration for a half hull model I built using this documentation. Last year I happened to find on e-bay the Bluejacket 1/2" scale of what you are building. I must say I ran into similar problems with it. I was so disappointed in the planking results that I literally tore it down and started again. I made all new bulkheads and false keel and followed a more traditional methodology in planking than that in the instructions. I must say the results were better but not without the same problems as the kit. I should have added more bulkheads, since laying tapered planks, landing areas in the stern area were non existent. As well bulkhead widths and false deck did not meet up well. I have seen this model completed and it appears your scale version has much improvement over mine so I would not despair. Keep going I will be interested in seeing the progress.

After too many years of arm chair ship modeling interest, I have rejoined the fold, in a more active roll, at the prompting of colleagues in our newly formed ship model forum in Rochester, NY. Having been away for so long I needed a project to reawaken my skills, I chose a Corel kit of HMS Unicorn dating back to the 1980's I acquired from the defunct Bliss Marine. I have had an off again, on again relationship with the kit as I came to realize there were flaws in its authentic nature. Research on MSW and through the internet made me aware of its flaws (something like that pretty girl you got to know that wasn't that pretty inside if you get my drift). In the MSW section on"Model Ship Kits....Reviews" I documented observations I made regarding the hull comparison to the Chapman drawing in 'Architectura Navalis Mercatoria". In summary "I didn't think we could have a long term relationship" (in boy/girl parlance). As a result I stared to put it aside until I received from Campbell Ross, in Alberta Canada, some of the ship's log for the Unicorn of 1747! He was quite familiar with the vessel as he is from England and had lived close by the preservation site of the current Unicorn. That turned me around. So as with anything in life I began breaking down what was troubling me about this vessel's authenticity. In a nut shell (and this relates to the hull only): * The stem is a bit odd in shape by comparison (it has been modified to come closer to Chapman and it has been extended to enable placement of the figurehead on top of the stem reach (this should also allow a more realistic head-rail treatment)) * The stern is too steep by comparison it has been modified somewhat to address this. I may extend its upper width if I don't get in trouble with the counter. * Chapman's depiction shows 26 guns on the upper deck, while Corel shows 24. To get to the 26 guns Chapman depicts a gun port just forward of the side gallery (starboard). Odd it should be that close to the gallery windows?? Secondly the Chapman plate shows a gun port forward of the fore mast. Corel does not. * Lastly mast spacing is not the same (more on this later) * An update (2/24): I over-layed the new keel over the Chapman drawing (at the same scale) before reattaching. Didn't think to do this earlier. Although modified as stated it does not match to my satisfaction. The Chapman plate depicts a more "bulbous" bow below the waterline. Hmmm, another compromise as it is much too difficult to modify the false keel and new keel at this point. Having the Chapman source is a two edged sword isn't it? So in compromise I have redone the false keel by cutting "the keel" off at the bearding line (there is none on the kit) and rebuilding it as shown in the photo. I used cherry laminated to bass to achieve a "look" I am headed for. In my next installment i will address the gun port solution (if there is one) and the assembly of the bulkheads onto the false keel. Over time the false keel has warped so I will have to address that as well.

I will add my opinion to your query regarding paint vs stain or natural for ship models. I have done both. I have a wonderful solid hull model of the Bluenose which I air brushed the hull and brush painted cap rails, mast caps etc.It is some 30 years old now and it still looks terrific, if not authentic. Yes the hull was sanded, sealed and touched up with automotive body putty, primed and then painted. For authenticity i do not think the hull of the real vessel ever had this appearance even when first launched. Some models are enhanced greatly when you can see the wood plank lines, crisp edges and joinery. Which brings me to another point, wood materials. In my opinion again I would never paint a model "dressed out" in pearwood, boxwood, holly and even some other exotics. It wood be a crime. Rather I would "paint with wood" (using different colors of wood to accentuate it). If you are using basswood I would caution you that you may be disappointed with painting this w/o some surface prep, i.e., sealing. It is such a fibrous wood that is hard to get crisp edges and eliminate the fuzz. Again my opinion. Also do use fine pigment paints whether you spray or brush as many paints are just inappropriate for fine detail parts.

Michael: Your model of this vessel is outstanding! It brings back memories as i lived in Portsmouth R.I. in the 1960's just across Narragansett Bay from Bristol R.I. where the Herreshoff boat yard used to be. I could look out our windows at all the boats sailing out of Bristol. I would image many were this craft. It is a beautiful subject. Today there stands a terrific boat museum, just outside of the main thoroughfare in Bristol, featuring many of thier craft. It is a tribute to the brothers. I wonder if you have ever had the chance to visit being so far away.