Thistle17

Thanks you have been so deliberate about the system setup I guess I just flew by that.
Joe

Thanks you have been so deliberate about the system setup I guess I just flew by that.
Joe

Can you remind me please anout the wiring of the limit switches since you moved the controller outside? I don't see the wires coming out or am I missing something? If they are indeed there what connector did you use to bring out the bundle? Thanks
Joe

Can you remind me please anout the wiring of the limit switches since you moved the controller outside? I don't see the wires coming out or am I missing something? If they are indeed there what connector did you use to bring out the bundle? Thanks
Joe

Ron you certainly are investing a good deal of thought, time and improvement to this machine. I am sure the lessons learned will be of benefit to many others including myself. And thank you!
 
I have built a number of tool adaptations as well as jigs which I have found for the most part are useful over time for my machines. However the one thing I often wonder and lament during the process is how much time I have spent on it all away from modeling. Now in particular to this project for you I would ask "how will you put it to work"? What usage do you forsee for the sytem in your modeling? It could be a boon to your product for sure. But what do you envision its applications?
 
I ask having had the following experience for an up and coming model I worked with a good friend who has a large CNC system to create my bulkheads and strong back for the project. I will admit getting the end product turned out quite well but getting there was a hill climb. I had a starting point other than a clean sheet design yet the work to make the file(s) ready was a chore.
 
I am not being critical just trying to determine the worth of it all as I think about upgrading from my 3018 Pro to something better such as yours.
 
I would add I am finding the same thing with 3D printing. With my grandson's help we designed a ships wheel using Solidworks. It is a beauty, however when it was sent onto a friend who has a printing system and software it generated so many slices (faces or facets) it was too big for his system. So now I may retreat to milling the components out of brass. You might say I am back to square 1. Do you see what i mean?
 
Regards
 
Joe

Ron you certainly are investing a good deal of thought, time and improvement to this machine. I am sure the lessons learned will be of benefit to many others including myself. And thank you!
 
I have built a number of tool adaptations as well as jigs which I have found for the most part are useful over time for my machines. However the one thing I often wonder and lament during the process is how much time I have spent on it all away from modeling. Now in particular to this project for you I would ask "how will you put it to work"? What usage do you forsee for the sytem in your modeling? It could be a boon to your product for sure. But what do you envision its applications?
 
I ask having had the following experience for an up and coming model I worked with a good friend who has a large CNC system to create my bulkheads and strong back for the project. I will admit getting the end product turned out quite well but getting there was a hill climb. I had a starting point other than a clean sheet design yet the work to make the file(s) ready was a chore.
 
I am not being critical just trying to determine the worth of it all as I think about upgrading from my 3018 Pro to something better such as yours.
 
I would add I am finding the same thing with 3D printing. With my grandson's help we designed a ships wheel using Solidworks. It is a beauty, however when it was sent onto a friend who has a printing system and software it generated so many slices (faces or facets) it was too big for his system. So now I may retreat to milling the components out of brass. You might say I am back to square 1. Do you see what i mean?
 
Regards
 
Joe

A "selfie" to go with your good works Ron. Good to see your recent work so well executed. Very nice work indeed.
Joe

A "selfie" to go with your good works Ron. Good to see your recent work so well executed. Very nice work indeed.
Joe

A "selfie" to go with your good works Ron. Good to see your recent work so well executed. Very nice work indeed.
Joe

Extremely well done and presented I might add! Crisp, crisp, crisp!!!!
 
What is next Ryland?
 
Joe

One could have a healthy discussion about the precepts of restoration. When is a replacement part, made anew, but differently, yet retaining the functionaly to  be considered an unfaithful reproduction. Well call it what you wish.  I had to scrap the replacement chainplates. During install they were so delicate that the tip which was a piece of soldered tubing attached to the plate body separated in both accounts. The stress was just too great on this diminuitive part (just about 1mm). I had to remake them much as I and others made Cheerful chainplates. You can find this in Chapter 9 of the Cheerful build log. Basically the chain plate has a tang at its top that is bent into a loop that allows connection of the lower deadeye to the chain plate. In this model there are no deadeyes. There is a looped line that passes through a shackle attached to the formed eye of the bent over tang on the chain plate and the shroud eye to adjust tension.
 
Attached photo is the reconstructed chain plate with shroud lashing installed but not tied off. Tie off is identical to deadeyes.
 
It is no wonder why they were missing on the model when I got it. I will move on from here and not look back.
Joe

Incredible, this world technology we so often take for granted and that is so abused by many I might add! Within minutes this morning David Bennett of the North Carolina Maritime Museum responded to my email. He is the curator there and is extremely knowledgable on the sharpie's. He sent me several photos that answer the question clearly,
 
I might add that he has developed a You Tube video on the sharpie subject that is a historical journey of this work boat and its many lives as an oysterman, a commercial transport and fisherman. You have to witness the bounty these craft brought in. It was just astounding. Sadly it is gone. I lament the our lack of sealife care then. If only!!!!!!
 
 

After seeing Chuck's work me thinks I should take up knitting or some such past time!
Just kidding I guess I will muddle on.
Joe

In my wailing and nashing of teeth I almost forgot to state some good news. Thanks to my granson home from college and Mahuna modeler of Kathryn a restored skipjack I now have a near ready rendition of a ships wheel designed in Solid Works.
 
One of the greatest elements of Model Ship World beyond inspiration is the willingness to share. Mahuna had gone aboard Kathryn and taken measurements of her wheel (along with her scaled dimensions) and posted that on this site. I had picked a quite similar wheel off the internet. We confered and as a result I now have an STL file for a 3D rendition of my own. Some minor tweaking is needed before submission to a vendor but here was the design process.
 
Joe
SOLIDWORKS Shipwheel.pptx

It has been a month since my last post on this restoration. A number of life events have kept me away from the model. Who ever said retirement was a life of bliss!!!!
 
I have to comment on restoration in general. It bears repeating I am no where near an expert at this process but do have basic skills after completeing 5 restorations of lesser models. This model is quite different in that the original modeler was incredibly skilled and made most, if not all, components from scratch. As I have noted I have moved onto the rigging of late and am now working the running rigging. As I proceed I find that his or her ability to fabricate parts humbles me when I try to replace those missing. Schackles for example, of which several are missing, are of such a diminuitive nature are beyond my capability. For example in the preceeding photo one can see an eye bolt on the deck. This is a termination point for a single block that is reeved to a companion block on the fore mast boom iron, starboard side (a similar arrangement is found on the port side). A schackle no bigger than 1/16 of an inch was fabricated out of wire (approximately #32 gauge or smaller) with a clevis simulated from a cut off nail that has a shaft diameter of approximately 0.0125 inches!!!!! My smallest nails are 0.02 inches!
 
In addition, because of age, I continue to find the model quite fragile. Last evening while rigging the fore mast boom port tackle to the helm i leaned a bit too heavily on one of the hatch covers and it collapsed. Luckily repair was easily handled. Just another frustration.
 
What is that saying, "Seemed like a good idea at the time"?
Joe 

It has been a month since my last post on this restoration. A number of life events have kept me away from the model. Who ever said retirement was a life of bliss!!!!
 
I have to comment on restoration in general. It bears repeating I am no where near an expert at this process but do have basic skills after completeing 5 restorations of lesser models. This model is quite different in that the original modeler was incredibly skilled and made most, if not all, components from scratch. As I have noted I have moved onto the rigging of late and am now working the running rigging. As I proceed I find that his or her ability to fabricate parts humbles me when I try to replace those missing. Schackles for example, of which several are missing, are of such a diminuitive nature are beyond my capability. For example in the preceeding photo one can see an eye bolt on the deck. This is a termination point for a single block that is reeved to a companion block on the fore mast boom iron, starboard side (a similar arrangement is found on the port side). A schackle no bigger than 1/16 of an inch was fabricated out of wire (approximately #32 gauge or smaller) with a clevis simulated from a cut off nail that has a shaft diameter of approximately 0.0125 inches!!!!! My smallest nails are 0.02 inches!
 
In addition, because of age, I continue to find the model quite fragile. Last evening while rigging the fore mast boom port tackle to the helm i leaned a bit too heavily on one of the hatch covers and it collapsed. Luckily repair was easily handled. Just another frustration.
 
What is that saying, "Seemed like a good idea at the time"?
Joe 

One could have a healthy discussion about the precepts of restoration. When is a replacement part, made anew, but differently, yet retaining the functionaly to  be considered an unfaithful reproduction. Well call it what you wish.  I had to scrap the replacement chainplates. During install they were so delicate that the tip which was a piece of soldered tubing attached to the plate body separated in both accounts. The stress was just too great on this diminuitive part (just about 1mm). I had to remake them much as I and others made Cheerful chainplates. You can find this in Chapter 9 of the Cheerful build log. Basically the chain plate has a tang at its top that is bent into a loop that allows connection of the lower deadeye to the chain plate. In this model there are no deadeyes. There is a looped line that passes through a shackle attached to the formed eye of the bent over tang on the chain plate and the shroud eye to adjust tension.
 
Attached photo is the reconstructed chain plate with shroud lashing installed but not tied off. Tie off is identical to deadeyes.
 
It is no wonder why they were missing on the model when I got it. I will move on from here and not look back.
Joe

It has been a month since my last post on this restoration. A number of life events have kept me away from the model. Who ever said retirement was a life of bliss!!!!
 
I have to comment on restoration in general. It bears repeating I am no where near an expert at this process but do have basic skills after completeing 5 restorations of lesser models. This model is quite different in that the original modeler was incredibly skilled and made most, if not all, components from scratch. As I have noted I have moved onto the rigging of late and am now working the running rigging. As I proceed I find that his or her ability to fabricate parts humbles me when I try to replace those missing. Schackles for example, of which several are missing, are of such a diminuitive nature are beyond my capability. For example in the preceeding photo one can see an eye bolt on the deck. This is a termination point for a single block that is reeved to a companion block on the fore mast boom iron, starboard side (a similar arrangement is found on the port side). A schackle no bigger than 1/16 of an inch was fabricated out of wire (approximately #32 gauge or smaller) with a clevis simulated from a cut off nail that has a shaft diameter of approximately 0.0125 inches!!!!! My smallest nails are 0.02 inches!
 
In addition, because of age, I continue to find the model quite fragile. Last evening while rigging the fore mast boom port tackle to the helm i leaned a bit too heavily on one of the hatch covers and it collapsed. Luckily repair was easily handled. Just another frustration.
 
What is that saying, "Seemed like a good idea at the time"?
Joe 

With Roger's added reference of the book, The Sharpie Book, by Reuel Parker, I now have a much better understanding of the rigging of this vessel. I repeat the quote from an email I received from Reuel Parker here about the bow sprit rigging which was most puzzling to me until his revelations:
 
[The forestay rove through a sheave in the bowsprit is a typical Chesapeake Bay arrangement, but there is usually an outer forestay with conventional bobstay beyond the inner forestay, whose function is to support the mast and carry a “spectacle iron” from which lazy jacks are suspended to contain the club foot boom and furled jib. This is absent here, so there is only the single forestay. The “car” on top of the bowsprit allows tensioning and releasing the club foot jib boom, which is absent in the photo. The car arrangement was commonly used on schooners. The inhaul lanyard is missing, but the outhaul lanyard is in place. There is a gooseneck on top of the car for the missing boom. The traveler on deck is for the jib sheet, which would be attached to the aft end of the club foot jib boom; the block at the front of the mast is for a fairlead for the jib sheet.
 
The cheek blocks on each side of the bowsprit are anchor rollers.
 
You might refer to Chapelle’s “American Small Sailing Craft” and his booklet on Skipjacks for further information. Or my article in Professional Boatbuilder Magazine last summer on Bowsprits.]
 
In his book he also describes on pages 143 and 144 the "car" or traveler arrangement for a San Juan 36 foot Sharpie. the only difference here is that the club or boom is 'fairlead back to the cockpit coaming for control by the helm. This would be difficult on the Florida Sharpie as the deck would have been laden with catch making the fairlead difficult to control I suspect.
 
So the picture has indeed opened up. As I suspected the cheek blocks have nothing to do with the "car" or traveler. So that is no longer a point of confusion. Further I have to consider his advice on the fore stay comments and the missing irons. I have contacted Wooden Boat to get a reprint of the article he suggests and should be getting that soon.
 
 

If it seems I am obsessing over the restorartion of this model it is most likely true. I have such respect for the creator's craftmanship that I feel if I do not try to replicate his work I am doing the person a misservice.
 
There are some wooden parts missing. Namely the port engine hatch and the main cabin doors. given the patina of the aged wood I have been experimenting with different species to see if I can approach existing wood aging. I happen to have a sheet of Alaskan Yellow Cedar that is actually on the orange side.  I had to mill it to .039 in so I lost some of the color but my first coat of WOP seems to be bringing in the correct hue. A few more coats should do it.
 
To the upper right is the hatch. I have built the lid and it is yet to be finished. I show it as further testament to the creator's talent. Observe the "tree nailed" framework of the assembly. This person even treated the inner sleeve that sets down in the hull (of course nobody can see it) with the same detail and  the same precision.
 
To the left are the main hatches for color comparison.
 
Joe

I know I have intimated this before but each time I approach this model to evaluate any restoration element I find myself in awe of the original builder. Everything on the model is of the highest precision and execution. Planking, deck furniture, metal work  replication is just astounding. Each tree nail, each pinning is precisely located. In evaluating building a missing hatch in the stern I now realize the entire hull has been ribbed and I will bet all bulkheads called out on the drawing are there as well.  I can not imagine that this could have been done without machinery. In examing the hatches and the deckhouses I recently discovered the modeler had used quarter sawn material to minimize expansion problems. I am still a bit puzzeled as to the wood species. The model has never been sealed so there are years of a deep patinia to the wood. At times I suspect it is boxwood due to its density (using the finger nail depression test) or bass wood that has just dried out over time. When I look at the end grain of the items I mention I can see a distinct grain so  it makes me think I still do not know. As an aside I was trimming a flowering ornamental apple tree today and in examining the grain and color it made me think it just might be hand milled lumber of this sort.
 
Now the other aspects of this model are its origin and its travels. It has had some disrespect in that some boom and other metal work is missing, there are missing doors to the main cabin, some rigging is missing on both the fore and main sails, and oddly some key deck terminations for fore and main sail control from the stern were never added. There is more but these are the main elements. So one question, that I probably never will answer was why wasn't she completed? Perhaps it was a life interrupted and then perhaps it was something less tragic. On another note the modeler had such an intimate knowledge of how it was built and rigged even in areas where elements are not shown in detail or below deck. One source could have been the North Carolina Sharpies as they were so close to this Florida Sharpie. But they were virtually wiped out in a hurricane somewhere in the mid 1930s. Could the model be even older than I think????
 
An update: I forgot to mention that all sheaves are boxwood, fully operational with what appears to be aluminnum or iron innards. They too are incredible.
 
At this point I have to live with the unkowns and drive forward hoping that I am worthy of restoring this incredible work. Stay tuned if you wish. Hopefully next time there will be more show than tell.
 
Joe

I took the model down to measure it for a case as it was starting to accumulate dust and I could not resist starting to work on it. I repaired the main hatch covers as eye rings had come off and one hatch cover had come apart. In doing so I did observe that some glue joints on the hatch coaming also had loosened. That was repaired. In doing so the centerboard lift internal "iron works" came apart. It is incredibly tiny so I am struggling with its repair. While doing so I began wondering about the chain lift that hauls the center board up. I now observe that the chain appears to be "terminated at an "iron work" mounted to the main cabin roof. This is just visible in my entry posting above on the 3rd photo. On the drawing it is the dotted line shown heading for the cabin roof. The termination appears just in front and to the side of the main cabin smoke stack. The Smithsonian drawing does show a dotted line indicating this odd termination point. What is even more puzzling is how the center baord is lifted when required. It imust weigh over 500 lbs!
Joe

I still await the drawing from the Smithsonian and assume "I am in the queue for a drawing next week" was abit optomiostic on their part. In the meantime I built the correct scale ships wheel from the minikit from Syren. I would offer that it was a humbling and frustrating build experience. I have to give myself a C- of a grade on quality.
 
I followed the directions quite closely and I don't feel my small motor control capability has dimished to the point where I am not able to achieve a decent job on most any component. The challenge with this assembly is two fold in my estimation. The parts are incredibly small and when Syren expresses a caution about sanding it should be taken seriously. The parts unsanded fit snugly into the build jig, however any over sanding of the char yields too loose a fit. Secondly the outer bands are made from .025 thick boxwood. Invariably they are prone to breakage especially the larger arc as it's lower sections run with the grain. Turning the spokes even with careful turning with a fine cut watchmakers file to round over the elements was challenging as well. I would recommend a purchase of two kits using one for practice. This is likely a practice piece.
 
I am possessed! I just can't live with this failure. I have to find a better solution or get much,better at this mini kit.
Joe
 

Incredible, this world technology we so often take for granted and that is so abused by many I might add! Within minutes this morning David Bennett of the North Carolina Maritime Museum responded to my email. He is the curator there and is extremely knowledgable on the sharpie's. He sent me several photos that answer the question clearly,
 
I might add that he has developed a You Tube video on the sharpie subject that is a historical journey of this work boat and its many lives as an oysterman, a commercial transport and fisherman. You have to witness the bounty these craft brought in. It was just astounding. Sadly it is gone. I lament the our lack of sealife care then. If only!!!!!!
 
 

It has been a month since my last post on this restoration. A number of life events have kept me away from the model. Who ever said retirement was a life of bliss!!!!
 
I have to comment on restoration in general. It bears repeating I am no where near an expert at this process but do have basic skills after completeing 5 restorations of lesser models. This model is quite different in that the original modeler was incredibly skilled and made most, if not all, components from scratch. As I have noted I have moved onto the rigging of late and am now working the running rigging. As I proceed I find that his or her ability to fabricate parts humbles me when I try to replace those missing. Schackles for example, of which several are missing, are of such a diminuitive nature are beyond my capability. For example in the preceeding photo one can see an eye bolt on the deck. This is a termination point for a single block that is reeved to a companion block on the fore mast boom iron, starboard side (a similar arrangement is found on the port side). A schackle no bigger than 1/16 of an inch was fabricated out of wire (approximately #32 gauge or smaller) with a clevis simulated from a cut off nail that has a shaft diameter of approximately 0.0125 inches!!!!! My smallest nails are 0.02 inches!
 
In addition, because of age, I continue to find the model quite fragile. Last evening while rigging the fore mast boom port tackle to the helm i leaned a bit too heavily on one of the hatch covers and it collapsed. Luckily repair was easily handled. Just another frustration.
 
What is that saying, "Seemed like a good idea at the time"?
Joe