Thistle17

As I said moving on I am preparing for the upcoming January demo/display at the museum. I will be assembling the hull at the museum.  In preparation, I have modified my hull building jig (which I had submitted to the MSW site but seems to have disappeared). I will restate this gantry style jig was a borrowed idea from, I believe Ed Tosti, who came up with the design. It is quite effective in holding the former/keel and ensuring the bulkhead perpendicularity can be easily maintained.
 
The one improvement I have made to mine, since its last use, was to add a registration guide to achieve a guaranteed centering of the gantry cross member '0' mark of the center finding ruler that is attached. The gantry lock down was a sloppy fit in the 'T' track making it easy to go astray as it was moved down the length of the platform. Adding a foot to the inboard member of the gantry that rides nicely in the 'T' track slot ensures center registration. It is hard to see in the picture attached as it rides inside the 'T' track afixed to the shoe of the gantry. Only one is needed if it is a good fit.
 
Joe

Thank you both for your comments. Blackreed your comments suggest familiarity with this type configuration. Although, Jim our modeler, is ex Navy, his duty was with nuclear power systems. That has left us with many questions of just how these weapons were loaded/reloaded, where the casings ended up and as you point out the spot light was just asking for it to be shot out.

Jim I am sorry I haven't been on this model for some time other than to repair alignment of a bulkhead that went astray while installing them in poor light at the Strong Museum.
 
I had thought of adding the extra detail between decks and then discounted it. Primarily as I am driving hard on Cheerful to finish hull planking and get on with more of the fun stuff associated with the model. I am not an accomplished plank installer but am slowly getting the hang of it so there is hope for me. I attended the 37th annual model conference in New London and picked up Syren's next kit, The Medway, and anxious to start that but holding myself in check. So things are starting to pile up.
 
Essex still intrigues me and I think when Cheerful planking is done I will pick her back up and proceed on her hull albeit at a halting pace. I may have said this already I am going to do her above the plating line in Alaskan Yellow Cedar and below that I will probably use Bass. Just for economy sake.
 
In regard to fillers I did Cheerful with Balsa fillers and ended up taking them out as planking below the wales proceeded as they just got in the way. It was useful in the fairing stage but became a nuisance thereafter. I was pleased with the blocking I installed on Essex, instead, as it made for quite stiff bulkheads.
Joe

Ship board damage control  now finds the bulkheads sanded fair at the keel rabbet and the rabbet strip and keel have been replaced.
 
Time to move on, by attending to the transom frames. These are very delicate members and have to be added somewhat "in the air" as they are attached, one by one to the former sides w/o much structural support. I will describe what I did but in hindsight I will also suggest an assembly method that might be a bit easier.
 
The pictures in Chapter 3 related to transom member assembly aren't too clear but they suffice. Once again I was on a roll with the bulkhead supports I had used for most of the other bulkheads and placed them (the vertical ones) on the aft end of #22. They should have gone on the inside of that bulkhead. This is going to give me a bit of the problem when I have to add the fillers where the stern terminates. However they did give a nice landing area for the inside stern frames that were to be added. I then added the 2 inner most stern members per directions (separated by 1/8 inch spacers along the former) to yield a 7/16" spacing. I liked the support they gave enough to add horizontal members port and starboard to support the remaining stern members. These are separated by 7/16" spacers per directions. All spacers and frame members are glued one to the other across the stern. These frames should be flush with the top of bulkhead #22.
 
I am left with the problem of still having to shape the stern with fillers as one does the bow. This I perceive will be a bit cumbersome. In hindsight I should have re-enforced the bulkhead from the inside as I said and executed the following:
 
On the aft side I would have placed a 3/8" X 1/2" strip across the bulkhead port and starboard side of the bulkhead and then filled in the balance of the stern area with balsa filler.
 
Also for the more fastidious modeler I would be tempted to extend the horizontal legs of each transom frame member such that they can extend forward of #22 bulkhead  (slotting this bulkhead to accept the thicker base leg of the frames) and placing those 3/8" X 1/2" horizontal strips on bth sides of the bulkhead (i.e. forward and aft).
Joe
 

This is a good news, bad news accounting.
 
The Strong museum demo/display was this past weekend. I used Essex for my demonstration for how a kit might begin and managed to assemble about 16 of the bulkheads before the end of the 2 day session. Today I installed the bulkheads 17 through 20. At this point one has to decide if the "strong back" stiffeners are to be added as they pass through bulkheads 3 through 20. They then are glued to the "strong back" and hopefully some of the bulkheads. It turns out this is a annoying task.. I say that because of slight irregularities in the slot of each bulkhead. Theoretically they all should line up and the stiffener just slides through, in this case from the stern, one to a side. If one uses the top of the strong back as the datum slight irregularities occur in the alignment of the slot from bulkhead to bulkhead. As it turned out I had to remove about 40 thousands from the stiffeners. and chamfer the edges to avoid any glue obstructions that may have occurred when the bulkheads were glued in place.
 
Stupidly I used CA to attempt to fasten the stiffeners to the strong back. I used the very thin CA and sure enough some trickled down onto my assembly jig gluing the keel to it!!!!! It took a bit of doing but I was able to extract the hull from the jig but in so doing the keel and most of the rabbet strip stayed behind. After a few moments of self chastisement I discovered it was somewhat of a blessing in disguise. I will have to make a new keel.
 
When using the top of the strong back as a datum and with each bulkhead set flush with it I observed that about 7 of the bulkheads protruded into the rabbet area. At this point  I realized it was going to be a lot easier to sand the bulkheads at this point so there was no rabbet overlap prior to the keel repair! That's my good news. Sort of!
Joe

Note bulhead protrusion at rule 15 3/4 and 16 1/4.

As I said moving on I am preparing for the upcoming January demo/display at the museum. I will be assembling the hull at the museum.  In preparation, I have modified my hull building jig (which I had submitted to the MSW site but seems to have disappeared). I will restate this gantry style jig was a borrowed idea from, I believe Ed Tosti, who came up with the design. It is quite effective in holding the former/keel and ensuring the bulkhead perpendicularity can be easily maintained.
 
The one improvement I have made to mine, since its last use, was to add a registration guide to achieve a guaranteed centering of the gantry cross member '0' mark of the center finding ruler that is attached. The gantry lock down was a sloppy fit in the 'T' track making it easy to go astray as it was moved down the length of the platform. Adding a foot to the inboard member of the gantry that rides nicely in the 'T' track slot ensures center registration. It is hard to see in the picture attached as it rides inside the 'T' track afixed to the shoe of the gantry. Only one is needed if it is a good fit.
 
Joe

In speaking with the original designer of the kit I am not much further ahead in getting resolution. So while waiting for a response from ME I was prompted by the kit designer to look at Portia's Anatomy of the Ship Essex. On page 34 is a body plan (reconstructed it was claimed from the Hackett drawing). It is not of the same scale but with a 1.87 enlargement I was able to come very close to the kit scale. In addition station 33 on her drawings corresponds very closely to bulkhead 22 in the kit. An overlay of the kit bulkhead 22 (the red outline) shows approximately the same deviation that is shown in the kit drawings of that bulkhead in my last post. Pushing on in pursuit of a satisfactory answer I overlaid the AOS copy onto the kit drawing and there is much more correspondence between them than the part.
 
A bit of crazy making here I know (and my grand kids will never know) but I will. Stay tuned.
Joe

At this point all bulkheads have been adjusted for the slot discrepancy and are a slip fit onto the former. In thinking ahead I thought it a good idea to add witness marks on each bulkhead for the gun port sills and headers. I am using the former topside height (basis of the gun deck) as a datum. Also observing that the bulkheads are flat (no camber) across the beam I could pull the vertical measurements off the profile in sheet 1 of the drawings and transfer them to each bulkhead image on the ensuing drawing sheets. Then overlaying each physical bulkhead I could transfer the vertical dimensions accurately to each bulkhead. Maybe a bit anal you say. Well maybe so but in so doing I stumbled onto a conundrum.
 
The forward and aft most bulkheads do not match the drawing profiles. In the stern area the profile is quite a bit off (wider than the drawing in the area from wales upward). In the case of the bow the profile is slightly off but the bulkhead is taller than the drawing. Amid ships they seem to conform much better. Something got lost in translation here. To me the design drawings are the reference!
 
Not knowing how the bulkhead profiles were translated to machining instructions I can not understand how this deviation has happened. If the drawing profiles were scanned in and "curve/segment" adjusted to achieve conformance such as in Corel Draw I might expect some small difference but certainly not what I observed. If the drawings were produced via a "CAD" system then the machining output files certainly would not create such an obvious difference.
 
Has anybody out there observed this problem? Is there yet another revision of this kit produced post 1Q 2015?
 
Joe

INTRO
As I open this log I find myself a bit conflicted as to what I could possibly add to curious or future builders of this admiralty model from Model Shipways. The kit was delivered in January of 2015 and as I understand it, this vintage addressed many of the early kit anomalies from the 2013 introduction. I had seen the designer's prototype version and had an opportunity to be mentored by him on his research sources and the construction.
 
As further impetus for the project I used Essex as a research subject for a group presentation. At the outset I thought I had ample sources of reference for it's build, however as I delved deeper the dissonance I discovered over a number of sources almost caused me to rethink a build. The topic and my findings are covered on our web site www.modelshipwrightguildwny.org under Topics Of Interest.
 
I opened this kit recently as I needed a subject for a January 2018 display/demo for the Strong Museum here in Rochester, N.Y. On January 12th and 13th they are engaging families with a pirate theme and one of our members, with publicity in mind, approached them to determine interest. They responded with an invite. I chose this subject for the event as Essex in some ways was a "pirate" in her last days marauding English whalers and merchant men in the southern Pacific before meeting her capture. I plan to display/demo the build from the former on up on my rendition of Ed Tosti's building jig.
 
THE BUILD
I will not spend time in reviewing the kit contents as others have done a very good job on that score but I will comment on certain aspects of the kit as I journey down this build.

I know the feeling jfhealy as I have not even attempted my Winchelsea until I have completed Cheerful. I made so many minor mistakes on Cheerful, only to rip them off and start again.
 
This passion we all have has been a pursuit of perfection and frustration given so many references on MSW of incredibly fine work.  I find in most anything I do the second time is the charm. For many reasons it seems to be so. So starting anew I am sure you will find it that way until you reach a new chapter and then it seems to start once again. The frustration that is. So for me I now do a practice run on a mock up or in your case maybe W1.
 
Nonetheless with your determination and persistence I think you will get there.
 
Joe 

Michael, just superb! You are such an artisan. You are an inspiration that i can only hope to follow.
Joe

Thank you both for your comments. Blackreed your comments suggest familiarity with this type configuration. Although, Jim our modeler, is ex Navy, his duty was with nuclear power systems. That has left us with many questions of just how these weapons were loaded/reloaded, where the casings ended up and as you point out the spot light was just asking for it to be shot out.

I know i have said this before but the gun tub is a project in itself making progress measured. Since the last posting, Jim, has made further advancement by assembly  (albeit dry) of the gun carriage suspension components and has started some work of the gun locking system and other internal details. I think he is doing himself proud. Would you agree?
 
Please note the guns are not mounted in their respective carriages but lay along side for perspective.
Joe

Conditions have not improved much in the Finger Lakes Region as far as the infection rate goes. People just let their guard down and we still have an infection rate of 9%. Vaccinations for our 1B population has started but the supply chain is faltering. i suspect even with increased supply there will be a bow wave as first time recipients compete with 2nd round recipients. All part of the Covid Crazies!
 
But I digress. I voluntered to turn the support system for the forward gun tub trays, as I have the lathe. I first tried making the system in one piece out of 1/2 delrin rod. It did not go well. In part because I am not a highly skilled turner and secondly when the turning got down to the 3/16 diameter the rod just did not have sufficient axial stiffness. So I turned to the old standby and made it out of brass. Actually the main body is 1/4" tubing with an ID that allowed yet another piece of tubing to slide neatly inside. That in turn very nicely accomadated a 3/16 inch rod which was end drilled to take the 1/16 rod. At present the 1/16 rod is quite long to aid in alignment of the whole assembly when it is installed on the gun tub support bracketry.
 
The assembly is not soldered as I have to experiment with brass blackening and its interaction with solder flux. I suspect the answer will be "not well", in which case the assembly will be glued.
Joe

Because of the Covid restrictions ( we are approaching an Orange rating for our county, after having the best state infection rating pre Thanksgiving) our work has slowed dramactically. Yesterday just a bit more advancement with the final fit of the gun tub into the cavity forward of the pilot station. Lots of clean up and fairing left to do topsides as previously stated. Nearly the last thing to do on the gun tub is form and fit the gun carriage supports. A member of our group has volunteered to convert a tub side profile image to a measured drawing for that purpose.
Joe
 

I am pushing to get the hull primed this weekend as the weather is going to be in the mid 60s and I can't spray in the basement. As a result I could not let this setback prevent me from that goal. The rub rail I have found is about 3/8 inch wide in scale (1:6 maybe slightly less). It has a slight taper across the width inboard to outboard. Using bass wood I built a shooting board and tried to add the taper but I quickly found that I was having trouble getting a uniform tapered edge not to mention tearout. I then thought of a more obvious way.
 
On the Byrnes saw I taped a 1/32 inch strip to the base of the saw fence. At this point the rub rail has been purposedly ripped to 1 inch width. Using my shop built ripping guide to keep the stock snug to the fence base and the top edge snug against the fence top (with my push stick) I managed to get a consistent taper These will be ripped to width and given some final detail sanding and attached to the hull/
 
I anticipate soaking, maybe steaming these strips at the bow to form to the bulbous bow shape. I may even have to segment the rail to get the desired conformance. I now think I have a fair chance of making the milestone.
 
Jim if you are listening I wish there was a tilting arbor retro for this saw.
 
Joe

How am to ever get my modeling done? Now I have to follow your fine works, watch Leo and his build and Acorn to Arrabella.
 
Indeed i find your "gems" amussing and it keeps me on my toes. You have a sense of humor.
 
Joe

I know i have said this before but the gun tub is a project in itself making progress measured. Since the last posting, Jim, has made further advancement by assembly  (albeit dry) of the gun carriage suspension components and has started some work of the gun locking system and other internal details. I think he is doing himself proud. Would you agree?
 
Please note the guns are not mounted in their respective carriages but lay along side for perspective.
Joe

I know i have said this before but the gun tub is a project in itself making progress measured. Since the last posting, Jim, has made further advancement by assembly  (albeit dry) of the gun carriage suspension components and has started some work of the gun locking system and other internal details. I think he is doing himself proud. Would you agree?
 
Please note the guns are not mounted in their respective carriages but lay along side for perspective.
Joe

I know i have said this before but the gun tub is a project in itself making progress measured. Since the last posting, Jim, has made further advancement by assembly  (albeit dry) of the gun carriage suspension components and has started some work of the gun locking system and other internal details. I think he is doing himself proud. Would you agree?
 
Please note the guns are not mounted in their respective carriages but lay along side for perspective.
Joe

I know i have said this before but the gun tub is a project in itself making progress measured. Since the last posting, Jim, has made further advancement by assembly  (albeit dry) of the gun carriage suspension components and has started some work of the gun locking system and other internal details. I think he is doing himself proud. Would you agree?
 
Please note the guns are not mounted in their respective carriages but lay along side for perspective.
Joe

I am pushing to get the hull primed this weekend as the weather is going to be in the mid 60s and I can't spray in the basement. As a result I could not let this setback prevent me from that goal. The rub rail I have found is about 3/8 inch wide in scale (1:6 maybe slightly less). It has a slight taper across the width inboard to outboard. Using bass wood I built a shooting board and tried to add the taper but I quickly found that I was having trouble getting a uniform tapered edge not to mention tearout. I then thought of a more obvious way.
 
On the Byrnes saw I taped a 1/32 inch strip to the base of the saw fence. At this point the rub rail has been purposedly ripped to 1 inch width. Using my shop built ripping guide to keep the stock snug to the fence base and the top edge snug against the fence top (with my push stick) I managed to get a consistent taper These will be ripped to width and given some final detail sanding and attached to the hull/
 
I anticipate soaking, maybe steaming these strips at the bow to form to the bulbous bow shape. I may even have to segment the rail to get the desired conformance. I now think I have a fair chance of making the milestone.
 
Jim if you are listening I wish there was a tilting arbor retro for this saw.
 
Joe

How am to ever get my modeling done? Now I have to follow your fine works, watch Leo and his build and Acorn to Arrabella.
 
Indeed i find your "gems" amussing and it keeps me on my toes. You have a sense of humor.
 
Joe

Michael, just superb! You are such an artisan. You are an inspiration that i can only hope to follow.
Joe

Michael, just superb! You are such an artisan. You are an inspiration that i can only hope to follow.
Joe