Cathead

Yeah, that plank bending line was meant as tongue-in-cheek. As was the editor comment.

No going to lie, I initially read that as "spittoon" and did a double-take. Spit-take, even.

Anyone interested in shantyboats should find a copy of Harlan Hubbard's classic book "Shantyboat", which recounts how he and his wife built a shantyboat and spent years working their way down the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers. Full of humor, close observation of river life, and just plain good writing. More than a little Engel/Billy in that book, in terms of the creative/iconoclastic thinking both employed. As a professional editor, I feel attacked! Great looking hull, and as always a startling perspective on your tiny work size. I guess we now know why this one is called "billy". I hope you didn't have too much trouble with all the plank bending, that's usually what trips people up on hulls.

I laughed out loud at the thought of Engel sitting up there in his pilot house on a tractor's springy seat.

Yeah, I have to agree that other Keith has it. If such a design really did make a meaningful increase in efficiency, I'd think other vessels would have adopted it at some point. American riverboat design was an absolute ferment of evolutionary creativity (few regulations, no "official" dockyards, no corporate staidness) and overall the designs evolved rapidly toward convergence on best practices. My guess is he just wanted to maximize his cabin/deck space on this small vessel, and doing that gave him the equivalent of an RV's "over the cab" loft. But it's question worth asking, and certainly one can never rule out the idea of a creative iconoclast coming up with something new!

Vexillology clearly has the right root word. Personally I commend manufacturers like Vanguard for caring about getting little details right. It shows attention and care for their work, and helps justify the appropriate price they charge. Would much rather have that approach than the slapdash cutrate version we see from various other sources that shall go unnamed. An incorrect flag may not "ruin" a model for casual viewers any more than upside down deadeyes, but it makes the model less than it could be. If an individual modeler makes something their way, fine. I see that as different from a manufacturer providing incorrect materials when they could get it right. So again, well done to Vanguard for making a sensible choice and explaining it.

Great work on this interesting and challenging project so far! As you saw in my project, I also enjoyed using woods I'd collected as well.

To be fair, those are the people who are retired and now have time to pursue extra hobbies. It's certainly possible younger generations will have different interests, but it's also reasonable to assume that people can develop new interests once they have more time on their hands.

I don't know about "setting you straight", it's a coin flip who's "right". To me, center-stair seems both more logical and more suited to the photo, but you've every right to follow your own instincts and build it the way you're most comfortable with. For what it's worth, in my head, two 6'x10' rooms work nicely if you think of one as a cozy sleeping cabin and the other as a sort of pantry/storeroom. Plenty of room for a bed (and small WC?) in one and lots of shelving/cabinetry in the other. And you still have a larger main room under the pilot house to act as a combination living room, dining room, workshop, etc. Also, even the staircase isn't entirely wasted space because 1/3-1/2 of it also makes a great "broom closet". I've been in lots of houses where the under-stair area has been turned into a useful cupboard of one kind or another.

Keith, that's roughly what I had in mind, but I'm a little confused by your labels. If that staircase ascends sternward (from main deck forward to boiler deck aft, just in front of the pilothouse), what does "door below" mean? There'd be no door up on the boiler deck, where that label is, and any door down on the main deck would be at the forward end, opposite from your label. I also don't understand what you mean by "cuts out so much of the deck structure below the pilothouse" because the whole thing is well forward of the pilothouse, which would be plenty well supported on uncut beams aft of the staircase. Again, lots of steamboats had staircases rising up into the boiler deck at various places without any structural integrity problems. As for the junk, it looks to me like it's on either side of the proposed stairwell opening. That railing certainly runs in front of the right-hand "junk", as I can see it on crossing that item on the blown-up image posted earlier. That also implies that that railing runs fore-aft, 90º off what it would be if it was protecting a right-descending staircase as in your other proposal. The other stuff looks like it could be piled in the narrow space between the port side of the stairwell opening and whatever those little sheds are. As for the stacks, my eye says they both lean outward at about the same angle. In an earlier discussion, I believe we decided that they were entirely decorative, explaining why they weren't straight. Also, based on the trend of the left-hand stack, it appears it comes down to the boiler deck at least 6-8 feet after of the forward end of that deck, since you can see 3-4 feet of "shack" forward of the left stack, then another 3-4 feet of deck forward of that shack's wall. So the right-hand stack would be placed well aft of your proposed starboard-descending staircase, meaning that both stacks have equal support (or lack therefore) because they don't interact with either staircase, which also fits why (to me) they both lean outward at similar angles. I don't mean to be telling you what to do, but this is what I see. Here's a drawing to illustrate how my mind reconstructs that image, right or wrong.

I have to admit, I also saw that railing and thought "center-mounted stairway forward of the pilot house". Why do you say it's "plugged with junk"? I don't see anything directly blocking that, only structures off to either side. And what do you mean by "below the PH"? What I, and I think others, are seeing is a staircase FORWARD of the pilot house, probably descending in a forward direction though it could be either. I don't see why its central location is a big deal, it wouldn't violate structural integrity any more than a regular home staircase does, especially in this vessel's cockamamie design. He could easily have that framed solidly. If anything, it mimics the forward central staircase that many steamboats had, ascending just in front of the main chimneys, and I could see him copying that design. I can't argue against your starboard idea, but I'd love to understand your thought process on rejecting the central idea.

I agree, it's easy to envision how the right location would work, giving them room to expand and add more collections, while drawing in more visitors and school groups. Just hope they can make something work. That article I linked was the first I'd heard of the Kansas options, and there's some promising ideas in there. Leavenworth could potentially be a great site, keeping it near the original discovery location but giving them more flexibility.

The Arabia museum has been in limbo for some time. Their lease with Kansas City is ending, and the city wants the building/location for other purposes. To be fair, the museum isn't the best use of that space or location and I can understand why the city wants to change. It's also not the best location for the museum, especially as it has no room to grow. But the museum hasn't been able to reach any kind of future deal for another location in KC. They've made lots of noises about other locations like Jefferson City, St. Charles, or even out of state, but nothing substantive has ever come out of those rumors. Honestly, from the outside, it's all seemed kind of ham-handed, like there's no one really in charge making clear decisions. And this has been going on for years, so it's not like they've been thrown a curveball. My impression as an outsider is that things aren't being run that well and they're kind of floundering. It honestly reminds of some stadium-hunts that certain pro teams do. This is a good recent article that sums things up: https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/manager-explains-why-arabia-steamboat-museum-will-close-its-location-in-the-city-market

In old-time steamboats this purpose was served by a single jackstaff mounted right at the bow, on the center line, primarily used for navigation. Not sure if that term is applied to these with their similar purpose but different mounting. Gorgeous work. I know exactly what you mean about the prototype, I'm a wood-and-iron person myself too, but you've done a lovely job of bringing this to life. I'm always tempted in the background to try my hand at one of these but it never quite makes it to the top of the list, so it's especially rewarding to follow someone else taking it on!

Oh, I know and appreciate it. Didn't mean to imply you hadn't or that I didn't know who you were. I meant that comment more for the general audience, and maybe a reminder if you didn't happen to remember that detail (I forget plenty of details from other peoples' builds, no matter how good).

Nicely done! And I agree with your reasoning on the carriage coloring. It makes sense to choose a style (realistic or artistic) and follow that consistently; both are attractive and reasonable but it's best to follow one path consistently.

My impression (could be wrong) was that riverboats by this era were required to have some kind of warning noisemaker, though of course that may not have stopped this eccentric fellow. Though I have a hard time imagining he made this journey without being inspected at some point by authorities, even in that era. Maybe he's got something mounted on the starboard or forward wall of the pilothouse where we can't see it. Although anyone who could cobble this thing together and take it downriver needed to get a grip. Everything's looking great, Keith!

Just to keep this dead horse alive a little longer, this YouTube video has some really nice footage of the Millersburg Ferry in operation.

Having been on it many times, I can confirm that it operates as one unit. It is more or less in two parts (the car deck and then the hull with engines, wheel, pilot house, etc) but they're functionally one whole. I can't remember exactly how they're joined, though my leaning is that they're actually physically joined and not just lashed, but regardless the "power" unit isn't really set up to operate on its own. The last time I rode this was in 2003, with my first ride probably in the early 1980s.

It was pretty common for sternwheeler outhouses to directly overhang the wheel for exactly the reason you state: it's the best place to dispose of waste and the wheel spray helps somewhat. There are also (possibly apocryphal) tales of uncomfortable situations when a lady went to use the facilities while crew were doing some form of repair to the wheel below. Not pleasant for anyone involved. If you look at my Bertrand build you'll see an example of the direct overhang style. As always, your work is looking fantastic!

Late to this side theme because I've been away, but that looks like the Millersburg PA ferry that ran (and still operates) across the Susquehanna. I rode it many times growing up and it's still a going concern: https://www.visitcumberlandvalley.com/listing/the-millersburg-ferry/1818/ My memory is that it's a gas engine with some kind of chain drive to the wheels. It's a fascinating ride, the river is extremely wide there but also very shallow, most of the time you could walk across it without getting your head wet. Most of the crossing you can see the bottom of the river just a few feet below the ferry deck. It's a cobbled-together contraption out of a whimsical nightmare, and there are actually two different ferries, both similar but each their own.

Ken, there were some brick and stone buildings in Rocheport but they were in the core business district set a few blocks back from the tracks, so not visible on the layout. If you go back and look at photos of the general setting I posted early in this log, you'll see that pretty much everything within a couple blocks of the tracks wad wood. And yes, MK&T buildings will share the same palette but the only other one in this town is a small shed I haven't built yey.

Richard, There was certainly smoke staining on the tunnel and I included that in the weathering, though gently since this layout is set shortly after the tunnel's opening. As for buildings, there's no evidence of that in contemporary photos, and I'd say it's a non-issue in a rural small town like Rocheport. No major industry, buildings not crammed together like a big city, only so much train traffic on a single mainline, relatively small 1900s engines, many houses still heating with wood, etc.

Ken, no figures in the tavern for now. It's too obscure and figures are expensive. I'd rather feature them where they're more visible. I left the roof detachable so I can change my mind someday. As for the differing colors, that actually raises a point I left out but can address: thinking about the color palette for different parts of this scene. While buildings in this era could certainly be colorful, I wanted to think about how to compose the scene in a way that would influence viewers. For example, I already talked about three subtle "zones" of town; the prosperous west side (no buildings yet built), the workmanlike depot area (most buildings now built), and the lower-income southeast side down along the floodplain on the "far side" of the tracks (one building now built). Another part of that is choosing colors. If you look carefully, you'll see that the buildings in the depot area all share a compatible reddish-yellowish-grey palette. This was quite deliberate as it ties them all together in a district. I didn't want, say, a bright blue building clashing with other buildings there and standing out. Since the depot was set as the railroad's yellow/green scheme, this also sets the non-railroad buildings subtly apart from the depot while still not clashing with it. Inman & Sons stands out a little, but not in a clashing way that it would if it were, say, light blue. My intention is that all the "far side" buildings will be an even more muted dull white/grey/raw wood palette, to emphasize their lower-income status and again to help that district subtly stand apart (and emphasize the transition between it and the depot area). Whereas the prosperous west-side district will have brighter colors (clean white farm houses, redder barns, brighter-colored storefronts, probably some nice blue). So you have this visual transition all the way across town in both design and color palette of structures that helps subtly tell a visual story about the economics of even a small town. Just to be clear, as I reread that sentence, I don't mean that in a political way, just in a "that's how it really was" way and I think it makes the scene more interesting by dividing it up into mini-scenes that both the viewer's eye, and the trains, pass through even in this little diorama. The final point is that, since this is set in late fall / early winter, too many bright colors would contrast with the general muted end-of-season color palette. So I'm making all sorts of behind the scenes decisions to help the entire scene "feel" right, not just look right.

I bet you're right. I was just rereading a history of the Ozarks earlier this evening, and in a passage on steamboating along Ozark rivers, the author notes that later gasoline-powered riverboats along the Osage River were still built with fake chimneys just for appearances. I honestly didn't think the 1938 date through when I noticed those wonky stacks. Funny you say this as I'm typing during a commercial break late in World Series Game 5.