Cathead

I did NOT need to learn about this. Dangit.

You say "eventually", implying not any time soon, so why not just start saving for the model now and buy it when you're actually ready to build it? Why try to find credit for something you can't afford and aren't sure you'll even use? Way too many people buy and hoard kits they don't end up getting around to for various reasons, which is such a waste. If you save up first, you don't lose the money if the kit never happens for some reason. It'll still be available when you're ready, likely even on the secondary market from someone who bought it and never built it. If you can afford, say, $100/mo for 10 months on Paypal (plus whatever interest they charge you), why can't you afford $100/mo into a bank for the same period of time with no extra costs? The key here being "eventually" since that implies you can wait. Also, asking a retailer for a payment plan if they don't offer one is likely to just be a pain. There's a reason it's not common, having to accept and track many payments (and/or shipments) is a lot more work for the retailer, especially small ones. Maybe someone would be nice and work with you, but it's an inconvenient ask.

I took a break from the ship itself to build a base, as the lack of one was holding me back from various steps. For example, I don't dare install the rudder until the hull was permanently fixed in place over a base wide enough to protect it (as the rudder sticks out way below the hull), and I can't start rigging the sail properly until the hull is stable (since I can't tip the hull onto its side once the yard is fully rigged). I pulled out some cherry and walnut that I'd harvested years ago here on my farm and bandsaw-milled. The cherry was more cupped and warped than I would have liked, despite years of drying in a stickered pile, but since I don't have a planer, I made do. I used a hand planer and rotary sander to flatten and smooth the surface somewhat, but couldn't get it fully flat. So I adapted the base design to "hide" this. I had two 6" cherry boards, so ripped one of them in half lengthwise and framed the other with them, using walnut inserts to separate them. I intentionally left the walnut thicker than the cherry. This meant that I didn't have to get any of the boards lined up at the exact same thickness, as the subtle (unwanted) variations between the cherry pieces are obscured by the more obvious (and intentional) difference between the two types of wood. I then added end caps of more walnut strips to further hide the cherry's problems. I did this with the base sitting on my flat concrete garage floor (where, sure enough, it wobbled slightly since the cherry wasn't flat), but simply attached the end caps flush with the floor so the final base would be stable. Not going to win any awards for woodcraft, but it worked well enough. I didn't take any photos of the assembly process, but here's the completed base with several coats of wood oil. I definitely like how the raised walnut gives it some visual diversity and interest (also looks less like a cutting board than if it was all flush). You may notice some chatter marks on the cherry. That's from the bandsaw mill. Ideally these would be planed off, and I don't have (or really want) a planer. With enough time I could have eventually taken all of them out using a hand plane but I frankly didn't care to. The oil and photograph really brings them out, they're not as noticeable in person, and I never intended this to be art. I may make a nicer base sometime, like post-pandemic when I'm willing to go into a wood shop and have them plane some boards for me, but this is good enough for a working base for a model that itself has various problems and isn't likely to ever be displayed outside of my home. I really want to be done with this model and didn't want to spend tons of time crafting a perfect base. So then I proceeded to attach the model. For this, I carefully measured a centerline, then marked the two points directly under the thickest ends of the stand (where the cross-pieces are). I then drilled holes in these locations, both in the base and the stand. Below, the screwdriver and pencil are pointing to the holes, which you can just barely see. I then hand-drove wood screws up through the base, leaving the tips just sticking out the top. I could then fit the holes in the stand onto the screw tips (the model would only sit flush when the tips met the holes), then held it down tightly with one hand while final-tightening the screw with the other. To make this easier, I set the base spanning a gap between my table saw and garage workbench, so all I had to do was kneel underneath. And now that she's firmly attached, here's a couple broader views from the pad outside my garage: I think it's good enough. The screw attachment means I can always take it off again if I decide I want to make a nicer stand someday. Now I can move forward again, although I quickly realized I'd need to change the layout of my workspace, as this now takes the entire width of my workbench (which normally has a lot of other resources on it): There's a bunch of stuff living on the floor next to the bench now. Another reason to get this done! Thanks for sticking with me.

I've developed the habit of designating a "show" side of the model early on, and always work on the opposite side first. That way, initial mistakes are concentrated on the "wall" side and I have a better chance of a higher quality "show" side.

I agree that wire is the most practical way to strop a block. Easier to use and easier to tighten properly.

Just found this and looking forward to following it. With a family history in northern Minnesota iron mining, and an upbringing along Lake Ontario, lake freighters are certainly of interest to me.

I think we're missing the model photo?

Pretty sure the darker object you indicate is actually a grasshopper spar stowed horizontally, hanging from lines coming down from its white support spar. The angle makes a good visual illusion but if you look really closely you can see the lines wrapped around it near center. I also don't think there's any reason rolled clothes would be hung like that, especially out over the bow.

Randy, that's a creative suggestion. I think the reason I don't agree is that the "tube" perfectly meets every vertical support as if it runs through it. Any kind of long rolled up cloth would, one would think, have to go around or over those supports.

I checked my copy of Way's packet directory, which does list this vessel but doesn't have much to say about it beyond what you already know. It mentions a documented inspection in 1881 at Valley City, IL, no idea if that's a lead toward finding some documentation? The last record it mentions is 1886. Cool project, good luck!

Whaddaya mean, "you hope you'll have more next time"? That's a huge dump of fantastic work.

Nice job, I agree that they really help visually tie the original knees in, accurate or not.

Oh, that's the dark side of scale modeling for sure. I also work on a carpet and have used nautical language to describe such events. Think of it as a chance to learn new skills in metal fabrication!

Turns out I moved forward today. I experimented with various cloth methods, after reading some more build logs, and just couldn't come up with something I liked or wanted to do. So I went back to the paper sail and applied another layer of colored pencil followed by a thick rub of brown pastel. This ended up darkening it pretty well with a better match for the model's color profile, and looks more like a weathered, heavily used sail. Before: After: So I think I'm just going to go with this. I want to keep moving. I also started shaping oars. These are hard to photograph, but I chucked dowels into my poor man's lathe (hand drill) and sanded down the shafts, then used a knife to flatten the oar blades. Here are the first seven test-fit on the vessel: I'll certainly stain and weather these, but it's fun to see them in place. And here's a shot of the sail propped up in roughly the right position: When it's installed for real, I'll bend it more so it isn't so two-dimensional. But this gets the idea across.

Your excitement is justified.

Sorry for the slow reply, kept thinking I'd wait until I had something new to show but still don't. This is the first time I've done a multicolored sail with pastel. In the past, smearing hasn't been a big deal because I've just been using the pastels to age/weather the white paper into a faded yellowish (see the sails on my revenue cutter linked in my signature). It took a lot more care not to transfer colors back and forth between the different panels this time. I find that once colors get rubbed into bond paper, they smear less. I wipe/rub the paper surface first with fingers then a cloth. After that, the loose stuff is gone and the color is worked into the paper fibers. Still have to be careful, but it's not shedding all over the place. But this is why I did each coloration on a separate workspace as described above. THe bad news is, the more I look at my sail the less I like it. I placed it on the model and it just doesn't fit. I think it's too bright and soft for the darker tone of the rest of the model, and the paper texture is too fine for this large scale. Bond paper looks great on my 1:64 revenue cutter, but less so on this 1:35 ship. So I'm not sure what to do. I may try darkening it some. I'm also realizing I'm REALLY not looking forward to the delicate application of lots of thin paper strips for the cross-hatched reinforcements. So I'm considering making a quick furled cloth sail and displaying the yard stowed, especially as I'm leaning toward wanting to display the oars in working position rather than bundled. Life's really busy right now so I don't know when I'll decide or move forward on something else while delaying this decision.

Another detail you might consider, look closely at the deadeyes in the drawings given previously. Deadeyes are always rigged in the same orientation, with the point of the triangle of holes facing down for the lower deadeye and up for the upper one. They should "face away" from each other in a matched pair, like two triangles pointing away from each other. This is not only "right", it will also make the rigging easier and cleaner. Not sure if this is easy for you to fix or not, but wanted to point it out. Sorry I'm just catching up now, may be too late. One other small note, it's "wale" rather than "whale" when referring to that part of the ship. Not being a nit-picker, just pointing it out since you're enjoying learning from this build and using correct terminology is part of the fun and experience. It can also make it easier for others to help you! Keep up the good work!

Ominous. Going back and fixing things one doesn't like is often frustrating but usually feels better afterward.

Bowsprits add a LOT of length. Looks great!

Personally I think I'd remove it. Even if you feel it's more accurate, from an artistic/presentation perspective it may be distracting to casual viewers. I have a "soft" rule for myself that anything that's right but I feel like I should have an interpretive card explaining "well, actually" for, maybe I should rethink. But it's certainly up to you!

It sure looks like you're right about the chains, they should naturally have a gap for the gunport without having to be angled around it.

First builds are always a learning process, I cringe at some of my early attempts! You've got the right attitude, keep having fun.

Looks nice so far, glad you decided to start a log. Things like the keel gap can be frustrating for the builder but are rarely noticed by viewers.

No worries, envisioning hull geometry can be really hard until you get used to it (I still struggle at times). Here are a couple more photos to help you envision this. In the bow planking below, look at how the planks butt up against the stem (the part of the keel that curves up to the front of the bow). Those plank ends are actually inserted into the little beveled notch you're forming in the false keel. Without that bevel, they'd just butt right up against the edge of the stem and you'd have a harder time getting them to stay in place and getting a nice smooth joint. In the stern planking below, see how the plank just above the keel (if the boat were right side up) is flush (smooth) with the keel? Again, that's the role of the bevel, it lets the plank slide in there smoothly. Otherwise, you'd be applying that plank to the original outer side of the false keel, and together they'd be wider than the actual keel, giving you a really awkward "step" between the two. All the way along, the bevel allows the planks to sit smoothly against the false keel and each other, giving a nice flowing compound curve to the outer hull. Hope that helps!

EDIT: Oops, looks like you deleted your latest question while I was responding to it, so the content below now seems rather odd! I'll leave it in case it still helps you or anyone else. This clarifies how and where the beveling happens. You are correct, the "bearding line" laser-etched into the false keel is the point at which the bevel starts. From that line, you bevel down toward the outer edge of the false keel (toward the real keel, away from the inside of the boat). So one point of confusion here is that I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "entire" and there are two possible answers. Are you asking (1) whether to put a bevel along the entire outer edge of the false keel, from stem to stern, or (2) whether to bevel the entire keel from top to bottom? I typed up a few different wordy attempts at talking through this before deciding just to draw out what you're supposed to do and hope that makes it clear. So here is the plan image you posted above, doctored to emphasize where the beveling should happen: Dark red shows where the laser-etched bearding line is. I don't remember whether the kit extends this along the whole false keel, but the plan image implies that it doesn't, which may be what's confusing you. You are supposed to bevel all the way from stern to bow (this is clearly stated in the instructions you posted above). In brighter red, I drew roughly where the bearding line should be for the rest of the false keel. Everything below the red line should be bevelled down to the lower edge of the false keel. I also drew two cross-sections to help you envision this. Forward, it's a small and sharp bevel, maybe 45-60º? As you go aft, the bevel gets wider and gentler, so that by the stern it's a very broad surface at a very shallow angle. To put it another way, start beveling at the stern and work forward. Once you get to the forward end of the laser-cut bearding line (where my dark line becomes brighter red), just keep roughly whatever that bevel angle and thickness is, going all the way to the bow. It might help to draw this in with a pencil or even scribe it with a tool. Does that help?