Cathead

I assume that, as in maritime vessels, a supply of fresh eggs would be highly desirable. Even on a settled river, having your own is better than buying them, and the hens can be fed in part from table scraps. Your Chaperon looks good so far.

Thanks, Carl. Unfortunately I still can't see enough detail there to figure out just what's going on. But following your suggestion that the topgallant shrouds could be a model, I went and looked at the detailed instructions for Syren, which still uses a small spreader bar (that's probably not the right term) between the shrouds. The problem is still that every other model I look at uses more than two shrouds per mast, spread over a wide base, meaning that the total width is wider and so it's easier to get higher and closer to the tops before the whole things gets too narrow. I finally found some images of the modern HMS Pickle, such as here or here, which only has three shrouds rising from a fairly narrow base. I think I'm going to call modeller's license, assume the caption had some leeway in the rigging of my fictional vessel, and install a small spreader between the two shrouds and then a couple of stays rising up to the topmast spreaders. In Syren, these were simply tied in place rather than being rigged to any blocks, so I'll do the same here. As in various other choices on this model, whether or not it's "right", I'll at least be able to justify it based on some form of prototype practice.

So I fixed the rigging problem by cutting out the lines and re-rigging, simply slipping the new lines in under the rope coils. It's hardly visible. I'll take better photos later, but right now I'm struggling with another problem. I've made very good progress on the standing rigging and have begun to rig ratlines. What I can't figure out is, what happens near the top of the ratlines on a small craft like this? The shrouds narrow in so much that at some point it seems pointless to keep tying ratlines, but without them how could anyone finish climbing to the tops? Larger ships have a wider spread of shrouds, and often use a spreader bar and other shrouds up to the topmast spreaders, but I can't find any documentation on how this was handled on a small schooner like this one. I've looked at MS's Pride of Baltimore and BlueJacket's revenue cutter, but neither one actually has ratlines, so that doesn't help. Here's a photo of my ratlines underway; I stopped when it started to get to narrow, but that's still a long scale distance to the tops. How should I finish these off?

I made a major mistake, and have not yet decided how best to fix it. Before that, though here's the good progress I've made. Apologies for the slightly fuzzy images; it's really windy outside today and I don't want to take outdoor photos. All sails attached, running rigging complete (the clothespins are holding a test of some standing rigging alignment): I decided to display the foretopsail at a sharp angle, both because this model will be viewed primarily from the side (thus making this sail more visible), and because it fits the overall layout of appearing as if the wind is coming from the rear port quarter. I like how the footropes look on the lower yard: Some detail of the running rigging along the masts and pin racks (again, sorry for the image quality): I've also made my final decision on the standing rigging. I'm going with (per mast, per side) two topmast shrouds, run through spreaders, and down to blocks and rings on the deck (I installed another ring near the mainmast to accommodate this), and two proper stays run down to two deadeyes, with ratlines for both masts. This meant I had to pull off the original channels and deadeyes I'd installed from the kit materials, as they were now in the wrong place and orientation, and come up with my own from scratch. I ordered deadeyes from Syren, which are wonderful, but coming up with a good scratchbuilt set of channels and so on was really hard for me. After much experimentation, I settled on the approach shown below, which isn't ideal but looks fine from a little distance (like most of the model). I realize they're not entirely accurate, but they're the best I've been able to come up with and I want to move on. Now for the mistake. Remember how I wanted to have the foretopsail displayed at a sharp angle, as if the wind were coming from the port quarter and so it would be move visible from the side? Well, turns out I overdid it. After gluing in all the lines and starting to test the setup of the standing rigging, I realized that I'd gone too far, and the yard was now behind where the running rigging would need to be. In the image below, compare the spreaders at the crosstrees and where the yard is: both the stays and shrouds would need to drop in front of the angled lower yard to reach their assigned positions on the deck. Oops. Fixing this won't be easy; all the lines holding the yard are already glued in, with rope coils glued on top. All I can think to do is cut those lines and try to discretely splice in some new line (on the starboard side) and reduce the line length (on the port side) to rotate the yard back to a shallow enough angle to allow the standing rigging to descend properly. That's not going to be easy, and any knots are really going to show. But the only other option I can think of is to leave the standing rigging off on this (non-display) side, which doesn't seem very acceptable. Any other good ideas?

That looks fantastic. The setting is nicely done, realistic and creative without distracting from the model itself. I've had fun following this one, you've done such a nice job.

Oh, that was in no way a criticism. In many ways not running the chimneys all the way through makes a lot of sense. I was just curious, especially as I'm starting to think about the design for my next one, and your progress has been inspiring and informative.

Well, that's better than using Elm stain and naming your oldest son Minwax. He'd never forgive you. Model looks great so far.

Really looking nice, Clarence. It hadn't registered until now, but it looks like you're not running a single chimney through the decks but breaking it up on each deck?

I'll happily repeat the accolades. Well done on a unique model.

Interesting that the two initial sets of artwork depict masts, but the last one doesn't. The latter seems more likely to me; it also seems more realistic in terms of the overall layout of the vessel (such as placements of chimneys and boilers relative to the paddlewheels).

Wish I could help. Those are some fantastic images. I grew up a few hours from there, but had never heard of this before. The figures leaping off the ship in the final photo are rather dramatic, if unlikely!

Glenn, what a useful response, thank you! The Corel image doesn't mean much; there's a lot about this kit that relies more on imagination than any real prototype practice, so I don't tend to follow their approach as "correct" in any given way, so just because they show that sail fully permanently rigged doesn't mean it was so. I had not considered that such a large sail could/would be taken down entirely, but it does help explain why so many such ships are shown without it even though it would be very useful when sailing downwind. I'm intrigued by the idea that it was only rigged with a block at each end of the yard; as you say, that could be modeled without the fuss of a furled sail but still acknowledging the existence and possibility of the sail. I will consider this, and thank you again!

Glenn, I'm happy to found this interesting and lovely build. You have some excellent detail work there, and the prototype is beautiful.

A couple quick updates from this weekend's work, then another major decision to make. First, I've added the upper sail on the mainmast. I'm afraid I don't know what it's properly called. Second, I took a stab at adding footropes to the larger fore yard (not sure of the terminology here, either). The basic challenge here is how to make these look like they're hanging down properly when in fact there's hardly any weight on them at all. I came up with a basic jig to hold the ropes in place while I tied everything off, then applied PV glue to harden the ropes in place. Here's how it looks, completed, but with the jig left in place on one side for illustration. I think it came out ok. And now for the big decision. The kit design calls for two square sails on the foremast; a very large course hanging from the yard shown above, and a smaller topsail above that. That course was actually the first sail I made for this model, it's been sitting quietly on a shelf for quite a while awaiting its turn. But at this stage of the model, I'm wondering if I should use it or eliminate it. Here's the thought process. If I include it, that large course really blocks quite a bit of the rest of the model when viewed at many angles. It also seems a bit unrealistic given the other sails I have set; would anyone ever have a large course like that set when all the other sails are set? It doesn't make sense from a sailing point of view, at least in my limited knowledge. I test-fit it to show Mrs. Cathead, and she agreed that the model looked better without it, more balanced and easier to see the rest of the detail. Then, if I decide to eliminate the full course, the question becomes whether I rig up a furled course on that lower yard, or leave the whole thing off altogether. Here's where research comes in; while going back through lots of imagery, both photography of recent vessels and paintings/drawings, the vast majority of images show similar vessels with no lower course at all (not set, not furled), just the upper foretopsail. See, for example, this USCG image of USRC Massachussets (USCG images are public domain): Of course, to my eyes the wind direction, sails, and pennants/flags in that painting appear to be mutually impossible, so who knows how accurate it is. But there are lots of images like it online showing no lower fore sail. And here's another USGC image, this one an actual photo of a revenue cutter: Again, no square sail below the foretopsail, not even furled. On the other hand, the drawing of USRC Louisiana I've consulted a lot clearly shows a lower course. For comparison, here's the original kit image with the big forecourse set: But I'm leaning toward leaving it off entirely, as I can find abundant imagery showing such vessels without such a sail at all, this is very much a free-lanced ship anyway, and frankly I think it looks better without it. I can't pretend I haven't considered that this would also simplify the remaining rigging, but that's not a primary reason. It just really seems that the model will look more balanced without it, more like the many images I can find of similar topsail schooners with only a foretopsail set along with the fore-and-aft sails. Any thoughts?

Fantastic work, sir. You've taken a good kit and really made something special out of it. Can you post a few shots of the completed vessel with the lights on?

Love it!

Lovely work, Joe. I've been having fun this evening reading up on this class of ships thanks to your build.

I'll just slip quietly into the back, as unlike many other readers I know nothing helpful, just that this looks like a beautiful and interesting design and I'd like to learn from the build.

That canopy looks fantastic; what a great approach! And the chimneys now really fit into the rest of the model. I'm going to miss this build, but it's got me itching to start my next one.

This was my second-ever ship build; I built it more-or-less out of the box and learned a lot; it still sits on a shelf in my office. I agree that a kit like this can be a really good learning experience and a nice platform for experimentation and improvement. I didn't change the hull much, but did add better rigging after some study. Good luck with your project, I'll be interested to see what you do with it.

Daria and Mike, What a lovely project this is! I'm fascinated by the Russian kit, as a former Russian Language major in college. It looks quite interesting and well-crafted, and I would probably have fun trying to translate the instructions. And I can't say enough about how lovely it is to see a daughter-father project like this. Daria, you're doing excellent work so far and I hope you won't mind a random American following along to learn from what you're doing. Looking at the bow in that photo, did you feel that the kit provided enough internal support for the planking? There don't seem to be any filler blocks. Are the planks well-spiled enough to fit smoothly without any further support or aid?

I agree, stowed makes the most sense for your presentation.

I'm interested to follow your progress, as this is on my someday list.

Both jibs are made and (mostly) rigged. I ran out of rigging line at this stage; there's more on order from Syren, which should arrive any day now. I'm starting to get a little terrified of the rat's nest of loose rigging lines, none of which I want to fully tighten and glue until everything else is rigged. By the way, for anyone reading this who's interested, I also wrote up a summary of the method used to make the paper sails for this model. Once I get my new rigging line, I'll finish the jibs and start installing the two square foresails. That's going to be some tight work.

Personally I agree with Mike; it's not the level of weathering per se, it's that they don't look like the original metal was ever black. It's a bit distracting since overall the goal of weathering is to make the model more realistic, and in this case the eye wonders, "hey, why does that look like an unpainted white metal casting?". I think you could darken them a bit and still get the rusty, beaten-up effect you're going for. But that being said, it's your model of course and you shouldn't construe such opinions as a reflection on the work. It's lovely and you've a right to finish it how you like. After all, you'll be looking at it a lot more than the rest of us!