Cathead

I managed to overlook this update somehow, but a belated congratulations on finishing. You've done a nice job bringing this kit to life and it's a lovely gift for your friend.

As you can tell from my username and photo, I heartily approve of this addition to the crew.

As you can tell from my username and photo, I heartily approve of this addition to the crew.

I managed to overlook this update somehow, but a belated congratulations on finishing. You've done a nice job bringing this kit to life and it's a lovely gift for your friend.

I'm now calling this build complete. Here are the finished photos: 

Thank you to everyone for the kind comments and for the likes. 
 
 
 I got the dinghy weathered and glued down, I still need to add a coil of rope around that sprue. You can barley see that sprue in normal viewing. I used a brown pastel to weather the inside of the dinghy but it's got a pinkish tint to it. I know not why and I'm not sure how to fix it other use a little black? 
 
 I received a box of three cats today from an Etsy supplier. They're supposed to be HO scale but they seem smaller which is okay. The one sitting on the fire bucket box is 0.115 inches high. To see any detail it must be viewed under magnification. 

 
 It snuck aboard and I'm really not in favor of it sticking around as I think it's bad luck to have a black cat onboard. I've temporally named the cat, D1. 

 
 This cat sharpening it's claws on topping lift line I named Stump Grinder. It's more or less the lead deckhand's cat. It's a little bigger than D1.

 
I couldn't get a good in focus photo of the cat laying on its belly beside the Derrick crane mast. This cat doesn't have a name yet. It's larger in girth than Stump Grinder. I may name it D8. 
 
 
 If you think I'm procrastinating doing the handrails you are correct. 
 
  Thank you to everyone for the support and for following along.
 
   Keith
 
 

Thanks to steam exhaust products, like cinders and gases given off by coal combustion, the areas around rights of way were fairly denuded of any foliage. The diesel transition started the recovery of the forests near the tracks.

And every once in awhile the steam locomotives cinders would light a fire on the roadbed and clear weeds and sometimes bridges🤪🤪.  That’s why you would see an inspection car running a mile or two behind the train to put out anything that caught fire.

Railroads had these weed burners  back in the day of steam and newer versions today to keep weeds down on the roadways.
 

We lived for a couple of years near a branch-line during the last days of steam back in later 1960s Germany and used to play around the embankments. One day we had to alarm the adults as indeed some shrubs/weeds had caught fire after a steam-train passed.
It seems that this, however, was less likely with coal-fired engines, while wood- (or peat-fired, as was the case for a period in Bavaria) always had those bulbous spark-arrester chimneys.
 

I agree that a steel hull would be less likely to require full length hog chains as longitudinal stiffening can be incorporated into the hull structure.  Also a lake boat with the ability to have a deeper draft could be more heavily built eliminating the need for hog chains.  However, as show with the Verity some additional support is required for the stern wheel.  I have been aboard the Verity many times but until I can find old 35mm negatives of the interior I can't positively rule out internal hog chains, though I doubt it was so equipped.  I have seen many photographs of hog chains run through interior spaces; even in palatial riverboats.
 
In general terms I am pretty sure your statements are accurate.
 
I wish I could call a couple of old friends to ask as they would have the answers at hand.  Thinking of Ralph DuPae, Jim Swift and Alan Bates.  I have been trying to contact another old friend that unlike the three I just mentioned was alive the last time I was able to check.  Jack Custer was the Editor and Publisher of the Egregious Steamboat Journal and knew an awful lot about steamboat history and construction, especially for a professor of Latin!  He was working on some drawings showing internal hog chain use, both longitudinal and cross ways.  Most don't know that many boats had cross wise hog chains in addition to longitudinal.  Jack was preparing a paper for the NRG's Journal.  My phone calls go unanswered and the it gives me hope as the number is operating not disconnected.

Kurt, do you agree with my assessment above? You're the true expert here, you and Roger, and I'm happy to be corrected if I misstated something.

Thanks for sharing those great photos! You've done a nice job on your scenery. Do keep in mind that I'm modeling late fall / early winter, so a lot of the standard foliage products won't work for me. I also prefer to minimize the use of artificial stuff, though I'll certainly be using some. One of the reasons I'm focusing on this season is that it lets me use a much higher percentage of natural materials. But, for example, I intend to use some purchased static grass to help simulate the winter grasses so distinctive in this part of the world.
 
There will be plenty of fallen limbs/timber, especially along and in the creek. But on the other hand, keep in mind that this was the era when trees were at a minimum, so to speak, given the local demands for timber and firewood. Check out the historical photos posted earlier in the thread; the landscape was a lot more open than the lush regrowth people take for granted today. One of my interesting challenges will be balancing a historically accurate level of vegetation with an easily believed/accepted look, because modeling this truly accurately would make many modern viewers think it was farther west in, say, Montana, because they associate modern Missouri with lush (almost overwhelming) vegetation rather than the sparser "frontier" look it had around 1900.

Thanks for sharing those great photos! You've done a nice job on your scenery. Do keep in mind that I'm modeling late fall / early winter, so a lot of the standard foliage products won't work for me. I also prefer to minimize the use of artificial stuff, though I'll certainly be using some. One of the reasons I'm focusing on this season is that it lets me use a much higher percentage of natural materials. But, for example, I intend to use some purchased static grass to help simulate the winter grasses so distinctive in this part of the world.
 
There will be plenty of fallen limbs/timber, especially along and in the creek. But on the other hand, keep in mind that this was the era when trees were at a minimum, so to speak, given the local demands for timber and firewood. Check out the historical photos posted earlier in the thread; the landscape was a lot more open than the lush regrowth people take for granted today. One of my interesting challenges will be balancing a historically accurate level of vegetation with an easily believed/accepted look, because modeling this truly accurately would make many modern viewers think it was farther west in, say, Montana, because they associate modern Missouri with lush (almost overwhelming) vegetation rather than the sparser "frontier" look it had around 1900.

Learning from each other is what makes MSW so valuable.
Kurt
 

very true years ago with steam locomotives and early settlements the landscape was totally different than it is today.
 
i lived in Colorado for many years and places in the mountains that are treed now were bare mountains back in the days of steam and mining.
 
i was just showing ideas and i forgot about the photos you were trying to create in miniature.  
 
you do nice work and look forward to the progress.

Thanks for sharing those great photos! You've done a nice job on your scenery. Do keep in mind that I'm modeling late fall / early winter, so a lot of the standard foliage products won't work for me. I also prefer to minimize the use of artificial stuff, though I'll certainly be using some. One of the reasons I'm focusing on this season is that it lets me use a much higher percentage of natural materials. But, for example, I intend to use some purchased static grass to help simulate the winter grasses so distinctive in this part of the world.
 
There will be plenty of fallen limbs/timber, especially along and in the creek. But on the other hand, keep in mind that this was the era when trees were at a minimum, so to speak, given the local demands for timber and firewood. Check out the historical photos posted earlier in the thread; the landscape was a lot more open than the lush regrowth people take for granted today. One of my interesting challenges will be balancing a historically accurate level of vegetation with an easily believed/accepted look, because modeling this truly accurately would make many modern viewers think it was farther west in, say, Montana, because they associate modern Missouri with lush (almost overwhelming) vegetation rather than the sparser "frontier" look it had around 1900.

Thanks for sharing those great photos! You've done a nice job on your scenery. Do keep in mind that I'm modeling late fall / early winter, so a lot of the standard foliage products won't work for me. I also prefer to minimize the use of artificial stuff, though I'll certainly be using some. One of the reasons I'm focusing on this season is that it lets me use a much higher percentage of natural materials. But, for example, I intend to use some purchased static grass to help simulate the winter grasses so distinctive in this part of the world.
 
There will be plenty of fallen limbs/timber, especially along and in the creek. But on the other hand, keep in mind that this was the era when trees were at a minimum, so to speak, given the local demands for timber and firewood. Check out the historical photos posted earlier in the thread; the landscape was a lot more open than the lush regrowth people take for granted today. One of my interesting challenges will be balancing a historically accurate level of vegetation with an easily believed/accepted look, because modeling this truly accurately would make many modern viewers think it was farther west in, say, Montana, because they associate modern Missouri with lush (almost overwhelming) vegetation rather than the sparser "frontier" look it had around 1900.

I've learned plenty from your work, believe me.

Thanks for sharing those great photos! You've done a nice job on your scenery. Do keep in mind that I'm modeling late fall / early winter, so a lot of the standard foliage products won't work for me. I also prefer to minimize the use of artificial stuff, though I'll certainly be using some. One of the reasons I'm focusing on this season is that it lets me use a much higher percentage of natural materials. But, for example, I intend to use some purchased static grass to help simulate the winter grasses so distinctive in this part of the world.
 
There will be plenty of fallen limbs/timber, especially along and in the creek. But on the other hand, keep in mind that this was the era when trees were at a minimum, so to speak, given the local demands for timber and firewood. Check out the historical photos posted earlier in the thread; the landscape was a lot more open than the lush regrowth people take for granted today. One of my interesting challenges will be balancing a historically accurate level of vegetation with an easily believed/accepted look, because modeling this truly accurately would make many modern viewers think it was farther west in, say, Montana, because they associate modern Missouri with lush (almost overwhelming) vegetation rather than the sparser "frontier" look it had around 1900.

Thanks for sharing those great photos! You've done a nice job on your scenery. Do keep in mind that I'm modeling late fall / early winter, so a lot of the standard foliage products won't work for me. I also prefer to minimize the use of artificial stuff, though I'll certainly be using some. One of the reasons I'm focusing on this season is that it lets me use a much higher percentage of natural materials. But, for example, I intend to use some purchased static grass to help simulate the winter grasses so distinctive in this part of the world.
 
There will be plenty of fallen limbs/timber, especially along and in the creek. But on the other hand, keep in mind that this was the era when trees were at a minimum, so to speak, given the local demands for timber and firewood. Check out the historical photos posted earlier in the thread; the landscape was a lot more open than the lush regrowth people take for granted today. One of my interesting challenges will be balancing a historically accurate level of vegetation with an easily believed/accepted look, because modeling this truly accurately would make many modern viewers think it was farther west in, say, Montana, because they associate modern Missouri with lush (almost overwhelming) vegetation rather than the sparser "frontier" look it had around 1900.

Thanks for sharing those great photos! You've done a nice job on your scenery. Do keep in mind that I'm modeling late fall / early winter, so a lot of the standard foliage products won't work for me. I also prefer to minimize the use of artificial stuff, though I'll certainly be using some. One of the reasons I'm focusing on this season is that it lets me use a much higher percentage of natural materials. But, for example, I intend to use some purchased static grass to help simulate the winter grasses so distinctive in this part of the world.
 
There will be plenty of fallen limbs/timber, especially along and in the creek. But on the other hand, keep in mind that this was the era when trees were at a minimum, so to speak, given the local demands for timber and firewood. Check out the historical photos posted earlier in the thread; the landscape was a lot more open than the lush regrowth people take for granted today. One of my interesting challenges will be balancing a historically accurate level of vegetation with an easily believed/accepted look, because modeling this truly accurately would make many modern viewers think it was farther west in, say, Montana, because they associate modern Missouri with lush (almost overwhelming) vegetation rather than the sparser "frontier" look it had around 1900.

Eric, thank you for taking the time to teach me. I can't tell how much I truly appreciate it.
 
 I was seeing sternwheelers without full hull length support not knowing or understanding the why of it. Now that I'm more educated I can view and appreciate what I'm seeing when observing sternwheeler images. For that, I again, thank you.
 
 Thank you, Gary. I hope I'm allowed the opportunity to work on that sternwheeler from the Hard Coal Navy days. She is truly an ugly duck. 

Just some ideas for ground cover.  Most is woodland scenics some trees are scenic express and the pine trees are made by me and the big tree behind the building is made from a sagebrush branch and then ground foam for foliage.  Don't forget to add some branches or sticks as dead fall trees or dead standing trees.  Makes the scene more believable. 
 

 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 
 

Keith, most of those appear to be steel-hull vessels. For one thing, the super-long hulls and short stacks imply they're late-era vessels that are more likely to overlap with early metal hulls.
 
#1 is, as you suggest, a harbor vessel and not representative.
 
#2 is the Monongehela, a steel-hull built in 1927 (https://www.waterwaysjournal.net/2021/01/24/the-towboat-monongahela/)
 
#3 I can't identify but looks like a lake steamer design, and a post-1900 one at that given the more modern davits and lifeboats as well as the thin metal paddlewheel, so very well may be a steel hull. Even if not, if she's a lake steamer, she can have a heavier, more rigid hull than a riverboat so may have more muted support structures above deck. Or if she does have a full set of hog chains, they may well be hidden within the superstructure and since we can't see a bow view we can't tell for sure.
 
#4 is the George Verity, another 1927 steel-hull vessel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_M._Verity_(towboat)). And though your view is from astern, the photo from Wikipedia is forward and shows the same long hull, short stack design of that era.
 
#5 is the Orco, built in 1936 according to the UW LaCross library (https://search.library.wisc.edu/digital/ACNQC2XXRJ4USX8G), so again very likely a steel-hull vessel.
 
#6 is definitely a steel hull, and the 1935 date of the photo helps confirm this. 
 
These are all fun photos to look at, and thank you for sharing, but I'll maintain that any wooden-hulled riverboat had to have hog chains for structural integrity, until the development of steel hulls or unless it was designed to operate in deeper water (e.g. the Hudson) where shallow draft and/or light weight wasn't a consideration. If I recall correctly, the original Lula was up in Montana, so absolutely fit those constraints. Your version is meant to be a Hudson River / port boat, right? So you can get away with fudging it a bit.