Cathead

I was a model railroader long before I discovered wooden ship building, and once I did, railroad modeling went dormant, but it's quietly stirring again like a quiescent volcano muttering its way back to life.

Hmmm! That's the sort of thing I attend Eric - but am never brave enough to publicise.

Looking at that sketch reminded me of the stern of the steamboat Arabia. This was a Western River sidewheel steamboat built in 1856, a very different context than yours, but the geometry is somewhat similar. The Arabia's stern was recovered and is now on display at a museum in Kansas City, where I took a bunch of photographs of it (both exterior and interior) while planning a scratchbuilt model of her. If you're having trouble conceptualizing the stern of your vessel, perhaps it'd be helpful to look at these photos, since so few real-life examples of these hulls remain? I wrote a whole thread on researching that model, here's the relevant post where I share all the stern photos, and below is one just for an example (I don't want to spam your thread with lots of these):
 

 
 
 
 

Sorry for lack of progress, haven't touched the model since my last update. But I did have a pretty cool model-viewing experience recently, getting to see a fantastic scratchbuilt Missouri River rail ferry from ~1870 at a model railroad convention. I wrote a full post about it in the Steamboats and Other Rivercraft General Discussion thread so as not to clog up this one, but here's a teaser image to encourage you to go over there and check the whole thing out. This is at the same scale as my Peerless (1:87).
 

 
Hoping to get back to Peerless soon, but other commitments have had to take priority lately. Thanks for your patience!

I apply each strip separately. Cut to fit as needed, smear wood glue on the tacky surface, apply, use a strip of wood or my finger to rub smooth and flat (sometimes bubbles get trapped), then move on to the next one.
 
Another benefit to doing it that way is that the tape itself is just tacky enough that sliding it into an exact position is tricky because it catches. A film of wood glue on the bottom means it slides effortlessly and can be adjusted to exactly where you want it, then snugged down with some gentle pressure.

A few shots of carefully working the masking-tape "canvas" around the rest of the boiler deck:


Lots of fiddly cutting and fitting here. But another benefit to masking tape is that it holds its shape stiffly and is easier to shape and fit than something floppier like silkspan or tissue. And it's just sticky enough on its own to stay put when you're trying to draw or cut a careful line, while still being easy to move when you want.
 
I finally reached the point where a bunch of these overlapping mini-projects all came together. So here she is with cabins and pilot house attached, deck fully canvassed and painted, hog chain posts installed, and stern planking applied.


Careful eyes will notice that I haven't yet installed the support posts for the rear cabin roof overhang, but it's plenty stable for now. I'm not worried about the messy appearance of the boiler deck's edge because that will get wrapped in a thin plank veneer.
 
On Sunday, I'll be giving a talk on the evolution of steamboat design along the Missouri River, at a regional cultural center that specializes in supporting educational and artistic programming. I initially developed this talk back in 2021 as an online lecture for a regional non-profit that works along the Missouri River (you can view the talk recording here if interested), but this will be the first time I've given it to an in-person audience. As a bonus, I'll be displaying three of my steamboat models, the first time any of them have been presented to the public. Here they are all lined up and ready to go:
 

In the back is Arabia (1:64), in the middle is Bertrand (1:87), and of course in the foreground is Peerless (1:87). All three operated on the Missouri River, from 1853-1856, 1864-1865, and 1893-1903, respectively.
 
Model size is misleading, as Arabia is at a larger scale though she's actually very close in size to Bertrand. On the other hand, Bertrand and Peerless are the same scale, so you can really see how tiny the latter was in comparison to her ancestors.
 
This talk has been scheduled for a long time, and I'd originally hoped to have Peerless done for this talk, but when it became clear that wouldn't happen, I aimed to at least reach a clearly presentable and semi-complete stage, which I just barely did!
 
Thanks as always for following along, and helping me get to this point.

I'll kick in with my $.02 (US) for what it's worth.   Kits are basically either something someone wants to build for their mantel or maybe some they just like doing.   For other, they are a starting point to rework the kit into something realist to the actual ship.  Nothing with either reason.  As far as kits go... for example, the Vasa... or Victory.  Lots of them around from different manufacturers.   Accuracy.... is kind of "meh" for almost all of them but are a few that are really detailed and accurate.   Two of the kit makers (Syren and Vanguard) pride themselves on accuracy.   The key is that you get what you pay for and accuracy is one of the variables along with materials.

That's essentially what I did with my Dusek Viking longship. Used the model as a base and made lots of changes to improve the accuracy and appearance. The kit still saved me a lot of effort over scratchbuilding but the result was much better than the out-of-the-box version.

These aren't the only ones, I can point to lots of model kits that are laughably, cartoonishly, unrealistic even when it wouldn't be hard to make them at least reasonably accurate. But my guess is that it isn't felt to pay off to put the extra work into making a model good. Same answer for improved materials.

"Tunnel vision" is an English idiom meaning you focus narrowly on one thing. So the idea here is that you focus only on making this model and don't worry about broader concerns. So it's like your model is in a tunnel and you only look at that, and the tunnel walls block out all the other worries beyond the model. I speak some German but am not sure what the equivalent idiom would be.

Sorry for lack of progress, haven't touched the model since my last update. But I did have a pretty cool model-viewing experience recently, getting to see a fantastic scratchbuilt Missouri River rail ferry from ~1870 at a model railroad convention. I wrote a full post about it in the Steamboats and Other Rivercraft General Discussion thread so as not to clog up this one, but here's a teaser image to encourage you to go over there and check the whole thing out. This is at the same scale as my Peerless (1:87).
 

 
Hoping to get back to Peerless soon, but other commitments have had to take priority lately. Thanks for your patience!

That's essentially what I did with my Dusek Viking longship. Used the model as a base and made lots of changes to improve the accuracy and appearance. The kit still saved me a lot of effort over scratchbuilding but the result was much better than the out-of-the-box version.

That's essentially what I did with my Dusek Viking longship. Used the model as a base and made lots of changes to improve the accuracy and appearance. The kit still saved me a lot of effort over scratchbuilding but the result was much better than the out-of-the-box version.

That's essentially what I did with my Dusek Viking longship. Used the model as a base and made lots of changes to improve the accuracy and appearance. The kit still saved me a lot of effort over scratchbuilding but the result was much better than the out-of-the-box version.

That's essentially what I did with my Dusek Viking longship. Used the model as a base and made lots of changes to improve the accuracy and appearance. The kit still saved me a lot of effort over scratchbuilding but the result was much better than the out-of-the-box version.

These aren't the only ones, I can point to lots of model kits that are laughably, cartoonishly, unrealistic even when it wouldn't be hard to make them at least reasonably accurate. But my guess is that it isn't felt to pay off to put the extra work into making a model good. Same answer for improved materials.

These aren't the only ones, I can point to lots of model kits that are laughably, cartoonishly, unrealistic even when it wouldn't be hard to make them at least reasonably accurate. But my guess is that it isn't felt to pay off to put the extra work into making a model good. Same answer for improved materials.

These aren't the only ones, I can point to lots of model kits that are laughably, cartoonishly, unrealistic even when it wouldn't be hard to make them at least reasonably accurate. But my guess is that it isn't felt to pay off to put the extra work into making a model good. Same answer for improved materials.

Sorry for lack of progress, haven't touched the model since my last update. But I did have a pretty cool model-viewing experience recently, getting to see a fantastic scratchbuilt Missouri River rail ferry from ~1870 at a model railroad convention. I wrote a full post about it in the Steamboats and Other Rivercraft General Discussion thread so as not to clog up this one, but here's a teaser image to encourage you to go over there and check the whole thing out. This is at the same scale as my Peerless (1:87).
 

 
Hoping to get back to Peerless soon, but other commitments have had to take priority lately. Thanks for your patience!

While I've enjoyed this discussion as a novice in this area, I think Steven nails it at one point in observing that some small details that may or may not be in error act as discussion points for the knowledgeable and will not be noticed by the casual viewer. I certainly have a few on my models and it's actually a thrill when someone notices one in person and it sparks an informed discussion. Well done Steven and carry on!

The GErman equivalent would be "Tunnelblick" and I knew what it means but not explicit in this situation, but now I think I know it. That I shouldn´t think about any future build but only the one I´m building right now. At the moment I don´t think about any new build lol just the Roar Ege.
That´s a lie, I still have in mind about the next model, what kind of ship. But I´m not even sure if the next model would be a plastic or wooden kit. I´m waiting for a 1959 Revell Cutty Sark kit but I would prefer a wooden kit though... so yes,
 
I should focus on the current build, not an anything else at the moment.
 
Micha

Gute Besserung, Micha. 

"Tunnel vision" is an English idiom meaning you focus narrowly on one thing. So the idea here is that you focus only on making this model and don't worry about broader concerns. So it's like your model is in a tunnel and you only look at that, and the tunnel walls block out all the other worries beyond the model. I speak some German but am not sure what the equivalent idiom would be.

Very nice job on the railing John!
 
For the stack tops I used some thin copper sheeting that I had on hand. For the ones that look like crowns I cut the copper to where it allowed enough space to secure it to the top of the stack and stick up enough to clip the each point with flush cuts. Once they were all cut, I gave them a slight bend outward to give them their finished look.

 
For the stacks that were capped I used the same copper sheeting and formed the caps. I then used thin brass strips for the supports. The ends of the brass strips I bent to the angle of the caps and glued them on the concave side of the caps and the straight sides were secured to the tops of the stacks. 


I ran out of copper sheeting on my last build, but I found that an aluminum can works just as well. Hope this will give you some helpful ideas. 
 
-Brian

Started on the railing that go around the ship.... I was not looking forward to this as I was sure the hull (do to my poor building skills) was not going to match the curve in the etched brass railings.   To my surprise the railings were pretty close to the curve in the etched brass railings.   Some of the square stationaries were not exactly 3/32" high so they had to be filled down some, but for the most part the railings on the hurricane deck went on pretty well.
 
 
 

 

 

 

 
As designed in the kit the railings looks a little thin and and do not have any type of place for you hand to rest.   Just one skinny railing.   I decided to a strip of wood on to of the railing to make them look a little more finished.   I decided to use 1/16" x 1/16" strips on top of the railings.  In order to pre-bend for the curves it runs out a laundry detergent cup is very close to the curve in the railing.   A little soaking and a few clamps and drying over night, and the wood was very close to the actual curve in the railing.
 
Below there are two strips being bent.  One already painted the the other to be painted

 
The old saying is try,,,,,, it is not possible to ever have too many clamps
 

 
While waiting for those strips to dry and be painted, I decided to add some planking to the inside of the pilot house....   I just seemed a little stark with plan walls.
 



 
On to the six rear smoke stacks.   I started out using the supplied dowel rods and attempted to make the paper tops as described in the directions...  I used stiff paper, but it was not as stiff as card stock.   That may be my issue as i just could not make those stack tops look very good.   They looked mis-shaped.  At that point I decided to skip the paper tops, but then I could not use the dowel rods as stacks,,,,  as they would look like dowel rods.    Thus I cut some 5/32" and 1/4" copper tubing to simulate the stacks.   They would not have the tops, but at least they would look more like smoke stacks than dowel rods.
 
Below are the smoke stacks ready  to be attached to the hull...   I have since found some firmer card stock, so I will make a few more attempts at the stack tops, but I am no optimistic of the outcome....  Besides, the copper tubing painted black look pretty good as smoke stacks,,,, we will see what happens with my attempt at tops with card stock.