Cathead

Chuck,
 
I'd say play to your strengths.  You design beautiful kits with a history. Instructions that are second to none. There's options on purchasing (that's a big plus) such that if the buyer wants better wood, they can get what they need from you and "good wood" from elsewhere.  This saves the buyer some cash on the kit.  Options on the fittings.   
 
You're already basically allowing your customers to "roll their own prices".  You have range of kits in work or available.  I take it that Winchelsea is next?
 
From what I see, you're doing right by your customers.

Great point, Bob. That's been on my travel list ever since Kurt mentioned it to me. It's just far enough away from me to make it difficult.

What's important to understand is that someone saying "I want this awesome thing made out of the best possible components which are all expensive, but I want it to cost a dollar" isn't necessarily insisting that all three of those things be true all the time, they're just telling you that those three things are important to them, just as a market customer is telling me that they care about cost, quality, and growing method.
 
It's not breaking news, but this collection of comments tells us that  majority of people here like 17-18th ocean-going ships, they have a budget they feel is appropriate, and they value good materials and instructions. Any given designer may not be able to meet all three goals, but they can make an educated decision about which of them to focus on.
 
Again, this thread asked people what they thought in general, as if I handed out a survey of farmers market shoppers. People giving their ideal ideas to a survey is not the same as people specifically criticizing a given vendor. Consumers that challenge my market prices directly and personally are annoying if they don't try to understand the business model. Consumers who tell a survey that they want organic, affordable, nice-looking produce are just telling me in general what's important to them. Respondents to this thread are, by and large, saying what matters to them in general; they're not saying "X company is too expensive or Y company doesn't make models I like".
 
For example, when I say I want a kit to be $250-$400, I'm saying that's as much as I can possibly justify spending. If the only way to make a kit I'd otherwise like is for it to be $600, then I don't want that kit made for me because I won't be able to buy it no matter how nice it is. That's important information for a manufacturer. I'm not insisting they lose money making me a $600 kit for $400, I'm saying that's my budgetary limit, period. We chose not to grow some things on our farm because we couldn't sell them at a price consumers would accept. I'd like to grow them, but I accept that people won't pay me to do so. They can grow them in their home garden if they want those items, or scratchbuild that model, or just do without if that's what life dictates. Again, don't misinterpret what's being said in this forum.

People aren't being unreasonable, they're doing exactly what they were asked to do by the topic, sharing what they'd like to see. Most of us don't know anything about the business side of kit development (which is why I tried to ask about it earlier), so how do you expect respondents to magically produce only practical answers?
 
Look, no one understands businesses they aren't engaged in. Among other things, I'm a vegetable farmer, and farmers market customers always want their produce organic, perfect, and cheap. Well, you can't have all three. Organic and perfect, it won't be cheap. Organic and cheap, it's going to have bug damage. Perfect and cheap, it ain't going to be chemical-free. But people who have never grown a vegetable in their life, or even people who have a home garden, have no mental structure for evaluating the actual business of vegetable production.
 
So there's no need to get huffy about modellers saying what they'd "like" to see, especially when that's what was asked for. If we can get a nice explanation from the developers of what actually goes into the business model of kit development, maybe then we can give more "realistic" answers. Until then, just take the feedback here at face value as a narrow sampling of a limited community of dedicated modellers and get what value you can from it.

As a comparison to the work boats depicted above, the photo below is of the preserved "snagger" 'Industry' on the Murray Rive in South Australia.  The photo was taken at Renmark some ten years ago.  'Industry' was built in 1910 and, like virtually all traditional Murray River boats, is a side wheeler.
 
John
 

 

People aren't being unreasonable, they're doing exactly what they were asked to do by the topic, sharing what they'd like to see. Most of us don't know anything about the business side of kit development (which is why I tried to ask about it earlier), so how do you expect respondents to magically produce only practical answers?
 
Look, no one understands businesses they aren't engaged in. Among other things, I'm a vegetable farmer, and farmers market customers always want their produce organic, perfect, and cheap. Well, you can't have all three. Organic and perfect, it won't be cheap. Organic and cheap, it's going to have bug damage. Perfect and cheap, it ain't going to be chemical-free. But people who have never grown a vegetable in their life, or even people who have a home garden, have no mental structure for evaluating the actual business of vegetable production.
 
So there's no need to get huffy about modellers saying what they'd "like" to see, especially when that's what was asked for. If we can get a nice explanation from the developers of what actually goes into the business model of kit development, maybe then we can give more "realistic" answers. Until then, just take the feedback here at face value as a narrow sampling of a limited community of dedicated modellers and get what value you can from it.

So here's a question for the kit designers reading this. How do you judge what will sell or be popular? All of us can advocate for our little niches (riverboats, transitional craft, merchant ships, etc) but you professionals have to actually assess and decide what will be a good product. What does that R&D process look like? How much is guided by your own hunches and interests versus outside research into trends, etc.?

People aren't being unreasonable, they're doing exactly what they were asked to do by the topic, sharing what they'd like to see. Most of us don't know anything about the business side of kit development (which is why I tried to ask about it earlier), so how do you expect respondents to magically produce only practical answers?
 
Look, no one understands businesses they aren't engaged in. Among other things, I'm a vegetable farmer, and farmers market customers always want their produce organic, perfect, and cheap. Well, you can't have all three. Organic and perfect, it won't be cheap. Organic and cheap, it's going to have bug damage. Perfect and cheap, it ain't going to be chemical-free. But people who have never grown a vegetable in their life, or even people who have a home garden, have no mental structure for evaluating the actual business of vegetable production.
 
So there's no need to get huffy about modellers saying what they'd "like" to see, especially when that's what was asked for. If we can get a nice explanation from the developers of what actually goes into the business model of kit development, maybe then we can give more "realistic" answers. Until then, just take the feedback here at face value as a narrow sampling of a limited community of dedicated modellers and get what value you can from it.

What's important to understand is that someone saying "I want this awesome thing made out of the best possible components which are all expensive, but I want it to cost a dollar" isn't necessarily insisting that all three of those things be true all the time, they're just telling you that those three things are important to them, just as a market customer is telling me that they care about cost, quality, and growing method.
 
It's not breaking news, but this collection of comments tells us that  majority of people here like 17-18th ocean-going ships, they have a budget they feel is appropriate, and they value good materials and instructions. Any given designer may not be able to meet all three goals, but they can make an educated decision about which of them to focus on.
 
Again, this thread asked people what they thought in general, as if I handed out a survey of farmers market shoppers. People giving their ideal ideas to a survey is not the same as people specifically criticizing a given vendor. Consumers that challenge my market prices directly and personally are annoying if they don't try to understand the business model. Consumers who tell a survey that they want organic, affordable, nice-looking produce are just telling me in general what's important to them. Respondents to this thread are, by and large, saying what matters to them in general; they're not saying "X company is too expensive or Y company doesn't make models I like".
 
For example, when I say I want a kit to be $250-$400, I'm saying that's as much as I can possibly justify spending. If the only way to make a kit I'd otherwise like is for it to be $600, then I don't want that kit made for me because I won't be able to buy it no matter how nice it is. That's important information for a manufacturer. I'm not insisting they lose money making me a $600 kit for $400, I'm saying that's my budgetary limit, period. We chose not to grow some things on our farm because we couldn't sell them at a price consumers would accept. I'd like to grow them, but I accept that people won't pay me to do so. They can grow them in their home garden if they want those items, or scratchbuild that model, or just do without if that's what life dictates. Again, don't misinterpret what's being said in this forum.

People aren't being unreasonable, they're doing exactly what they were asked to do by the topic, sharing what they'd like to see. Most of us don't know anything about the business side of kit development (which is why I tried to ask about it earlier), so how do you expect respondents to magically produce only practical answers?
 
Look, no one understands businesses they aren't engaged in. Among other things, I'm a vegetable farmer, and farmers market customers always want their produce organic, perfect, and cheap. Well, you can't have all three. Organic and perfect, it won't be cheap. Organic and cheap, it's going to have bug damage. Perfect and cheap, it ain't going to be chemical-free. But people who have never grown a vegetable in their life, or even people who have a home garden, have no mental structure for evaluating the actual business of vegetable production.
 
So there's no need to get huffy about modellers saying what they'd "like" to see, especially when that's what was asked for. If we can get a nice explanation from the developers of what actually goes into the business model of kit development, maybe then we can give more "realistic" answers. Until then, just take the feedback here at face value as a narrow sampling of a limited community of dedicated modellers and get what value you can from it.

I feel compelled to make a comment from the manufacturer's side. Our CSS Alabama kit took about 1,400 hours to develop. That's a BIG chunk of payroll money. Even a "simple" kit like our Revenue Cutter is hundreds of hours of development.
 
As to deciding which ships to model, I made a survey back in April of 2014 that reached 3,000 people, and I got back 60 or 70 responses. That is BlueJacket's general guide for kit development for the next several years to come.
 
Without being too commercial, we already offer some kits that were suggested in this thread. We also have a toll-free help line for our kits. We take our reputation very seriously.

People aren't being unreasonable, they're doing exactly what they were asked to do by the topic, sharing what they'd like to see. Most of us don't know anything about the business side of kit development (which is why I tried to ask about it earlier), so how do you expect respondents to magically produce only practical answers?
 
Look, no one understands businesses they aren't engaged in. Among other things, I'm a vegetable farmer, and farmers market customers always want their produce organic, perfect, and cheap. Well, you can't have all three. Organic and perfect, it won't be cheap. Organic and cheap, it's going to have bug damage. Perfect and cheap, it ain't going to be chemical-free. But people who have never grown a vegetable in their life, or even people who have a home garden, have no mental structure for evaluating the actual business of vegetable production.
 
So there's no need to get huffy about modellers saying what they'd "like" to see, especially when that's what was asked for. If we can get a nice explanation from the developers of what actually goes into the business model of kit development, maybe then we can give more "realistic" answers. Until then, just take the feedback here at face value as a narrow sampling of a limited community of dedicated modellers and get what value you can from it.

People aren't being unreasonable, they're doing exactly what they were asked to do by the topic, sharing what they'd like to see. Most of us don't know anything about the business side of kit development (which is why I tried to ask about it earlier), so how do you expect respondents to magically produce only practical answers?
 
Look, no one understands businesses they aren't engaged in. Among other things, I'm a vegetable farmer, and farmers market customers always want their produce organic, perfect, and cheap. Well, you can't have all three. Organic and perfect, it won't be cheap. Organic and cheap, it's going to have bug damage. Perfect and cheap, it ain't going to be chemical-free. But people who have never grown a vegetable in their life, or even people who have a home garden, have no mental structure for evaluating the actual business of vegetable production.
 
So there's no need to get huffy about modellers saying what they'd "like" to see, especially when that's what was asked for. If we can get a nice explanation from the developers of what actually goes into the business model of kit development, maybe then we can give more "realistic" answers. Until then, just take the feedback here at face value as a narrow sampling of a limited community of dedicated modellers and get what value you can from it.

People aren't being unreasonable, they're doing exactly what they were asked to do by the topic, sharing what they'd like to see. Most of us don't know anything about the business side of kit development (which is why I tried to ask about it earlier), so how do you expect respondents to magically produce only practical answers?
 
Look, no one understands businesses they aren't engaged in. Among other things, I'm a vegetable farmer, and farmers market customers always want their produce organic, perfect, and cheap. Well, you can't have all three. Organic and perfect, it won't be cheap. Organic and cheap, it's going to have bug damage. Perfect and cheap, it ain't going to be chemical-free. But people who have never grown a vegetable in their life, or even people who have a home garden, have no mental structure for evaluating the actual business of vegetable production.
 
So there's no need to get huffy about modellers saying what they'd "like" to see, especially when that's what was asked for. If we can get a nice explanation from the developers of what actually goes into the business model of kit development, maybe then we can give more "realistic" answers. Until then, just take the feedback here at face value as a narrow sampling of a limited community of dedicated modellers and get what value you can from it.

People aren't being unreasonable, they're doing exactly what they were asked to do by the topic, sharing what they'd like to see. Most of us don't know anything about the business side of kit development (which is why I tried to ask about it earlier), so how do you expect respondents to magically produce only practical answers?
 
Look, no one understands businesses they aren't engaged in. Among other things, I'm a vegetable farmer, and farmers market customers always want their produce organic, perfect, and cheap. Well, you can't have all three. Organic and perfect, it won't be cheap. Organic and cheap, it's going to have bug damage. Perfect and cheap, it ain't going to be chemical-free. But people who have never grown a vegetable in their life, or even people who have a home garden, have no mental structure for evaluating the actual business of vegetable production.
 
So there's no need to get huffy about modellers saying what they'd "like" to see, especially when that's what was asked for. If we can get a nice explanation from the developers of what actually goes into the business model of kit development, maybe then we can give more "realistic" answers. Until then, just take the feedback here at face value as a narrow sampling of a limited community of dedicated modellers and get what value you can from it.

People aren't being unreasonable, they're doing exactly what they were asked to do by the topic, sharing what they'd like to see. Most of us don't know anything about the business side of kit development (which is why I tried to ask about it earlier), so how do you expect respondents to magically produce only practical answers?
 
Look, no one understands businesses they aren't engaged in. Among other things, I'm a vegetable farmer, and farmers market customers always want their produce organic, perfect, and cheap. Well, you can't have all three. Organic and perfect, it won't be cheap. Organic and cheap, it's going to have bug damage. Perfect and cheap, it ain't going to be chemical-free. But people who have never grown a vegetable in their life, or even people who have a home garden, have no mental structure for evaluating the actual business of vegetable production.
 
So there's no need to get huffy about modellers saying what they'd "like" to see, especially when that's what was asked for. If we can get a nice explanation from the developers of what actually goes into the business model of kit development, maybe then we can give more "realistic" answers. Until then, just take the feedback here at face value as a narrow sampling of a limited community of dedicated modellers and get what value you can from it.

People aren't being unreasonable, they're doing exactly what they were asked to do by the topic, sharing what they'd like to see. Most of us don't know anything about the business side of kit development (which is why I tried to ask about it earlier), so how do you expect respondents to magically produce only practical answers?
 
Look, no one understands businesses they aren't engaged in. Among other things, I'm a vegetable farmer, and farmers market customers always want their produce organic, perfect, and cheap. Well, you can't have all three. Organic and perfect, it won't be cheap. Organic and cheap, it's going to have bug damage. Perfect and cheap, it ain't going to be chemical-free. But people who have never grown a vegetable in their life, or even people who have a home garden, have no mental structure for evaluating the actual business of vegetable production.
 
So there's no need to get huffy about modellers saying what they'd "like" to see, especially when that's what was asked for. If we can get a nice explanation from the developers of what actually goes into the business model of kit development, maybe then we can give more "realistic" answers. Until then, just take the feedback here at face value as a narrow sampling of a limited community of dedicated modellers and get what value you can from it.

If you are ever near Louisville KY, you need to go to the Howard Shipyard Museum across the river in Jeffersonville IN.  The Howards built about 1700 boats from 1834 to 1940.  The yard is still in operation mostly building barges for the towboats.  The museum is in the three story mansion the Howards lived in and the riverboat models fill every room of the building. 
 
Bob

Google the W.T. Preston, a stern wheel steam boat used as a snag boat on Puget Sound for many years. The boat is now a museum in Anacortes Washington. Interesting history. I used to see her lead the parade through the Montlake Cut on opening day of yachting season from Lake Union to Lake Washington.

If you want a specific prototype of a working steamboat, look into Bertrand or Cairo. Cairo's frame is on display in Vicksburg, Bertrand has a nice museum and very thorough archeological documentation of its structure and construction. Both are great examples of non-showboat working boats that have a good story to them.
 
You are also correct that many (most?) American riverboats weren't built with plans. There were dedicated boatyards along the upper Ohio churning out boats, but they generally didn't go by blueprint. They weren't backwoods-built, exactly, more like individual custom-builds on an assembly line. So in some ways the best topics are the boats that have been excavated and studied after the fact, like Bertrand or Arabia or Cairo.

Daves,
 
http://www.steamboats.org/modelplans/paddlewheelers.html
 
has a lot of plans offered. I bought the plans for my Far West scratchbuild there and was pleased. The site also has a long list of other resources for research.
 
For Bertrand, I mostly relied on archeological drawings from the National Park Service excavation of the wreck (see my log). I'd purchased a set of private plans, too, but found that they conflicted with the NPS drawings so mostly used the latter.

If you want a specific prototype of a working steamboat, look into Bertrand or Cairo. Cairo's frame is on display in Vicksburg, Bertrand has a nice museum and very thorough archeological documentation of its structure and construction. Both are great examples of non-showboat working boats that have a good story to them.
 
You are also correct that many (most?) American riverboats weren't built with plans. There were dedicated boatyards along the upper Ohio churning out boats, but they generally didn't go by blueprint. They weren't backwoods-built, exactly, more like individual custom-builds on an assembly line. So in some ways the best topics are the boats that have been excavated and studied after the fact, like Bertrand or Arabia or Cairo.

Daves,
 
http://www.steamboats.org/modelplans/paddlewheelers.html
 
has a lot of plans offered. I bought the plans for my Far West scratchbuild there and was pleased. The site also has a long list of other resources for research.
 
For Bertrand, I mostly relied on archeological drawings from the National Park Service excavation of the wreck (see my log). I'd purchased a set of private plans, too, but found that they conflicted with the NPS drawings so mostly used the latter.

Daves,
 
http://www.steamboats.org/modelplans/paddlewheelers.html
 
has a lot of plans offered. I bought the plans for my Far West scratchbuild there and was pleased. The site also has a long list of other resources for research.
 
For Bertrand, I mostly relied on archeological drawings from the National Park Service excavation of the wreck (see my log). I'd purchased a set of private plans, too, but found that they conflicted with the NPS drawings so mostly used the latter.

Stay sail is rigged:
 

 
For the halyard, I rigged a single block at the mast rather than pass the line through the mast sheave. It made the rigging easier to handle, rather than tangling it with the other lines behind the mast (this also seems more functional for the real-life craft as well). The tack is hooked to a ring bolt at the bow. The sheet is belayed to a pin. The sail ends up looking smaller than I expected, I think because I measured it hanging dead from the stay, rather than billowed out, but I think the jib will balance it nicely.
 
You may have noticed the missing bowsprit. I broke that off with an errant wrist while rigging the stay sail. Turned out to be a blessing in disguise, as the reason I bumped it was that it was really in the way in the first place. I just left it off until I was done with the staysail. Fortunately, it came off cleanly and I think I can just glue it back on when I'm ready to work on the jib. It would have worked great to not even install the bowsprit until I'd finished the rigging to this point; something to keep in mind if I end up in a future situation on another build.
 
Anyway, I like the way it's shaping up. One more sail to go, then the final standing rigging.