trippwj

This is one that I have heard of but have never been able to locate. According to R.C.Anderson in the Mariner's Mirror (1947), Marion Brewington advised him there was a copy at the US Navy as you noted above. According to Worldcat, there are 3 library copies of the NRG facsimile edition - at the LOC, the Smithsonian and the San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park, Maritime Research Center. There is a single table from the document in the NRJ volume 31. I will, of course, let you know if I am ever able to locate an additional copy (or an online version of the original). Good luck!

Abstract: For millennia wooden ships that plied the world’s oceans were plagued by biological problems. These were a multifaceted result of water temperature, salinity, levels of sunlight and the quantity of nutrients in the water. Vessel hulls, in time, collected seaweed affecting their speed and maneuverability. The ship’s longevity was impacted by infestations of two marine borers: the shipworm, a wormlike clam and tiny crustaceans known as gribbles. Combined they largely destroyed the integrity of marine timber structures, often working together to bore tunnels in wood to make it spongy and friable. Countless schemes were tried over time to solve sea flora and wood-rot problems. Some produced limited success until, in the eighteenth century, a relatively simple and practical solution was found, one that would shape maritime history. The evolution of that discovery ultimately affected two American icons, one a storied ship, the other a patriot, entrepreneur and an industrial opportunist. Norton, Louis Arthur. 2019. “Copper Sheathing, Industrial Espionage and an Eminent American Entrepreneur | Coriolis: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Maritime Studies.” Coriolis - Interdisciplinary Journal of Maritime Studies 9 (2): 37–44. https://ijms.nmdl.org/article/view/20133 Enjoy!

Welcome from "way Downeast". Love the lazy Susan idea - will have to see about getting one!

As I have been banned from the other forum, let me respond to the owner here. SNIP So, someone investigate to see if trippwj has an ongoing build log here on that forum that advocates model piracy. I do not remember seeing anything in a long time ANSWER - I may have a couple of old ones. Please delete them. SNIP It is also my understanding that trippwj or other member(s) might be copying and pasting that forum that advocates model piracy material and pasting that material/screenshots on other media outlets such as MSW Facebook or where ever? If so, this is causing strife and conflict in the modeling community (for what purpose may I ask? - rhetorical) Then I wish to support a member being banned permanently for causing problems playing the game on both sides when we are trying our best to create a positive experience in the modeling industry especially for the new members. If the shoe fits, then wear it "I condemn it - stop trying to ruin the hobby with your nonsense". ANSWER - Yes, I did post one of my own posts at MSW in response to a topic they had posted. Not with any intent to cause strife but to offer a response with a slightly different perspective to the conversation. Apparently you have staff monitoring the other forum as it was a very short time before I was told I ciuld be banned and I was banned. FINAL COMMENT Ultimately, which model kits people choose to buy and build is up to the individual. The position taken at MSW is to try to protect the industry that develops the kits we build. If the copycats take the business away those existing manufacturers may well have to close shop. Margins on kit sales are pretty slim, and competition with cheap shipping rates from China is a major issue (real fact - look it up). The theft of intellectual property is a serious issue in many industries. We can condone it by buying the knockoffs or take a stand against it. MSW has opted to take a stand against it (and yes, sometimes to an extreme.)

Truer words have never been spoken! Well, that may be a tad much, but I agree completely. The lengthy discussion (more of a monologue) concerning copyrights strayed far from the original purpose. To summarize what they got correct: Any commercial product which is sold for profit and is based upon a copyrighted set of materials held by an institution (such as a museum) or individual may require some form of licensing agreement with the copyright owner. This would include a model kit where kit drawings and plans are derived from the originals held by an institution which asserts a copyright interest in the original source. This would also apply to the model kit drawings and materials for which the developer asserts a copyright to the items. Any infringement of that copyright is wrong, and indeed in the terms of use said site specifically states that it is not permissible to sell your copy of the plans your purchased for a model kit. What they get wrong, though, is that it is legally acceptable for you to sell your personal copy of the plans (not a copy, but your plans you purchased) to another member. They also missed on the whole issue of intellectual property theft - the sale by one business of materials copied in total from the materials developed for commercial use by another entity. I for one have a tough time trying to reconcile the the two conflicting perspectives. I can understand that they do not want to be in the position of "policing" the industry. I have no problem with that. I do, however, think that they go to far in actively promoting (to varying degrees) some of the more obvious perpetrators of IP theft. It just don't make sense! They censor members for offering contrary interpretations, yet seemingly condone the commercial practice in question. Free speech be damned, so to speak, unless it toes the party line. They repeatedly bash other fora (I think that's the plural for forum?) for taking a firm stance against the practice as being bullies and worse (have you read the anti-cyber bullying section in their terms?) yet engage in that practice themselves. Oh, well. I guess I have stirred the hornets nest over there for the last time. It is interesting to see the "debate" continue with only one viewpoint able to participate. To quote myself, "Life, like diapers, sometimes fills with undesirable products. A change and before you know it, fresh as new!" (Feel free to use the quote with appropriate attribution)

https://shipsofscale.com/sosforums/forums/general-topics-help-with-models.62/

What a bunch of hot headed individuals there - apparently I have also been banned and my account disabled. Oh, well!!!

Yeah, waiting to see how they react to the next response (cropped so only my comment, not the qutoed reply to my earlier post, is visible to avoid any concerns about violating the rules. I am not misrepresenting the post in any manner by reposting a screenshot here.

For what it's worth (probably not enough for a cup of coffee), here is what I just posted concerning the discussion on Copyright protections and so forth. I have posted similar in the past (often deleted) and have been ridiculed and insulted for my contrarian views. However, being of a certain age and mindset, I maintain my responsibility and obligation to continue as a curmudgeon.

From all I have read the shot was all moved by hand. Every. Last. One. Them young lads had stamina!

How would these various methods relate to a Bermuda built merchant brigantine like the Lexington?

In the case of the Lexington (originally a merchant brig), it would an error to try to apply the scantlings from the Establishment (see book by Yedlinsky and some extracts in the Humphrey's Papers). These scantlings were for a custom built war ship - a merchant vessel would likely have more space and perhaps less robust scantlings for the frames. You may have some luck by contacting the Mystic Seaport Museum as they have most of Davis's files in their archive. https://research.mysticseaport.org/coll/coll253/#head58871776

A warm (well, windy and brisk) welcome from Eastport.

About 2/3 planked. The starboard side will only be partially planked - the small bits are spacers while I tinker with the layout.

Just test fitting the mast and pawl bit post before laying the deck.