MORE HANDBOOKS ARE ON THEIR WAY! We will let you know when they get here.
×
hdrinker
-
Posts
226 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by hdrinker
-
My narrative didn’t come through. Your’e likely wondering why I would post pictures of such a poor job of deck framing…It demonstrates how one can’t be too attentive to symmetry. Even with a framing plan taken from the book and drawn to the particular dimensions of my build, and what I thought was careful measurements, the drift of port carlings to starboard in the beginning accumulated significantly before I recognized it (see top photo). Rather than start over, since the framing will be hidden, I elected to make an abrupt correction with the few remaining beams. Not a pretty result. But a lesson learned, as noted by Kevin previously. Turning the whole model/building board on a bench with limited space in order to sight fore to aft is difficult, but now I see the need to do so frequently.
-
Kevin has provided the number that I needed, of 53” from upper deck to pin top. That dimension should be constant, regardless of which model one is talking about. Now I can apply that number to my own model’s dimensions and arrive at a total pin length and have a pretty good idea of where to place the cross piece in advance. We’ll see. Maybe I’ll have to remake the assembly later, but I’m hoping not to. Anyway, it’s been a good lesson in planning ahead. I appreciate all the feed back. Henry
-
Thanks t Levine. I have emailed the RMG FOR the plans I don’t have. Meanwhile x, I’ll continue with my crude attempts to follow the book. Many errors but managing to get around most of them. One I just discovered relates to the location of the riding bit pins. The platform cut outs are about 1/2” aft of beam #5. So, having installed the platforms and beams, I am in the process of advancing the cut outs forward using a #11 blade and handle inserted below deck. It seems to answer well. In other regards, the decking seems to be going well. Had to remove one ledge for access.
-
Help me out with those numbers a bit. .101( inches ?) from what to what.
-
Kevin, thanks so much for your kind attention to my riding bit delemna. My problem actually is not the location of the pins, but their length. So, I measured the distance from the bilge to the top of the lower deck beam #5 in my build and added that to the measurements on your note to the top of the pins and came up with a pin length of 4.069”. Does that make sense? If so, I am left only with the remaining question of where you derived the measurements on your note…. Henry
-
Kevin, thanks so much for your kind attention to my riding bit delemna. My problem actually is not the location of the pins, but their length. Maybe if I knew the height of the pin tops relative to the upper deck, I could apply that measurement to my model and come up with the correct pin length overall. Even a photo from the side of a completed model would help, if it showed the riding bits. Henry
-
If I use your drawing, it looks as though the various dimensions, when added up, come to 4.148” in 1/48. However, you’re confirmation would be comforting. Henry
-
Hi Kevin. Thanks for that. However, the video doesn’t help me with the issue of the overall length of the riding bit pins ( (or height). Where did you get that from? Henry
-
I appreciate the recommendation of construction of the riding bits as one frames the fore part of the lower deck. However, I’m wondering where the height of the pins is specified. Henry
-
Hi Kevin, I am using a soft silver solder paste, yes.
-
Very hard to scale real hinges down. So far, all are too big. Just received tubing .0126 “ iD. We’ll see if I can work these down to 1/48… When I started this build, I had the plans for framing and spars provided with the 1st volume of David and Craig’s series. But they don’t provide framing for the decks or deck furniture. Where are those available?
-
Making progress on my second iteration. So far I’ve followed the posts of Kevin Kenny and Stuglo with great appreciation and admiration. Your skill level is way beyond my own. I find myself spending hours on improving my hinges, trying to make them smaller and smaller. The key has been perfecting my silver soldering technique. The stronger the joint, the more I can file them down to the desired size without the joint failing. I’ve not yet made a decision on how, and whether to display the interior in the final product. So for now, I’m doggedly applying all the interior detail. If nothing else, it’s a fun process and serves to improve my methods. After all, Isn’t that what it’s all about! It’s a cold morning in eastern Massachusetts. Great weather for making progress in the model shipyard.
-
I did start again. Added a digital height gauge and digital angle gauge to my gadget box. Those have made certain things more accurate. Payed much more attention to height of breath this time as well as the top timber alignment, and as a result, some of my earlier alignment issues have not been repeated. Now that the cant frames are in place fore and aft, I’ll focus on getting the right sheer of the ports. I put the foremost and after most ports in by measurement and have made a template of the port sheer line as a check going forward.
-
That’s wonderful to hear and very encouraging. I’m going back over the plans, the tutorial and my framed version recording in a journal where the errors probably occurred and plan to spend much more attention to detail next time. Even though it’s a bit foreboding to begin again, that’s the plan. I’m learning a lot. Not by any means is the first run waisted!
-
Thanks for that advise. But why settle? I don’t have room in the house, as my wife likes to remind me, for more ship models. I kept a log of my ‘Gros Ventre” and didn’t seem to have avoided the same issues this time. As you will appreciate from the photo of that POF, the issues for me have not been what happens after the framing. I’d like to feel I got it right....
-
Note the undulating top timber line. I should have remade the offending cant frames at that point but was unsure of the eventual top timber contour, and so I decided to make corrections at the end.
-
I’ve now completed the hull framing and find it less than satisfactory from a visual point of view but structurally fine. I would be embarrassed to leave it unplanked! The two biggest issues were#1: an undulating top timber line and #2: port alignment not true to sheer. As a result, I’ve revised the ports and have had to add and subtract considerable material to create a smooth top timber line. Wish I’d completed the framing before cutting in the ports. A template of the sheer could then have been used to insure proper port alignment. I’m tempted to begin again, having some idea for how to avoid these mistakes now. I’m more interested at this point in my skill development in the process than the final product.
-
Kevin, I very much enjoyed your videos. Beautifully done. Your skill level is understated. I am just finished the hull framing of Pegasus. My attention to detail has been inferior by far to yours. The two most significant problems I encountered were #1: maintaining a smooth top timber line, particularly with the aft cant frames and #2: alignment of the ports consistent with the sheer. I cut the port notches as I went and the end result was poor. I decided to redo all the ports. I think I would prefer next time to cut them after the framing was complete by drawing the correct locations relative to the sheer beforehand. The top timber line correction was completed by adding and subtracting material. While the end result is satisfactory from a construction standpoint, I would not want to leave it unplanked in the end. Your work makes me consider starting again from scratch. My first two POF models were undertaken as much for the end result as for the process itself. This one was purely for the process. Well done! Henry Drinker
Our Emblem ®
