gak1965

20 hours ago, ted99 said:

Well, this is "live and learn" day.  I read your review, Yves, and it hits everything I dislike about the Nichimo kit.  I wrapped up my "research" for a Yamato kit back at the beginning of the year.  When I saw the ads later, I thought the MRC kit was just a reissue of the Nichimo kit at a higher price than the old kits available on eBay.  Wrong, Wrong, Wrong.  I would have given pause if anything I read pointed out that it was Trumpeter.  I may abandon this Nichimo kit.  I'll keep on a little while and see if the coming recession results in any price reductions.  Perhaps MRC will lose their exclusivity and the Chinese discounters will be able to pick it up.  Call continuing the build "practice" to see where I need to watch out for in the Trumpeter kit.

Obviously your opt, but I can tell you I've seen well done OoB Nichimo Yamatos and they are still great looking, reasonable representations of what we think the real ship was like (there are questions, the Japanese government destroyed a lot of the info about her and the Musashi at the end of the war). Add the PE, it gets even better. At the end of the day you are edging into a philosophical question about what simplifications and omissions (all models have both) is best, and there may not be an obvious answer. Is some additional level of accuracy around hull lines or armament, or whatever worth replacing the investment you've already made? That's yours to make and to heck with what anyone else thinks!

Enjoy either way, it's the journey that makes the whole thing rewarding.

George K

It's being issued through Gallery Models I believe, but yep. There is a review on the site: 

Well, I have finally had some time in the shipyard so some progress being made. When I left off back in September, I had mounted the lower forestay and the had managed to put the starboard lower fore shrouds in place. I've been working my way up the foremast, adding lines as they appear on the mast. So, since then I've:

1. Installed the lower shrouds on the port side (the lines were in place, but not the deadeyes or the lanyards).
2. Installed the topmast shrouds (6 total). 
3. Installed the starboard side topmast backstays.

Next up will be the port topmast backstays, followed by the fore topmast stays (2 through the bees, one through the jibboom), the topgallant lift pendant, topgallant forestay, topgallant backstays and topgallant shrouds, and then the royal/skysail series (lift pendant, forestay(s), backstays). I think that I'm going to just use a set of jackstay eyebolts for the lift pendant - anything larger will seem out of scale, and I think that the rest of the lines will disguise them fairly well. 

None of the lanyards in the below have been anchored yet (well, the lower forestay is fully anchored, but if need be I will reconnect the ends to the knightheads to keep it tight). The idea is once everything is in place to tighten it all up so that the mast is straight and true, and to be able to adjust as need be without replacing a lot of existing work. We'll see if that is realistic. Once I start on the main mast, I will also start putting in the ratlines on the fore. On my Niagara, I found that by doing say, 10 rows a day while working on other things I didn't get completely sick of tying knots and the job got done in about 3-4 weeks.

In the interim, here are some photos of the rigging coming along:

As always, thanks for looking in!

Regards,

George K

4 hours ago, ted99 said:

A temporary setback.  Those of you that followed my Bismarck build may recall that I have to do my spray painting from a rattle can on my 8th floor balcony.  I had just repainted the hull bottom with Rust-oleum "Rusty Metal Primer".  I like it better than the "brick red" for comparison to the color in the "A" color plates).  The hull was upside down resting on a board suspended at a corner of my balcony railing to dry.  Just as I was going out to bring it in, a big gust of wind (the mid-West cold spell front just arriving) blew the hull off the board and onto the concrete balcony.  Thankfully it went that way and not down 8 floors.  The hull was resting on the gun turrets, rather than flat on deck giving room for the wind to get beneath the hull and lift it.  The bow broke off, the stern was cracked and both the fore and aft-most sections of deck were knocked off.  Thankfully, I was there just as it happened and I was able to quickly retrieve all the bits and pieces before they blew off. 

Yikes! I'm sure you'll get it all back together.

<JOKING>You could take this opportunity to switch to building the Musashi, which took a torpedo to the bow in March, 1944, and explain away any still visible evidence of the damage as representing the repairs! </JOKING>

In all seriousness, we all know how you feel. When I was building the Niagara I accidentally caught a line in my drill chuck and it snapped off the (fully rigged) jibboom. It took me a while to undo all of that damage, but now no one would guess - and I'm sure no one will guess once you are finished with the repairs!

George K

It all looks really great!

On 10/17/2022 at 10:23 AM, ted99 said:

Does anyone know what can accelerate the tarnishing of copper?

Well, I assume you mean other than fingers 😀. I've blackened copper chain with Brass Black, and Jax Pewter black Patina also works on copper. I guess the question is what color are you aiming for? Jax sells a chemicals that will give you green or gray-black but I've never used them. The other two go straight to solid black.

George

Well, back from everything, hopefully back in the shipyard soon. In the interim, here's a palate cleanser. The triathlon I did was the Ironman 70.3 Wilmington, so here are some snaps of the USS North Carolina, BB-55, our first treaty battleship (the race ends just across the Cape Fear River from her and is nicknamed 'From beach to battleship')

On 10/14/2022 at 10:36 AM, Wawona59 said:

This week, since none of the bulkheads lined up properly I added a wooden strips to the top of each bulkhead

This happens to everyone, more or less always. There are always things that need adjustment, often due to the manufacturing process, not error. My (and everyone else's) Niagaras had an issue where if you follow the instructions and plans you will wind up with improperly fitting cannons. Fortunately, I saw a build log and could adjust.

You said you are fairing with files and chisels. I think sandpaper would work better The wood is softer than you think and it generally doesn't require that much fairing. At my limited skill level, anyway, I appreciate the fact that sandpaper limits the amount that I can remove at once. A rotary tool is useful when you need to remove a ton of material (e.g. in filler blocks), but most places you probably want something that removes wood more slowly (and goodness knows I've thrown away pieces I've hand sanded into oblivion)

For the cutwater, I wound up adding it after planking with no I'll effects, although you could do so at any time during the early stages of the build. In retrospect, I might have added more filler, but as I'm the only one that will see it, c'est la vie.

Those shackles are amazing!

Ted (my apologies if I misunderstood your handle),

      I'm curious if the Nichimo Yamato has what @Roger Pellett called the "rather humpbacked sheer" of this class. The picture on the Anatomy of the Ship cover you put in shows the apparent downward slant from the after to the more forward of the forward turrets, and here is a public domain pic of the Musashi showing what I'm asking about .

My grandfather built the Nichimo version in the late '60s, but I don't remember this at all (and it seems less than obvious on photos of the 1:10 model at the Yamato Museum), but I haven't seen the results of his build since the early '90s. Just curious if my memory is wrong or if this is one of the changes that was made with some of the newer kits or if some of the aftermarket parts make the change if I'm not misremembering.

Please don't take this as a comment on your build, which is looking great, and which I am following with interest. FWIW, I've trolled ebay for Nichimo Yamato's but have just balked at the prices, and, for sentimental reasons I might get go for the Nichimo version over the new MRC version.

Regards,

George K

A trailboard is a decorative piece of wood, often (but certainly not always) with the ship's name, usually attached to the cutwater. As @ClipperFan can provide details for, there is every reason to believe that the Flying Fish had a set of Naval Hoods, which unlike a a trailboard are structural elements. He has shared a reconstruction/diagram in several of the Fish build logs of what the hoods (and the prow generally) would look like based views of other McKay clippers, particularly Glory of the Seas.

Regards,

George K

Welcome to the Flying Fish (and I suppose McKay clipper) club! It's always nice to see another Fish.

George K

One quick update before I go into a hiatus of about 3 weeks. My wife and I are going to spend the next 2 weeks in Flagstaff, AZ. It's not a vacation - as we both work (mostly) remotely, and we're going to continue to do so, but we'll have two weekends to hike in Grand Canyon after the crowds have left for the season, and after I get back I am heading down to Wilmington, NC the following weekend for a triathlon. That means that the ship will be back home with no one working on it. So, current status: The shrouds on the foremast and the forestay have been installed:

I started getting the shrouds ready on the starboard side, attaching the deadeyes using the traditional twisted wire spacer and seizing them in place. The yellow tape just indicates which shroud is which (1,2,3,4,...).

Finally, two pics of the starboard shrouds with the deadeyes and (black) lanyards.

The lanyards aren't tied down yet - I want to tighten P/S pairs of shrouds forward to aft, so I need to get the port side set up before I do anything more.

Finally, in honor of the ship - tonight's beverage:

I should be posting again in the third week of October, at which point I will be rapidly coming up on two years working on this project. For some reason I was thinking that I would manage this in two years (that's how long Niagara took), but this is a much more complex project - I expect another 6-12 months to go. 

As always, thanks for looking in and for the encouragement. Have a great end of September and early October!

Regards,

George K

20 minutes ago, TAGood827 said:

I checked but I don't see a build log for any Constitution on the forum unless I'm missing it somehow. If anyone knows of one, please point me to it.

@TAGood827 Assuming you mean the Revell Constitution there are 7 build logs that are tagged as 'Finished' and many others at different stages. You can find them in the indices for kit logs from 1750-1800 available here: https://modelshipworld.com/applications/core/interface/file/attachment.php?id=840412&key=a9d02329559034405c24d1cc0f3af501

And if you start a log, a lot of us have built this over the years and can provide answers to questions. One of the nicest things about being on this site.

George K

Thanks guys. To be honest, it came to me after looking at Rob's gin block manufacturing process - it got me thinking a bit outside the box of 'make an exact miniature replica'. There are people that have that level of skill on here, but I'm not one of them.

I've put the mounted the lower shrouds on the foremast and placed the lower forestay, but none of them are yet attached to deadeyes nor are any of the (black not tan) lanyards in place. More when it is further along.

Well, I resolved how to manufacture the gin blocks (or whatever they are) used to haul the halliards. My eureka moment was to realize that it didn't matter if the pulley actually turned, the chain would slide along more or less regardless with a little bit of space. So I cut a thin slice out of a 1/8" dowel, and made a small rectangular box out of 1/32" wide brass strip as below:

I glued the disc inside the brass box, and fabricated a piece with a hanger and two open ends (like a tuning fork):

That was then glued onto the block to make the completed block:

The chain runs through the block and can move to be positioned even though the pulley is stationary:

So, I made four of them, painted black (the blocks are iron).

This is one of the completed blocks with chain:

So, anyways, the foremast now has all of the mast mounted blocks and is firmly mounted and ready to start putting in shrouds and stays. I have a couple of items to install on the main, and will then mount it as well. The gin blocks on the mizzen are smaller, so they still need to be manufactured before I can fully mount the mizzen.

As always, thanks for looking in!

Regards,

George K

@Cathead, do you play the hammered dulcimer. I think I see one in the background there, a certain similarity to my home office.

2 hours ago, ccoyle said:

 

Wow -- that sounds alarming. Glad you were able to recover!

That is alarming. Glad to hear you are recovering and going to follow along.

8 hours ago, Bruma said:

George, 

what a wonderful job! I keep following you in silence, and it is a real pleasure to see this marvel growing. 

Unfortunately, I am not able to help you for the halliard. I'm more familiar with the Cutty Sark, but she has standard single block for each halliard under the fore trestle tree.

I'm sure someone else will help you! 

Thank you for sharing your build! 

 

Thanks! I  am always on the lookout for your next post!

7 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

From post #2822 to #2840 Rob describes in great detail his fabrication process for maling "gin blocks". From their function, they sound very similar to the halliard blocks you're looking to make.

They might be - and that is in fact an ingenious fabrication method.

6 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

George, are they blocks for hauling the yards?  Typically the sheave is imbedded within the mast itself.....but the haulyard for the main yard on my Great Republic was external and I used model railroad sheaved logging blocks for that application.  some are metal and some are printed.  They did need some slight modifications, but they worked for my needs.

Show me a pic of what you are talking about and what/where the blocks are supposed to be located on the tree.  I will then be able to tell you what I did and what you may possibly do.

So it is a set of blocks for hauling the topsails. The rest of the halliards are just as you describe, sheaves directly in the mast and I'm just using holes for those rather than try to install the actual sheave. This is a more complicated rig just for the topsail. I'm including a snap of a small section of the plans that show what I'm talking about:

They do look like gin blocks but mounted as a pair on the trestle trees instead of on the yard.

Regards,

George K

Well, bowsprit rigged until it is time to mount the forestays (soon!). A couple of pics:

The foremast needs 4 more blocks before it's time to start mounting shrouds. One question I hoped that someone like @rwiederrich might be able to answer is how they handled the halliard blocks on the trestle trees (given that those are 2 of the four). The plans suggest that they weren't standard wooden blocks, but something that frankly looks more like a sheave (or maybe a roller on a desk chair), an iron circle inside of a triangular support. So far, my attempts to fabricate them have failed utterly or just been badly out of scale. I could paint standard blocks black so that they are more like iron, or if anyone has suggestions, I'd love to hear them.

Thanks for looking in!

George K 

8 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

George K

I'm wondering why mounting the lines "inside the ship" wouldn't just as easily refer to her forecastle, which would have been much more accesible, instead of her main deck? It strikes me that, in order not to have the lines chafing against the ceiling of the forecastle, access holes would of necessity had to been made through the forecastle. Knowing how seas would crash over her bow, that would lead to more access points for water to enter into the sailor's berths which were beneath the forecastle. None of that makes sense to me. What does make sense is reinforced verticle posts terminating on the forecastle, as designated mounting points for the ship's lines. Being part of the vessel's superstructure would give it the added benefit of the ability to withstand the stresses of those lines as well. Just my 2c, others can either confirm or refute my observations.

Sorry - I think we are actually saying the same thing, I just did so poorly. Both the supplied plans and the description point to the mounting points being topside of the main deck and below the forecastle deck in the open forecastle interior to the bulwarks. Here is a small section of the plans to show you what I mean:

My problem is that there is deck covering the space where the lines would belay, and it would involve drilling through both the bulwarks and the ceiling planks to get there. Probably not impossible with sufficient patience and some specialized tools, but I'd need a (very small) offset drill with a very short bit (something like a dentists drill) to put in the necessary holes for the belaying bolts. So, anyone that wants to do this maximally accurately will need to put in the belaying points (and I'd recommend drilling the hole in the bulwarks) before they plank over the forecastle. And because of the amount of strain on the lines, I'm not really hip about trusting to glue to hold the lines in place (which is what the instructions suggest). So, likely a bolt in the bulwarks.

Regards,

George K

Brian,

      Appreciate the insight. I think it's a perfectly fine way to manage lines that go into inaccessible locations. The sheets probably didn't have a huge amount of stress on them, but I don't have a good feel for the amount of strain on the forestays of the Academy model. Are the deadeyes/lanyards one plastic piece or are they held together with thread? If the latter it would tend to suggest that the glued line/bulwark joint can take a fair amount of strain, which is the question here.

Rick,

    That's my concern too. I'm worried about the amount of stress on the stays. The doubled lower forestay anchors in the knightheads, but the doubled topmast forestay that goes through the bees to the bulwarks has the combination of a decent lever arm, a stiff spar, and plenty of pull from the backstays that makes me think it's going to need to be pretty strongly seated.

I suspect I'm going to take the approach of mounting a homemade eyebolt (that will have the twisted wire stem for better grip) with some CA glue and belay the lines on the bolt. Maybe bend the stem so that it can adhere to the bulwark from behind, or if I'm lucky have it screwed into one of the bulkheads. Not technically correct, but I'll keep the loop just big enough for the line and a black eyebolt against a black bulwark with black line will hide the sins.

Well, another milestone reached. I'm still mounting blocks on the masts (but I think I'm almost done with that), so to break up the routine I started rigging the bowsprit. So far, I've only installed the bobstays and the shrouds. The kit surprisingly did not include any hearts (although there was a laser cut sheet that included what I thought were mast hoops that turned out were bullseyes). In any case, I bought some extras from Bluejacket and used them.

The kit had a single diameter of chain for everything. When I put the anchors together, I thought that the supplied chain was massively out of scale (too small), so I bought a couple of feet of two larger sizes, the intermediate of which I used to represent the 1 inch chains on the shrouds and bobstays. For the bobstays, I stropped the hearts with 34 gauge black wire and then bent the tail into a hook which I either inserted into a jackstay eyebolt (for the non -chain end) or the chain itself. The lanyards are black seeing as this is standing rigging.

Here is a view of the stem and bowsprit.

Here is a view showing the shrouds.

The forward attachment of the shrouds is pretty much the same as the bobstays, but the hull end is quite different. The bobstays are basically attached to an eyebolt embedded in a metal strap. By contrast the shrouds are attached as in the photo below (sorry about the image quality).

The mounting strap is 1/64" wide brass, with a split ring attached on one end, and the chain attached to the split ring (anchor chain obviously coming from the hawse pipe). 

From the last post, no one had any suggestions, so I wound up mounting the blocks on the forward cross tree - it makes sense from logic and the similar blocks on the mast tops, so, that's how I decided to proceed. 

Next step on the bowsprit is to rig the dolphin striker and the associated martingales and bobstays. The kit comes with a Britannia striker, but I think I'm going to scratch build one. It's the correct length but the locations for the stays are all wrong, and it's just a bit clunky. One decision that I will need to make eventually is how to terminate the various stays on the foremast on the hull. The Boston Daily Atlas indicates that the stays were belayed inside the ship on various frames, which is to say under the forecastle which is pretty much inaccessible at this point. Doing this in the way of the real ship would seem to require drilling through both the hull planks and the ceiling planks, feeding the line through both and terminating them somehow inside the ship. Two options come to mind, one of which is to drill holes in the outer hull, feed the line in and glue or to mount to small eyebolts. Neither is perfect, I suspect that I will do the latter as the lesser of two evils. If I had thought further ahead, I might have run the lines before I decked over the forecastle, but we can all be wise in hindsight.

As always, thanks for looking in!

Regards,

George K.

PS - Background movie in the first pic is, of course, The Hunt for Red October. One of several proper choices, I think you will all agree, for ship modeling. 

On 8/28/2022 at 2:15 PM, Roger Pellett said:

.  The bridge, which is listed as a National Historic Landmark, still exists although it is restricted to pedestrian use until the West Virginia DOT figures out a way to keep idiots from exceeding the 2 ton weight limit.

A bit off topic, but if you read the Wikipedia article on the bridge it is astonishing how many people seem willing to damage a historic bridge (and possibly fall to their deaths) to avoid following clear instructions. Good grief.