gak1965

I have nothing to offer on the best way to build her, certainly not compared to some of the folks that have actual expertise. My only observation looking at the side view plan (and where I m in my current build) was "I hope you enjoy tying ratlines", because that ship has a lot of shrouds... Good luck, I'm sure she's going to turn out great! George K

The Balaos and Gatos were all designed with having to transit the large distances of the Pacific so that they could operate with the battle fleet. As a result they were designed with certain comforts such as enough racks for each sailor to have their own and lots of food storage. While the nominal range of the Type IXC was longer, it seems like (at least in the beginning) the Germans were anticipating shorter patrols and less need for the creature comforts that took up space in US fleet subs

I've made some progress, but not much to show now as we've been in Boston for our younger (and final) child's college graduation (technically she finished her degree in December, but she didn't graduate until yesterday). While we were there we visited the Museum of Fine Arts (she lives about 1/2 mile away) and stumbled into the ship gallery. Thought I might share a couple of clippers from there; have a look at some professional level skills... First up, the Marie Rose at 1:64 And the Flying Cloud at 1:64 Not a Clipper obviously, but a 100 gun ship of the line at 1:64 Tis is Boston, so USS Constitution And he a French ship Héros (1778). This is not technically at any specific scale, but the craftsmanship is amazing considering it's bout 14 inches long. It was made by a French POW around 1781. Regards, George K

Hi, To the person that is maintaining the list. There is a mixup in two of the Flying Fish listings (1851-1900). Rick310's Flying Fish is the Model Shipways clipper JimmyK's Flying Fish is the Corel schooner Thanks, George K

Thank you. I'm sorry your mom (and family) had to go through that. I'm hard pressed to imagine a worse way to go. Fortunately, as I say, my mother was mostly with it until the very end; but I know far too many that went the other way. Regards, George K

Absolutely amazing. It's great to see a model with all that spread canvas. It makes me think about the (usually pretty small) crew having to manage all of that sail so that the ships could make top speeds. The finish line must be visible now... George K

Thank you both for the sentiments, it is appreciated. Could be, although the capstans are poorly placed for that. I assumed (as was suggested somewhere earlier) that it was because when you pull down you are limited in how much force you can exert by your weight, vice when you are pushing up from a (basically) immovable object. Turns out the instructions had something to say about that. It appears that the block was only on the topail. Next time, I should RTFM I guess. The instructions are fine, but I've been tending lately to just build from the plans. Regards, George K

She looks great! Glad you took it to the finish line

Well, the 'potential' break became an actual one because my mother had gone into the hospital. On that Tuesday evening we were all thinking it was relatively minor, and just waiting for the definitive test that was going to be done the next day, and that Friday morning she was gone. We were grateful to have her as long as we did, and she lived to see both of our children graduate from college, and my siblings' children graduate from high school, and, fortunately, she had her faculties until about the last 36 hours. I think she really wanted to reach her 87th birthday and 64th wedding anniversary, both of which would have been next week, but it was not to be. However, she had her husband, all three children (one of whom was fortunately in town from Denver) and 2 of the three spouses (one had to stay in Denver to deal with one of the grandkids) with her for the last week, hopefully that helped. With that, and the week making various arrangements having passed, I have had some time for a little bit of wood based therapy. Not a lot has changed, but, I mounted the fore topgallant yard, and its halyard. I installed the tackles that hold the topmast halyard, and anchored the first set of live ends from the halyard tackle) on the pinrails. I've installed the first of the fore topgallant sheets and attached it to the tackle on the deck. Once the other sheet is installed, I will anchor everything that terminates on the fife rails (the four chain sheets and the live lifts, as well as the 6 clew lines (which anchor on the pinrails. At that point, I'll add the Royal and Skysail yards, and I'll be close to finished on the foremast square yards. I think I'm going to rig the fore spencer before I have a bunch of main yards in the way. Here are a couple of photos. @rwiederrich or @ClipperFan, the halyard tackle for the topsail yard goes to the pinrail via a deck mounted block (that is, the live end leaves a double at the point where the tackle is shackled to the chain, passes through a deck mounted single and is then belayed to the pinrail). I presume that this is meant to allow the crew to pull up rather than down, which makes sense. The drawings are ambiguous for the other halyards (topgallant, royal, and sky). On other McKay clippers did all the halyards have deck mounted blocks or was that specific to topsail yard because it was so heavy and had that unfortunate lever arm that made it harder to pull into place? As always, thanks for looking in and your encouragement and comments! Regards, George K

Looking forward to your build. Just so I understand, you aren't restarting the old Donald McKay model, but rather you are converting an old Glory of the Seas model and using the base from the the prior Donald McKay model (suitably adjusted)? George K

Concur. And the main would have been even worse because it was heavier and had a longer lever arm. I think it's no accident that the topsail yards use chains and are attached to two sets of tackles (one each P/S) with greased leather as a lubricant under the parrel band. They must have been a royal pain the posterior to bring into position. Hopefully they didn't need to do a lot of such evolutions most passages. George K

A couple of quick updates, as I may wind up being away from this for a time. I've started the ratlines on the mizzen (about halfway up the lower shrouds), as can be seen in this photo. Eagle eyed observers will likely notice two things. First, I didn't move the lower forestay over the top. I was just too worried about the impact on the tension in all of the rest of the forestays and at this point, I have no meaningful way to tighten any of the shrouds without completely redoing it. The trade painting shows them going through the lubber's holes, that will have to be good enough for this time. If I do another McKay clipper, I will probably adjust accordingly. Second, the fore topsail yard is in place. Here is a view looking aft: And a couple of closeup views: You can see that I have rigged the topsail clews and sheets. The live ends of the sheets are attached to their relevant tackle, although the clews are just taped onto the bulwark. Once I rig the sheets for the topgallant (which also attaches to a deck tackle), the fife rails will be clear enough to actually start belaying the relevant ends. I've also run the topsail halyard which runs through three gin blocks (one on the yard), two in the crosstrees. That turned out to be more painful than I expected, but I ran a bit of very fine wire through the chain and twisted the two ends like I was making a flattened eyebolt. This was stiff enough to send through the blocks although it took me a while. The two live ends are meant to be attached to tackles on the channels, which are not yet in place, so the live ends are kinda just hanging for now. In the last photo you can see the iron band that nominally holds the yard in place. That is basically just a thin piece of painted brass and the pin that is attached to the crane goes through the brass and into hole in the mast so it is actually pretty solid. I then glued down the brass leaving a "tail" of brass where the two sides met, which I cut down to size to represent the place where the hoop is bolted together. As always, thanks for looking in and the likes! Regards, George K

Not at all. If I can manage it without major repairs, I will. If it's going to mess up a bunch of other things, I won't. If the latter, I can live with the knowledge that the forestay is wrong. In aggregate, it will still be an improvement over the out of the box kit on the basis of the cutwater, naval hoods, figurehead, binnacle, the composite masts, etc. that I scratch built rather than use the fittings. There is already at least one case where I decided to go for inaccurate to the real ship for a (sorta) historic and aesthetic reason (the green hull that McKay wanted to do, but didn't). I really appreciate all of the information that I've gotten, even when I didn't make the suggested mods (e.g., the big windows on the carriage house, and hoops on the mizzen). It's really interesting and has been a great teacher about doing historical research on ships that I intend to use when I start RRS Discovery. It existed in the era of photographs, and there are plans and the actual ship available, but, as with so many ships there have been a lot of changes over time, so I need to define the when and even then, will probably need to make some educated guesses. Regards, George K

Those photos are pretty clear. And the main and mizzen stays are through the lubber's holes. Okay - I just need to figure out if that kind of change is going to mess with too much else. It shouldn't but I want to validate that it's not going to do something undesirable with the shroud tension and that the foretop is sturdy enough on the model to take the strain. The mast itself (which has a beech core and basswood fishes) is solid as a rock - I'm less certain about the entirely basswood top. Replacements happen. I cut out and replaced the starboard side main topgallant shrouds a couple of days ago b/c they were too loose to effectively tie the ratlines without undue deflection. Interestingly, as I was prepping the fore topmast for its eventual installation, I finally understood how the tackles at the base of the foremast are supposed to operate. Somehow I thought they were for 3 sheets, when it was actually for two sheets and the running lift on the course yard. And that what I had been thinking of as a fore sheet was really the fore top sheet, and the fore top sheet was the fore topgallant sheet. That leaves the live ends of all six of the tackles (3 each port and starboard) belaying to the fife rail (which makes sense). The four where the live end rises from the deck are the sheets, and the two where they descend from above are the lifts (again, sensible) and the "fore sheet" if for the spencer. Why I got so confused over the nomenclature, I have no idea - this is not the first ship I've rigged. Thanks, George

So, if I understand you correctly, the stay doesn't go through the lubber's holes but rather over the forward edge of the top? I can see that there is not much in the way of clearance between the fore course and the forestay, and that it has a less acute angle than the main or mizzen stays given the anchor point on the knightheads. I figured it would probably limit how far you could realistically move the yard. Was there some kind of reinforcing at the edge of the top or some kind of spreader to ensure that the stay landed on the top directly over the trestletrees? Right now, this is still potentially changeable (as I say, it's not glued in place yet), and my recollection is that the forestay is the highest and outermost of the lines so replacing it won't (shouldn't?) mess up the shrouds, but I need to think about this a bit. Thanks, George K

Well, ratlines are continuing apace. Starboard side is now most of the way up the main mast (just a little work on the topgallant to go), and I'll be starting on the mizzen, so the finish line is in sight. However, the real step is the first of the yards is basically ready to go. The photos below show it in position, but it's not glued and I still have to set the chain sling up. The upper end of the chains that are the course sheets are taped to the the mast so I can estimate how long to make them as there is no clew up there to attach the end to. The live end is held with yellow tape you can see in the photo. The next step is to fabricate a hook somewhere above where the tape is and then hook that to the tackles that you can sort of see around the base of the mast. At the moment the running lifts are just taped to the side of the hull, I want to move some of the sheet tackles out of the way (i.e. attach them to the sheet chains before I try to run them down into the mass of line down there. You can (may?) see the blocks for the clew and the reef tackle. On my Niagara I hooked the reef tackle to the clew on the course (above the course the clew was always attached to the sheet). I also mounted the bunt and leech blocks; I'm going to tie a knot in the end of each and leave them sitting up on the blocks. It gives the yard a bit of interest. Another view, with all of the lines strewn around the deck - as I imagine it was as she was being initially rigged. And a quick overview of the whole ship: As always, thanks for looking in! Regards, George K.

It certainly won’t hurt to put in some pins (although it seems like you would have to sink them into relatively thin bulwarks). As is, though, you would have two glue joints per deadeye (one in the channel and one at the base (bulwark or waterway). CA there should do the job fine. The shrouds shouldn’t have that much tension on them; you want them tight enough to not distort too badly when you tie the ratlines and any blocks, but not so much that they put the masts and tops under undue stress. I have anchored forestays into eyebolt held in place with just a bit of CA and it worked great. looking great so far! George K

+1. They have sent me replacement parts (brass strip in my case). I told them that the error might well have been on my part, but they sent it with no shipping charges. I mean I probably make up for it in costs for extra thread and jackstay eyebolts, but still, it's confidence inspiring that they stand behind their product enough to sink the non-zero cost (Connie is $535 as of today) of one of their kits. George K

The Revell instructions (and the Heller Passat) suggest putting the yards in place before the standing rigging. I don't know if it's because not everyone rigs their models (strange but probably true), or because much of the standing rigging (at least the shrouds, ratlines, and the deadeyes for the shrouds and backstays) are premade, or some combination of these and other reasons. Every wooden ship model instructions I've ever seen starts with the standing rigging. Probably a good choice with v2.0

I mostly use Tamiya acrylic paints now. They brush well and have a good range of colors. I've needed some odd colors, when Tamiya doesn't have it (or our store is out) I'll use Model Master acrylics (which is made by Testors). The metal colored ones are (so far as I know) pretty much all enamel. I don't have an issue with using enamel on things like copper plate, since (when new) they are shiny anyway. I can't speak to how well anything works in an airbrush, I've only ever brushed

I wouldn't., For two reasons. If you prime the sprues, when you cut off the part you will have a chunk that is unprimed and it could look a little weird after you paint it (I'm thinking of a sort of hole where the sprue was and you have an extra layer of paint). My observation with Revell plastic is that it takes paint well, and you generally aren't in the situation (as I've seen with Heller) where the final color is say black, and it's molded in white, or vice versa. This drove me nuts with the Passat. YMMV, but with the Revell Constitution and Testors paints, no priming was necessary. I bushed everything (including the copper) and there was no problem. Also, FWIW, I've seen people use paint pens to get at fine details on unprimed Revell plastic with no fuss. Something to think about. Good luck! George K PS: Do log the next build! Your first one was coming along great and it can be so helpful to be able to ask questions. I wouldn't be near as far along without the helpful comments.

Oh wow. Did not see that. It works, the lines look phenomenal.

That makes sense. My concern is that I don't see how you would belay this particular line. I goofed earlier, in that it appears that the top and the topgallant both belay on the fife rails (the top is belayed to the fife rail bitt itself rather than a pin). But for the course my read is that the line would have follow the path I've drawn in to the picture below, starting at the base of the mast and going to the marked pin on the bulwarks. Among other problems, the path to that pin has the fore deckhouse in the way. It seems there are three options, all of which involve ignoring the diagrams: belay this at the fife rail somehow, use a spare pin on the bulwarks that at least isn't blocked by the deckhouse, or maybe swap the topgallant for the course sheet. I like the latter best, as it will have the two sheets where the live ends last exit a block on the deck go to the fife rails, and the sheet where the last block is near the top goes to the pins in the bulwarks. The latter looks much more like a bunt or a leach and a lot less difficult to manage on a real ship. Regards, George K

One thought. You might want to keep the model around as a practice version (a test bed as Rob calls it) that you can use to try things out and make mistakes. You might therefore consider building up one mast all the way up so that you'll have a baseline going into the new build. Something to think about. Good luck whatever you decide. George K

Mike, When you rigged the tackles for the course, top, and topgallant sheets, how did you run the live ends to the pinrails? On the plan excerpt below, the live ends for the course and top sheets leave a double block on the deck by the mast and the rigging plans say that they are belayed on the pinrails. That seems odd to me,was hoping you might have some insight into how you rigged it. Any help appreciated. Thanks, George K