tkay11

Of the choices you provide I'd go for the last one with the flat angled top. Tony

To align at 90 degrees, you can straighten the scans by using a vertical (or horizontal) line on the drawing (e.g. a station line), superimposing a straight line with a photo editor and then using that line to rotate the whole drawing. After doing that you make all the distortion adjustments and then the superimposition of each of the subsequent scans. Tony

Just to add to Mark's post, you need to remember that ordinary scanner distortions occur in all axes (not necessarily those of the architectural scanners). You can't be absolutely perfect, but you can at least adjust the horizontal and vertical axes independently. The problem is that the distortions also change depending on the position of each part of the drawing. So distortions at the centre are different from distortions at the edges. For that reason I take scans that overlap by at least half the width of the preceding scan, and then similarly of the length as I go down the plan. You can then use the transparency layers in your photo editing programme to overlap the scans accurately. It is after this overlapping that it is best to do the final horizontal and vertical adjustments. The way I do it is to look at the scanned image in Photoshop or TurboCAD and then take accurate measurements of the horizontal and vertical at their widest possible margins. Taking smaller lengths increases the possibility of inaccuracy. I then enter these dimensions in a spreadsheet (or a calculator) and divide them into the distances measured on the plans. You will very likely find different ratios for the horizontal and vertical axes. These ratios are then used to re-size the images in a photo-editing or CAD programme. So if the horizontal axis is found to be 1.04 times that of the paper plan, you simply divide the length on the scanned plan by a factor of 1.04. Sorry if this is all very obvious, but I'm adding this info just in case you might assume that the distortions are consistent. Tony

I just scanned mine on overlapping A4 sections then joined in Photoshop after a bit of readjustment for distortion. As you say, they were not very accurate, but proved to be accurate enough for the deck layout. You need to work with card cutouts to achieve final shaping here and there. The page in the manual with the pictures of the bulkheads came in very handy to determine the waterline for my own model (I created a blue perspex 'sea' for the model to lie in). The drawings of the bulkheads I found to be the exact size of the parts in the kit. Tony

I forgot to mention that the reason for buying white card is so you can print to it if you want after using a CAD or illustrator programme to create or copy parts. Ordinary card from cereal boxes etc is more than adequate just for experimenting. Tony

To do the edging it's useful to make cardboard templates until you have the hang of it. You can then use Pritt stick to glue them temporarily to the wood so you can cut it accurately. To remove the card just damp the top very slightly with water and then when dry sand the wood down to remove any traces of glue. Some people use rubber cement to do this but I find it more problematic to remove. I have reached the stage where I just tear off the card without water and scrape the residue off with my nails, then sand. That way you don't have to wait till the wood is dry before fitting. This is a cheap and effective method to find the right cuts in a wide variety of situations. The card I use is stock card about 0.3mm thick. You can get 50 sheets of A4 at this size at https://papercutz.co.uk/a4-card-white-printer-and-crafts-220gsm-280micron This costs only £5.32 and will last you a very long time. For larger projects you can also get larger sizes of card. Tony

I do agree about the treenailing. In fact plank nailing on the hull is also only visible faintly. Look at a deck from a distance of 64 feet and you'd be pushed to see it at all, just as you would a foot away from a model that is 1/64th the size of the real one. On deck planking I use a wax of the same shade as the deck to fill the holes if I do it at all, and I don't do nailing of hull planking. To my mind (and I stress that this is just a personal view about my own practice) doing this just draws excessive attention to the nailing and therefore to the skills of the modeller rather than the overall impression of a ship -- but then this is against the general convention and most would disagree with me. You could argue that I just don't have the skills to do it properly! Tony

B looks better. I use a soft lead pencil on one side only. On real ships the caulking was not precisely defined, being a little fuzzy here and there. I attach a picture of the renovated Brixham trawler Pilgrim: Tony

I'm not a sailor, so I can't really comment on the height of the boom in terms of sailing. Its function is to be movable laterally and vertically, so in terms of structure there would be little problem as you can set it to whatever height you want with the rigging. However, the transom does look very high to me and I'm not clear of the need for it to be so high. The original plan which I posted earlier would seem to be a good indication of the height. Tony

Yes, the plans point to a housing, while there's a scuttle next forward. However, as you say, these cutters differed in their anatomy from shipyard to shipyard. I'll look up the Alexander Kent books, so thanks for the recommendation. Tony

Sorry, Edward, I forgot to add the second plan which shows the deck details I was alluding to in the post. I've now edited that post so you can see what I was talking about! Tony

The planking is symmetrical, and all you need now is filler followed by sanding. The original plans for the Sherbourne show the rearmost entry as a companion way, then comes a scuttle. I interpreted that scuttle also as a skylight for the cabins below. As to the design of the companion way, you can see different interpretations of that on the various builds. I attach the relevant drawing (the plan is from the low res distorted jpeg from the NMM site: you can order the full originals from them if you intend to do this seriously but note that it is sometimes spelt as Sherborne or as Sherborn). In the above low res plan from the NMM website, note the top of the companion way and the placement of the vertical line on the lid. I interpreted that as signifying the companion opened towards the front. You'll notice the design of the windlass is quite different from that of the kit. There's also the one gunport with a lid, the boom crutch, the galley stove pipe and the hand rails at the top of the steps. All these aspects were, I think, discussed in the different logs (as well as on separate question discussions) so it would be worth while digging a bit more if you're going after historical accuracy (which you don't need to, of course!). Just search for Sherbourne on the site. I hope this helps. Tony

If you want to try out the full spiling route on the planking, then it might be good to go for wider strips overall so you can cut according to the width required at each part of the length. You could practice that on the first planking, although it would mean buying more wood. I've used Cornwall Model Boats mostly in the UK, although I've also used Jotika and Model Dockyard in Cornwall. Tony

First planking just gives the base and you can sand and use filler, so there's not much problem there. One of the reasons to leave the stem, keel and stern timbers off until you've done the planking is to allow you to sand the planks down more easily, but I (like you) had not known that because the instructions tell you to put them on first. In order to make it easier, I ordered 0.5mm thick planks for the second layer in order to fit to the timbers more easily. I used 5mm widths for most of the planking but 10mm strips for the garboard as that can't be done with the narrower strips. All the same, if you protect those timbers it just takes a little more care to achieve a good result, especially if you follow the planking tutorials available in the articles database of this site. I found it easier to start with the garboard planks. For a really good result you might want to separate the planking into bands as suggested by the tutorials, but I didn't. It also helps if you fill between the bulwarks before planking, certainly at the bow where the curvature is more pronounced, and at the stern. That gives the planks something firm on which to rest and to make a good curve. Don't forget that the details of the planking won't be noticed too much if you're going to paint below the waterline. On the question of gluing, I find it easier to use a pointed stick such as a cocktail stick. You don't need much to glue a joint. It's more important to ensure a really tight fit. As for lighting, I agree it's very important to have the area well lit. I use a magnifying lamp as well as an anglepoise. Tony

Good start. Seeing as you've already fitted the stem, keel and stern, it would be a good idea to cover them with tape to avoid the inevitable scratches etc as you get on with the planking. Tony

It would be good if you could specify a particular ship as there are quite a few variations in that period. There are hundreds of plans at the National Maritime Museum at Greenwich in the UK. For the particular date you choose (1790) there's the Cutter Trial which had sliding keels. You can see the range of its plans and pictures at https://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections.html#!csearch;searchTerm=cutter_1790 I have also taken quite a few pictures of the model in that collection which you can see on this site at There are also lots of pictures of other cutters between 1763 and 1820 in the discussion at I hope that helps Tony

Fear? I live in dread of every new step. I look at the plans. I look at previous builds. I read the books. But believing I can do it is a whole other matter. OK. I make a stab at it. I make a mistake. I start again. I make another mistake. I go on until I reckon I can live with the mistake. Then the next step. Several steps down the line I find I've done something which makes the next step very difficult. Think .... and this is the exciting bit ... how to get around the mistake and carry on. Ha! I've found a way out. I can then continue. And so on. I really like modelling not only for the satisfaction of completing a build and the beauty of wood, but even more for the satisfaction of thinking. Thinking how to interpret plans. Thinking how to approach a problem. Thinking of how to overcome mistakes. Thinking about the skills of those who made the ships and sailed in them. I am sure that in your life of working with wood you've experienced something similar. So to my mind fear, anxiety and apprehension are an intrinsic part of the process. Getting over it is part of the satisfaction. Tony

Bear with you? I'll do more than bear with you. I'll follow your build avidly. It's a great model to start with, especially as there are so many pieces you may well find yourself improving or modifying as you get into the swing of things. There's no single 'correct' way of finishing it, as you will have found out from the various builds, so no need to worry: you'll be doing it right! Tony

That's how the modellers on the French forums/fora interpret it. It's worth having a look. In addition to the ones I have mentioned, there's Marine & Modélisme d'Arsenal at http://5500.forumactif.org/. The pictures tell you most of what you want to know. Tony

If you look on the French modelling forums there's plenty of discussions about the rigging and history of La Toulonnaise as a topsail schooner. For example, from the Forum Marine at http://forummarine.forumactif.com/t3369-la-toulonnaise-construite-en-1823: "Lancée à Toulon le 13 août 1823, la TOULONNAISE prit part à la guerre d'Espagne sous les ordre du commandant JOURSIN, stationna à Barcelone puis atteignit Cadix ou elle contribua au canonnage des équipements portuairesEn 1832 à Brest le navire fut soumis à une révision complète. Pour les puristes ce vaisseau aurait été armé de Caronades" Which translates as "Launched on the 13th August 1823, the Toulonnaise took part in the Spanish war under the command of commandant Joursin, stationed in Barcelona, then at Cadiz where she contributed to the bombardment of the port. In 1832 at Brest the ship had a complete re-fit. Purists tell you she would have been armed with carronades." The discussion on La Royale Modélisme says in addition (http://www.laroyale-modelisme.net/t15358-la-toulonnaise-goelette-de-1823-au-1-75-maquette-musee-marine-auto-bce-n-36-2015?highlight=la+toulonnaise): "Elle contribua à la répression de la traite des noirs sur les côtes d’Afrique. Elle participa aux opérations d’Alger en 1825. Ses périples la conduisirent alors à Cayenne, en Martinique, à Terre- Neuve. En 1832, de retour à Brest, le vaisseau fut soumis à une révision complète. Elle resta ensuite dans les Antilles. En 1836 elle fit l'objet d'une nouvelle campagne de réparations à Fort de France. Elle croise ensuite durablement dans les eaux des Caraïbes. Enfin elle revint à Brest en 1843 où elle fut radiée des listes de la flotte le 18 décembre." Which translates as "She contributed to the repression of the trafficking of black people on the shores of Africa. She took part in the operations at Algiers in 1825. Her voyages then took her to Cayenne, in Martinique, at Terre-Neuve. In 1832, on return to Brest, the ship was completely re-vamped. She then stayed for a while in the Antilles. In 1836 she had further repairs at the Fort de France. She then cruised in the Caribbean. Finally she returned to Brest in 1843 where she was de-registered from the lists of the fleet on the 18th December." In all the builds on the French fora the plans from the Musée de la Marine are followed with the deadeyes as shown. They are also shown in other schooners of the time and their recreations. I can't vouch for the validity of these statements, but I hope this helps, Tony

How's progress? Tony

Thanks a lot, Danny, for the meticulous log showing the individual steps and methods. I also appreciate your noting the time it took for several of the steps. In all a real help to others, as well as a good reminder of the attraction and skills held by card modelling which differ so much from those of wood modelling. I find I have to have a very different mindset when approaching card modelling and your log demonstrates perfectly that mindset. Tony

I hope you're having a nice break, Radek. Will you be coming back to this build, or is it still on hold? I really like your guidance on techniques in card modelling, so am looking forward to more! Tony

It might be construed as a dangerous weapon. Tony

We have thousands of CEOs all over London. They're Community Engagement Officers -- the new title for Parking Wardens. Tony