Jump to content

tkay11

NRG Member
  • Posts

    1,821
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tkay11

  1. Those three adjusters are just screws that press on to a plate that holds the travelling table. I attach the instructions from the identical table that is sold separately. They are designed primarily to hold the table in the x-y axes. So if you loosen all the hexagonal surrounding nuts first, then, with the supplied allen key, loosen the left hand one and the right hand one, you'll find that there is considerable rotational play in those x-y axes. The diagram is: Although it's not supposed to adjust the play around the z axis, in fact you'll find that with the appropriate tightening of all three screws the play on the z axis will be minimised. This is simply because the plate is being pressed down on the table. However, you have to set that against stiffer movement in the x-y axes. Over-tightening will not only make the table very hard to move, but will also increase wear on the table itself. Of course, after loosening the screws, you'll have to make sure that when you tighten them again the table is indeed still perfectly aligned -- although in reality I don't think that's much of a problem. Once you've finished playing, don't forget to re-tighten the outer hexagonal nuts so that the screws don't change the positions you've decided on. If you want more help, a simple email via their website to Proxxon in Germany should do it. They are incredibly helpful over even the most minor details. Tony
  2. Nice one, Henry! Thanks! As well as being very interesting! Tony
  3. I'm still beavering away at working out the rigging for my Sherbourne cutter of 1763. For reasons given in my build log, I decided to go with the rigging plan shown by Petersson in his book on rigging period fore and aft craft -- rather than the plan shown with the kit. However, this has led me to a few puzzles, current of which is how the lower yard was held. Having prepared the shrouds, backstays and Burton pendants, I was looking at the plans for holding the lower yard. Petersson shows the following: This leaves me puzzled as to how the yard was lowered or raised if just a sling was used. The books I have don't give me a straight answer. Several, such as those by Marquardt, show halliards with blocks (as do the plans for the Sherbourne). Others show just a sling, as does zu Mondfeld: Models in the Royal Dockyard at Chatham show some with a halliard and blocks, whilst others show just a simple sling. Thus a model of a 1763 cutter in Chatham shows the lower yard with a halliard and blocks as follows: I'd be grateful if someone could explain to me whether tyes with blocks were used instead of slings (or vice versa), or whether a ship could be fitted with either (depending on circumstances), or whether both were used together. I have a feeling I'm missing out on understanding function here, so any guidance will, as always, be very welcome! Thanks Tony
  4. Don't worry, the pics are self-explanatory. In any case, the book you're getting covers the detail. Tony
  5. In addition to the builds on this site, there are a couple of La Jacinthe builds on the French modelling site Marine et Modélisme d'Arsenal which you may want to look at (though the details of the builds are lacking): http://5500.forumactif.org/t1916-la-jacinthe-en-charpente?highlight=jacinthe http://5500.forumactif.org/t1490-la-jacinthe-de-snarlev-au-1-48eme?highlight=jacinthe Tony
  6. I don't know if you have seen Frolich's Art of Ship Modelling, but in that he shows how he built La Jacinthe using exactly the plug kind of construction you're talking about. I'll send you by PM a pdf of the relevant pages if you like. There have also been a few builds on this forum of similar ships, but they were on MSW 1.0 and may no longer be available. There are also a few books on modelling that discuss this technique -- but I can't think at the moment where I saw the discussions. An interesting take on the method is in the build 'Istanbul Kayigi by Ilhan Gokcay - (Coastal trade vessel of Istanbul) 18th c. Scale:1/50' which you can see at http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/506-istanbul-kayigi-by-ilhan-gokcay-coastal-trade-vessel-of-istanbul-18th-c-scale150/?hl=%2Bgokcay+%2Bistanbul. In that it looks as though he's going to build a straightforward plank on bulkhead model with complete filling between the bulkheads, but scroll through the pictures and you'll have a shock -- it's in fact to act as a plug. Tony
  7. If you're in the UK, Warco make an excellent range. See http://www.warco.co.uk/search.php?orderby=position&orderway=desc&search_query=magnifier&submit_search= I bought the magnifier LED round lens in February last year. Their after-sales service and advice is wonderful, and I haven't found similar lamps cheaper in the uk. Tony
  8. Which model engineering show are you going to? I haven't noticed any in the calendar at the Model Engineer website. Tony
  9. In my copy on Page 50 it seems to have been corrected. It reads "These shrouds are of 7" cable and their laniards are 3 1/2" line." It seems corrections are made on the hoof as people notice them. My copy arrived a month ago. Tony
  10. If you click on the generic line tool you'll see a box with what looks like an inverted T. That allows you to select a line to which you'd like to draw the perpendicular, then the length of the perpendicular and finally the end point of the perpendicular. Tony
  11. It may be that you have to convert your pictures to jpg before they can be viewed on this site. Tony
  12. Dr. Mike's videos are up to 95 now. He's the one publishing them on YouTube. As before his full list of videos is at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5wX2_PJGI8sxN_zzXNTWaZ9qi-U_9Zp7 Tony
  13. Thanks, Mick. Useful info. I'd looked at a Peatol/Taig before and wondered how it would compare with the ARC models. I see it's set up for imperial units only, but suppose that's not much of a problem. Sorry for diverting the thread! Tony
  14. Looks like a nice lathe. Which lathe is it? Bought in the UK? The reason I ask is that I'm looking for one myself. Tony
  15. What a great sense of satisfaction and pride you must have! I've often wondered if at the end of a build there's also a sense of anti-climax, as though you can't quite believe it's all over. Looking forward to your next build Tony
  16. Perhaps more seasonal than seasoned in my case, seeing the amount of time I've taken to get this far. Tony
  17. Sorry, I just remembered, I measured the angle off the plans. Probably the best way to go! Tony
  18. From memory, I set the cross trees to be parallel to the keel assuming a mast angle of 85 degrees (based simply on the way the mast fitted the slot!). I haven't yet fitted the mast as I'm working on the yards and their rigging. I am not sure a couple of degrees either way would be very noticeable. Tony
  19. Just a quickie as I'm on a 30 minute connection in India at the moment. Re the 3-pounders, there is a set of drawings for the Armstrong 3 pounders in the armaments section of the ship modelling resources pages on this site. Tony
  20. Just arrived in Bangalore and have a short spell of internet available. Great to see the progress. Re the 3-pounders, there is a set of drawings for the Armstrong 3 pounders in the armaments section of the ship modelling resources pages on this site. I'll see if I can pop in again later this week. Tony
  21. Great to see another Sherbourne build! And, like you, I've just decided on adding sails, so I'm more than interested in your progress. There was a long discussion on MSW1.0 as to whether the Sherbourne might have been clinker built. The consensus at the time was that it might well have been not, but it was agreed that either way would fit the period. It's really up to you -- but no doubt others more knowledgeable than I will chip in with their opinions! I'm sure you'll have noticed Gregor's, Dirk's and Kester's outstanding Sherbourne builds on this forum -- they have lots of good discussion, demonstration, advice and hints. I too have used George Bandurek's book, and found it very helpful indeed -- although my build has differed from his in a few respects. I'll be interested to see what you decide about the topmast and the windlass. I left out the fife rail on mine because of the clutter fore of the mast, but Kester says there are very good reasons for it! I'm not at all a sailor, so I'm probably wrong in that decision! You might want to look at the pictures I took of contemporary cutter models at the NMM at Chatham on this forum as they provide some very interesting details. I'll be travelling for the next three weeks, so may not be able to follow your build until I return. So in the interim, have a good bash! Tony
  22. Marquardt in 'The Global Schooner' shows the following as being used for the main sail sheet on page 185: This is very similar to the rig that Petersson shows, although in this case it is for a schooner rather than a cutter. Then on page 176 there is a rather interesting (though quite different) rig described as a 'small topping lift for smaller vessels': I'm showing the latter just as interest! Tony
×
×
  • Create New...