Jump to content
MSW Spring Donation Drive

tkay11

NRG Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,802

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by tkay11

  1. tkay11
    Ha! Having posted the question, I came across a couple of suggestions in Longridge's book on the Anatomy of Nelson's Ships. On page 217 he suggests two methods. The first is to wind fine thread three or four times round a dowel and then use a needle slipped between the dowel and the thread to serve the thread. The second is to make hoops of fine copper wire, silver-soldered, and serve the thread round the hoops. All the same, should any one come up with other suggestions, I'd be very interested. Tony
  2. tkay11
    I am at the stage of putting blocks on the bowsprit of my Sherbourne cutter (1763) to hold the various bowlines and yard braces. Going by Petersson's book on rigging fore and aft craft, as well as by the AOTS book on the cutter Alert, the strops require a rope to go round the block and the bowsprit and the middle section of the rope is spliced together and tied between the bowsprit and the block. The following diagram from Petersson's book shows what I mean: I've had a quick search through the forums and can't find a reference to how to make rope for such a purpose. I can't recall any discussion about it either. So my question is how to make the circular rope? I have thought of butting the ends of a rope together and stitching or gluing, but that seems very likely to produce visible joins. I'd be grateful for any suggestions as to how to go about this. Thanks Tony
  3. tkay11
    The point of the machine is to serve (to wind) small rope around a large rope. The point of that is to help protect the rope, and was mostly used on standing rigging. This would have been done in addition to worming and parcelling the rope, though few modellers would do that in addition to serving unless they are very dedicated. A search on these terms should provide you quickly with lots of explanation. There are a several videos on YouTube. Here's the link to Alexey Domanoff's post in this forum: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/1594-serving-machine-20-not-just-serves-ropes/ which is about the machine that he sells. There's an interesting 45min version he posted on YouTube in Feb 2012 which is worth watching for his earlier experimentation. It's in Russian, but you don't need to listen as it's all self-evident. It's at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7lZx_Lq2M0. Here's his latest motorised version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaJ149UMuNY It's the kind of thing that is very easy to build if you just want a basic machine without a motor. Tony
  4. tkay11
    In Europe buying from Germany is straightforward as there are no taxes to worry about. SAT have the usual returns system, and Proxxon have their guarantee beyond that if you need to return something to them. The most you can get into is the cost of posting something back to them. Tony
  5. tkay11
    Thanks a lot, guys. What I take from the conversation is that (in addition to obtaining all this wisdom from the forum) it is just as important to study contemporary paintings -- which so far I have not done. Tony
  6. tkay11
    Ah well! The romance of cross Jack has to go, I suppose. Thanks for the accuracy though! Tony
  7. tkay11
    Thanks, Jack and Kester. I was thinking the same as you, Kester, about the re-naming, and thinking it was probably just the spreadsail yard. I saw Falconer's description. It still remains puzzling as to why Biddlecombe would mention only that one yard. I like the idea of poor Jack being cross at not being able to see properly, being cross-eyed or having his eyes crossed by a yard. My last visit to the Science Museum was very disappointing in that I chose 2 models that were not very good (I could only go by the descriptions on their catalogue) -- so I posted no pictures of that. In the case of the NMM, though, I was able to see pictures beforehand, and so could choose with great confidence the models I want to study. I'll make sure you're kept up to date with the photos. The models are held at the Chatham Dockyard. Tony
  8. tkay11
    Thanks, Joel, and thanks also for taking the trouble to look at my log. It's ok, I have the dimensions and placing of the other yards. What I am interested in is the dimensions of the ropes and blocks. Biddlecombe's focus on a cross-jack yard without mention of the other yards just raised this particular question for me. The kit suggestions for the rigging are not only extremely basic and sparse, but lack the complexity and detail of a cutter of the period. This was why I was looking into the detail. Most books on rigging of the period seem to cover three-masters or merchant vessels. I have come across very little for cutters. The most detailed I have found so far in books for cutters are Petersson's books. In addition there are some fine detailed models of cutters available, but so far I have only seen pictures of those. I have an appointment at the NMM in April to have a detailed look at 5 of their models which of course will help enormously. I remain puzzled (entirely due to my ignorance) about the mention of a cross-jack yard on a cutter without mention of the other yards. I do understand that cutters could sometimes have a mizzen mast raised, but Biddlecombe didn't seem to be referring to that possibility. I also realise, of course, that he was writing nearly a century later. Tony
  9. tkay11
    Thanks, Spyglass. A lovely diagram and a thoughtful suggestion. Nice to know about the 'Admiral Mitchell'. If I get you right, your suggestion is that the yard was for a temporary square sail. My puzzle is why Biddlecombe would have referred to that alone and not the other masts on cutters. And it leaves me wondering where it would have been placed in relation to the other yards, unless it was one of them. One possibility is that Biddlecombe is referring to a class of cutter-yachts that is not the same as the cutters used in the 18th Century for customs purposes. Tony
  10. tkay11
    Biddlecombe, in his tables of measurements of 30, 60 and 90-ton cutters in his 'Art of Rigging', has a section on the 'Cross-Jack Yard'. I understand he is writing this in 1838, a long time after the Sherbourne, but I would be grateful if anyone could explain his use of the term, especially as he provides no measurements for the other yards (topsail, squaresail, spreadsail). I understand from Falconer that the Cross-Jack Yard is a term mostly used for mizzen masts, or that the term can be used for a rigged as a Cross-Jack. However, that would mean that the yard in question carried no sail if I understand correctly. Of course, I am very likely not to have understood correctly, so any and all explanations are welcome, together with why Biddlecombe should not give measurements for the other yards -- unless one of these is the Cross-Jack yard. Sorry, as usual for my ignorance -- which arises from trying to cross-check the various dimensions I have found for the rigging of cutters of the period. Tony
  11. tkay11
    I forgot the link for SAT Berlin in case you're interested. It's at http://www.satberlin.de/en/PROXXON-machines/Table-top-tools/PROXXON-Table-saw-FET-NO-27070. Tony
  12. tkay11
    I use their FET table saw which I find excellent. I can cut strips to an accuracy of 0.1mm or even 0.05mm without much of a problem (although I do use a set of feeler gauges to be absolutely certain), and I cut strips of 1mm width or less. On this model the blade can be angled which allows me to make jigs for octagons etc. If you look at the Russian, French and German ship forums as well as miniature furniture making forums you'll find most people use Proxxon without complaint. You can find the FET saw at SAT Berlin for €269.68 which works out at £199.95 today. Shipping comes at €14.90 or £11.06. As it's from Germany you pay no import duty or VAT so it's much cheaper than buying over here in the UK -- though you do have to put up with the continental plug! I think the FKS/E is the older version of the FET. Tony
  13. tkay11
    I forgot to add... there are some big advantages in being slower than everyone else. 1. You can watch what the others do with your particular model. 2. You can spend more time reading up about ships of the period, techniques, and dreaming about tools you might buy one day. 3. You can spend more time reading various logs on MSW to pick up invaluable hints and tips. 4. You can spend more time thinking whether you're satisfied with the kit offering, or the part you have just made, and decide whether to have another bash at the part in question. 5. You can spend time with repetitive tasks such as making blocks. 6. You spend less time with noise from electric tools from which the rest of the household suffers whilst you continue in happy oblivion. 7. You can spend more time planning for that miraculous next build which will be so much better. At the same time, it'll be longer before you get to your next model and spend yet more money on that. I am sure there are others, and others who will be able to provide advantages of their own. As to disadvantages, well ... Tony
  14. tkay11
    No, no. Let me be slower than anyone else. I bought my kit of the Sherbourne in April 2012 and I'm only just starting to work on the rigging. I've finished the bowsprit, so am making the blocks and their hooks. I then move on to serving the ropes I've made so that I can finally put the bowsprit assembly together. I can only spend a couple of hours at a time on the occasional day that presents itself. All this by way of saying it's not a race, there's no one holding you to account, and every moment I have with the build remains pleasurable. We are all as patient in watching other people's builds knowing just how long it can take to move to the next stage. Tony
  15. tkay11
    Or lofting heights? I was very impressed by Harold Underhill's frequent assertions that building from plans is within most people's competence. Perhaps it just takes a bit longer and maybe we'd make more mistakes to learn from. Anyway, just a thought. There are quite a few experts on this forum who prefer kit-bashing, and that seems just as demanding. I look forward to your next build whatever it is. Tony
  16. tkay11
    How about entering the world of scratch building? I've thought that it would be good to try one of the cross-sections on this forum, such as the Triton or Echo. It would probably be vastly more satisfying than a kit, especially since the materials are under your own control. When you think about it, the only real advantage to kits is that you have the bulkheads laser-cut. For a scratch build you just have to print out the sections, stick them to wood and then cut them out yourself with a jeweller's saw or fretsaw. Tony
  17. tkay11
    Congratulations! Very nicely done! Must be a very satisfying feeling. Tony
  18. tkay11
    There are a few furniture creams already made up of beeswax and turpentine, e.g. Stephenson's Olde English Furniture Cream (although that particular brand is no longer made, I have a couple of jars of it from my mother who used it for her antique furniture). See http://www.johngrahamhardware.co.uk/stephensons_old_english.html. Tony
  19. tkay11
    I did some 3D with TurboCAD in developing the ship's boat for my Sherbourne, but really it was only to get an idea of the shape and checking whether I was going in the right direction with the keel and frames. In reality for me 2D is quite enough, as Harvey and Wayne have intimated. I did look into the idea of going with 3D further, but it seemed I would have to invest so much time in it without it being much/any use to the modelling that I gave up. I have found that visualising 2D plans has become easier as I have come to grips with constructing pieces from them. There are some issues with rendering in TurboCAD, but as you can see from the examples they're small. As to the building of objects, as long as lines meet (which you do by working with the Snap function) I think you can just select the whole object and then extrude most of the time. I found getting the curves right on the 3D rendering took quite a bit of time, but that may well be because I didn't invest time in understanding how to do them properly. As I said, I am a real novice as far as the complex areas of TurboCAD are concerned. Tony
  20. tkay11
    Other owners of the Proxxon suggest that as it is a planer rather than a sander there is much less dust. I also have heard that one of the problems is that shavings get trapped inside the casing sometimes, so you do need to clean it out periodically. It's very popular amongst European model makers -- as are most of the tools made by Proxxon. That goes for miniature furniture makers as well as model ship builders. It's far too expensive to import Byrnes machines here. So it's a bit hard to compare them. If I lived in the US, I might well be going for Byrnes machines. I'm very happy indeed with my Proxxon saw, sander, wood lathe and small drill -- but I am just a beginner and I have yet to test the limits of these machines. Tony
  21. tkay11
    FRIVOLITY!!!!!!!! In THIS forum!!!!!!? What is the (model ship) world coming to? Tony
  22. tkay11
    And don't be frightened of asking here too. There's enough TurboCAD users on the forum to give it a bash as a first try, and at least you'll know they're all using it for ship modelling! I found the following key learning points: 1. Importing jpgs. You can't just plonk them down. You need to follow the instructions on the bottom left of the screen. It'll tell you to place the first point of a corner first, then the second. That will give the dimensions on the page, which you will then have to re-size to suit your purposes. 2. It's handy to get to grips with how to measure things. Use the orthogonal icon. 3. You may well be confused at first by the layers. These work just as they do in Photoshop (in case you know how that works!). It is highly important to check that you are working in an 'active' layer as otherwise you won't see anything happening when you try to draw lines etc. I generally place a drawing in the bottom layer and use other layers to trace, to get dimensions, to place other aspects of the model. Tony
  23. tkay11
    Thanks a lot, Phil. Very useful. My ignorance! Tony
  24. tkay11
    Why not take a deep breath and do it by yourself? Just take it a step at a time and ask the right questions of the online help as well as searching for the answers in the TurboCAD forum as Harvey suggests. I did this and whilst I can't claim to know every aspect of TurboCAD I now get along with it just fine -- from tracing out jpgs of plans to drawing up plans for deck furniture. The ordinary version doesn't handle pdfs, so you'll have to watch out for that one. But it's not too hard to convert pdfs to jpgs. Otherwise, after the initial shock of having to come to terms with a whole complex new world of thinking, it becomes very straightforward. It's like a lot of software in that respect -- don't be overwhelmed by complexity. After all, we all learn very complex procedures by exploring how to achieve each particular step. It just takes an investment of time. I'd say it took about 3 months of sporadic fiddling with the programme to become comfortable -- but it was very sporadic as I only had a few hours each week to spend on it. Tony
  25. tkay11
    I noticed they also passed stuff through several times, and I seem to remember (not sure) that someone said that the finish was very smooth. Have to check. Tony

About us

Modelshipworld - Advancing Ship Modeling through Research

SSL Secured

Your security is important for us so this Website is SSL-Secured

NRG Mailing Address

Nautical Research Guild
237 South Lincoln Street
Westmont IL, 60559-1917

Model Ship World ® and the MSW logo are Registered Trademarks, and belong to the Nautical Research Guild (United States Patent and Trademark Office: No. 6,929,264 & No. 6,929,274, registered Dec. 20, 2022)

Helpful Links

About the NRG

If you enjoy building ship models that are historically accurate as well as beautiful, then The Nautical Research Guild (NRG) is just right for you.

The Guild is a non-profit educational organization whose mission is to “Advance Ship Modeling Through Research”. We provide support to our members in their efforts to raise the quality of their model ships.

The Nautical Research Guild has published our world-renowned quarterly magazine, The Nautical Research Journal, since 1955. The pages of the Journal are full of articles by accomplished ship modelers who show you how they create those exquisite details on their models, and by maritime historians who show you the correct details to build. The Journal is available in both print and digital editions. Go to the NRG web site (www.thenrg.org) to download a complimentary digital copy of the Journal. The NRG also publishes plan sets, books and compilations of back issues of the Journal and the former Ships in Scale and Model Ship Builder magazines.

Our Emblem ®

Modelshipworld - Advancing Ship Modeling through Research

Nautical Research Guild ® and the NRG logo are Registered Trademarks, and belong to the Nautical Research Guild (United States Patent and Trademark Office: No. 6,999,236 & No. 6,999,237, registered March 14, 2023)

×
×
  • Create New...