Jump to content

bruce d

NRG Member
  • Posts

    2,977
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bruce d

  1. I asked the same question, he said 'don't bet on it'. His suppliers don't specify the distinction for generic products but the brands are consistent, so he always orders the same brand + some generic stock. It is a case of 'read the label'.
  2. I was surprised to be told by my pharmacist that there is more than one formulation of surgical spirits. Haven't looked into it in detail but he said some 'spirits' contain an oil and others don't. Since I don't intend to put any on a model I just filed it away in the trivia file but seems it might get important if it is used in a paint. Read the label on your bottle before using this product.
  3. An auction catalogue with an error? Surely not!
  4. From the estate of Nelson Dawson, 1924.
  5. From the estate auction of Commander William Barrett R. N., 1928.
  6. Part of the estate auction of Max Williams, 1928.
  7. Found this in an old auction catalogue. Part of the marine collection of the William Bell Chambers R.N. sold off in 1925.
  8. Christos, I always look forward to seeing your progress. This will be a very attractive model and your work is a pleasure to see.
  9. An intriguing article for anyone who is interested in how 18 - 19th century sailing ships performed: https://qz.com/1193455/the-speed-of-europes-18th-century-sailing-ships-is-revamping-historians-view-of-the-industrial-revolution/ It is headed "The speed of Europe’s 18th-century sailing ships is revamping history’s view of the Industrial Revolution" and cites sources and gives performance charts.
  10. Hello Mark, and welcome to MSW. Looks like a good job so far, please keep us up to date. Perhaps a build log? Regards, Bruce
  11. Good point. I was told long ago that CA applied to wood needed penetration to form a solid mass within the fibre structure. Otherwise the few fibres forming the surface have broken their bonds with the fibres below. I simply believed the explanation, never questioned it. Now that the light is on the subject, it makes me wonder about the bond created with a wood-char-CA-char-wood club sandwich.
  12. I think that is behind the failure despite me doing a bit of scraping to allow penetration. Just needed more wood exposed, perhaps. You may be able to tell, I find the tiny parts intimidating.
  13. Thanks Bob. I tried a couple of tests and was satisfied at first but was surprised the following day to see one of the CA joints had simply fallen apart. The other four CA joint test pieces were OK. There may have been sloppy practice by me and something affected that one joint but it seemed smart to ask the community. I really do not want to attempt cleaning the char from two sides of the tiny one mm thick frames on the longboat I am working on. Of course, I also don't want the planks to spring off after the model is finished ...
  14. I know laser char has been discussed before but I did not feel this point was nailed down: If you glue a joint where the char has been left on one or both surfaces, WHAT are the potential problems? For example, is there a glue to avoid? One that works well? I am building my first laser-cut kit (build log to follow) and many of the parts are so delicate that I only want to carry out the minimum sanding/scraping. All comments appreciated. Bruce
  15. Hello and a warm welcome from Sussex to MSW. Not built the Supply but someone will speak up. This is a good place to get guidance, don't be shy about asking. Regards, Bruce
  16. The later cutters were cutters but 'revenue sloop' was just a term in popular usage by the press and public in the earlier days, not something to be relied on unless it is verified by revenue records. Having said that, they used quite a few sloops and the picture you posted looks like a sloop to me but I will defer to any better informed observation (that's your cue, Druxey).
  17. Welcome, Brownbread. Judging from the pic of your armour, you know how to build models so we look forward to seeing more of your longboat. Regards, Bruce
  18. After a cup of tea and a browse I should qualify the statement I made earlier: At least some revenue craft were painted black during the first half of the 18th century so my comment about the later stripes' could confuse matters. There is another thing, not conclusive, but worthy of comment. As I recall, there was a protocol for the flying of jacks and pennants by revenue craft. A revenue craft was originally obliged to fly a long pennant for identification and some took to flying the jack as well. This caused friction as they were not part of the English navy. The compromise was that the revenue vessels would display their pennant and were allowed (not required) the jack but must haul it down if in the presence of a vessel 'properly' entitled to fly the jack: in other words, pennant only if in sight of any of His Majesty's ships. That fits the picture, whether by coincidence or design. Make what you will of it.
  19. Giampiero, very impressive. When you started you said it was an 'impossibly small' scale: well, you have solved that problem! Lovely work. Bruce
  20. Hmmmmm…. I do not want to tell you what you already know, but I don’t know what you know, so here goes: The nearest boat is flying the red ensign. This was used by commercial shipping under the English flag from about 1707 so she is not smuggling, she is legitimate. Also, her colours are consistent with early-mid 18th century practice. The further, smaller boat could be an early revenue cutter. She could also be a privateer. The pairing of these two (if the second is in fact a revenue cutter) would make sense as a comforting bit of graphics to illustrate the ability of commerce to function safely under the protection of revenue patrols. However, I will look at some notes on revenue service craft later and comment. My strong impression is that the map is about something happening (or proposed) on land. Do you have any reason to believe that the map is ‘official’ in any way?
×
×
  • Create New...