Hubac's Historian

I’m excited to see your next update, Marc, and I’m really glad you’re back in the shipyard!

Marc - thank you for granting me access to your pics and permission to post them.  I’ve been in contact, recently, with another modeler from the UK who was also a great admirer of Michel’s work.  He had just recently learned of Michel’s passing and was very saddened by the news.

Hello Melissa - this is a very nice subject for a kit, and I am looking forward to watching your progress.  You are off to a great start!

Awesome stories all!

10 hours ago, bruce d said:

Very nice setup and very good timing: I have been playing around with fixtures to make a  moulding and will now go straight to your method, thanks.

One question, if you don't mind? Did you try reversing the arrangement so the cut-off moulding was not between the workpiece and the guide? 

 

Yes, there is an easy way to reliably rip consistent depth mouldings by temporarily cementing a depth stop to the Byrnes table, both before the blade and on the off-cut side.  Then, one can simply adjust the fence so that the wood blank meets the stop.

 

One caveat to this is that the fence adjustment on some micro-saws may not allow for a “soft” approach to an external stop, thereby exerting excess pressure between the blank and the stop - if that makes sense. 

 

 

That is a high compliment, Gary - thank you very much!  As you know, I am likewise a fan of your super realism.

I echo Michael’s sentiments, exactly! 

Extraordinary! 

While you may not be satisfied with the color of the deck housing, the sense of faux graining is very good.  If I were doing this, that is exactly what I would be hoping to achieve.

Thank you, Michael!  It’s interesting because, while I do need to re-draft the reverse cyma curve of the tafferal, I should be able to use the kit sculptures of “Europe” and “Asia” because the tafferal width turned out to be about the same as stock.  That’s a big help because those figures are very challenging to make well, from scratch.  I will, however, have to carve the Americas and Africa figure from scratch because I reduced the stern height, overall by a 1/4”, and Africa’s posture is all wrong.  Those will be difficult to do.

Thank you, Mike!

 

Kevin - I am far from quick, but I certainly am committed.  I’m getting back some of my former momentum, now, and am excited to continue climbing the stern.

 

I can also appreciate that certain aspects of the build seem a little exaggerated, like the raking angles of the stern lights, but that is all part of designing within the pre-existing architecture.  For their part, Heller maintained a more or less vertical window framing for the stock stern plate.

 

If I had gone with my original plan to use the stock stern lights, it might have looked something like this photocopied mock-up:

 

 

Instead, I’ve chosen a closer approximation of Berain’s intent.  Here, I’ve corrected the clearance issue for the outer pilasters:

 

 

Comme-ci, comme-ca; my happy medium between what is and what should be.

 

 

Plastic is a wonderfully forgiving material, Ian.  Whatever dissatisfaction I currently have with my little squiggles will be veneered over with a top layer that I can shape to satisfaction.  

Well, guys, it turns out that I ended up having to make those side lights closer in width to the other four.  After fitting of the window plate, I realized that there was not enough room left for the end pilasters.  I made some filling pieces and will re-profile after dinner:

 

 

 

 

 

Michael, your work is a true source of inspiration to me.  There are so many things that you do with the greatest care and attention to detail.

I think the teak effect came out quite convincingly on the deck housings, Kevin, and I really like the plank variation in the decking. 

Magnificent work, Michael!

Bill - I am sincerely hoping for a much better 2022 for you and for all. It sounds as though you have been through the ringer!

Roger and Dan, thank you very much!

 

Dan, I see what you are saying about the mullions, and I will adjust for that when I scribe the clear plastic.  The detail concerning windows 1 and 6 being wider - this actually reflects what Berain drew.  Windows 2 through 5 are equally sized, but the outer windows are wider:

 

 

This was also true of the tier below:

 

Thank you for the kind comments guys.  I see what you are saying Druxey.  Mostly, this is a function of the windows following the tumblehome, as in the original drawing:

 

 

One issue that may be exacerbating this perception is that the space my windows occupies is a little too tall.  I played with shortening the windows and increasing the height of the rails above.  In the end, that particular compromise was even less pleasing, so I went with the taller windows.

 

The top and final tier of lights will be the shortest and most vertically oriented.

 

I’ve done a fair amount of hemming and hawing over a number of things, but I eventually arrived at the place(s) I think I need to be.

 

For clarification of the earlier discussion; this is the essential problem of my stern winding out of square.  Note, how the starboard aft edge of the upper bulwark increasingly extends beyond port:

 

 

I thought I might try drawing arcs of round-up that ranged from extreme to conservative:

 

 

I started with the extreme line (far right), but ultimately - a more slight increase of round-up (middle line), appeared to me to be the most organic possibility.

 

Here is what my ultimate choice of round-up looks like from the starboard side:

 

 

It is just enough, I think, to help balance this incongruity - if not completely.

 

It seems to me that I can also help balance this out when I make the upper stern balcony.  Here, I have pulled a uniform cardboard template just away from the port side, so that the outboard edges of the stern balconies align:

 

 

I think this will help align visual perception at the exact point where it is most important.

 

At the end of the day, I am pleased with the slightly increased camber of this bridge-piece:

 

 

One thing that has become interesting to consider is this:  in gluing up the aft bulwarks, I was very conscious of establishing a realistic sense of tumblehome, as the bulwarks rise.  Even accounting for my initial increase in breadth, in the early drawing, I inadvertently maintained the slab-sided verticality of the kit stern.  In the left margin, I have noted the discrepancy between where I have arrived, dimensionally, versus where I began schematically:

 

 

Pictorially, here is the discrepancy for real:

 

 

What is completely fascinating is that the upper width of the stern is almost identical to the stock dimension.  Here is the stock poop deck, in place:

 

 

Even though this is not where I thought this project was going, when I started, the improved sense of tumblehome was well-worth the sacrifice in stern-width.  This isn’t perfect, but it looks more  right than wrong:

 

 

 

A montage of development for the next tier of stern lights:

 

 

 

The pilasters of the lower balcony rail don’t seem to align, but this is not reflective of reality.  Again, it isn’t perfect, but it’s pretty close.

 

After drafting:

 

 

 

 

This isn’t perfect.  The drawing can  be improved upon with the carving tools, themselves.  For the most part, I think this works.  I wonder whether I should follow the Berain drawing a little more closely and include an extra line of horizontal window mullions.  The false side lights, at this level, have five horizontal lines, but I am trying to balance this tier with the actual stern lights below.

 

Just for fun, a different iphone filter - Le Soleil Noir:

 

 

As always - thank you for looking in.  Bon noir!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, I’m afraid there’s no flex in the hull.  I have gusseted and interlocked every stage of the construction, so that the whole thing is almost absurdly solid.  The bowsprit would break off in a stiff wind, but the rest of it would survive an earthquake.

 

Addition and subtraction to the aft edges of the upper bulwarks would, I think, draw more attention to those areas because they would not look right, afterward.

 

In preparation, I glued some styrene to my brace.  I’ll take better pics tonight, or at least I will try.

No worries, Wefalck - technical know-how, such as this, is always welcome here!

 

T_C, I struggle to explain the problem, but it may be easier to visualize with better photography.  I’ll try to take some better pictures a little later on.

On my working vacation to Batavia Werf, a good number of years ago, I had the opportunity to go aloft to Batavia’s main topmast top.  One of the volunteers was a professional climber -  Peter (?, if I remember correctly) Meijer and his son Jurrien.  They took me up there, one day, and it was simultaneously the most exhilarating and terrifying experience of my life!

Keith - thank you for posting this excellent link.  I believe strongly in this kind of cross-pollination - not the least for which, I now have a new interesting project to follow.   That is some beautiful work, Wefalck!

 

Kevin, I’ll be jumping over to your CS page, in a moment, to catch-up.  I’m glad this has been helpful, and I love what you are doing there.

 

Yes, Druxey, that is my poor approximation of an overhead plan view.  I’m attempting to show how, at each level that I have installed one of these braces, the round-up becomes increasingly tangential.  I agree with you and  Jan that the best solution to the problem would be to true the starboard profile to the port profile.  Unfortunately, the time to do that has long passed; I might have done that before framing-in the stern counter.  At this point, though, the whole lower QG is established and it would create a weird break to true the bulwarks above the level of the lower gallery rail.  Not to mention the fact that the starboard quarter piece has no place to go, but where it currently resides.

 

I think I have no choice but to play with perception, in this instance, so I will draw some lines on plastic and see what that looks like.

 

A big “thank you” to you all for looking-in and offering suggestions.  More to follow.

Okay, Kevin - thank you for your thoughts on my problem.  I agree that whatever happens, it should all pivot from the centerline.  I will mess around with all of that later.

 

Now, as for painting teak:

 

Like mahogany, when teak is used for brightwork, it often has the same iridescent ribbon stripe.  I believe there are numerous ways to go about this.

 

The inks are nice because they are only semi-opaque.  If I were to modify your particular approach - after my medium sand basecoat, I would apply a slightly dilute solution of the orange ink with a fine sable brush - not too wet - in the long flowing lines of ribbon stripe; not too sparse, and not too dense.

 

Once I was satisfied with that, I would spray a satin varnish seal coat to lock that all in place.  Next, I would do the same with your slightly darker ink color.  Seal it under satin.

 

Finally, I’d apply a washcoat of near-full-strength ink to get into all the creases and panel lines.  Because the stripes are sealed-in, you can then cut the wash ink back with a wet brush, until you achieve just the right depth of color and blending of the stripes.

 

Last, I’d seal the whole, again, with one more coat of clear satin varnish.

 

Achieving the stripe effect, at scale, is difficult with a brush, but my advice would be to not overthink it.  As long as the first ink color, the orange, is not such a striking contrast from the base, then it should show well if you make light, sweeping gestures with a barely wet brush tip.  You can do and re-do to your heart’s content, right up until the satin coat.

 

If you are good with an airbrush, and have the appropriate fine nozzle tips, you can probably achieve the same or better result.  I don’t know enough about ink viscosity to make any suggestions for airbrush thinning, though.