Dr PR

No matter how you do it 3 mm blocks are fiddly! Your stropping looks good.

John, Thanks. I did use a modified #11 blade as a scraper and it does work. I used an example of a deck planking problem, but the more general problem is making any type of narrow groove. There have been several good suggestions so far.

Thanasis, Good idea! The metal clip makes a good handle to control the sandpaper. The one problem I see with this is that the grit along the edge of the fold can remove material from the bottom of the groove, making it deeper. With the deck planking application it really won't matter much if the plank is a tight fit into the groove. I put glue on the bottom of the plank (you could put it in the groove) and press the planks into the groove most of the way. Then I use a wooden stick to press the plank down so the top of the plank is level with the tops of the neighboring planks. So the plank won't slide too deep in the groove. Druxey, You have hit upon the thing that worried me the most. There are several ways to widen the groove, and most have the potential to remove too much of one of the planks on the side that would make a very visible curve in the grout line. However, one method to widen the groove hasn't been mentioned yet, and it is just asking for trouble! I did use a new #11 blade to remove wood from the sides of the groove! I held the blade flat against the edge of the planks on the side of the groove, and then rotated it slightly to get the sharp edge angled into the wood - like the blade of a plane. Then I carefully shaved very thin slices off the plank edge, moving in the direction with the grain so the blade wouldn't cut too deep. This was a "high pucker factor" operation. But it worked! One of the problems I had with the thin planks was that they bent very easily, and if I didn't get the nibbing in deep enough into the nibbing plank the plank would develop a slight curvature. This happened a couple of times and I didn't notice until I had installed another plank or two. Looking along the length of the planks the curvature was obvious - the planks were supposed to be parallel to the centerline of the deck. I had to rip up a few planks and then "plane" away excess material from the remaining planks to straighten the edges. Nasty! A few of the planks do have a slight taper toward the nibbed end, but because the entire batch of planks varied in width so much you would have to look very closely to see it.

Johnny, I think Thanasis' suggestion to use sandpaper is a good one. If the paper was wrapped around something a bit narrower than the groove, so the sandpaper was a slip fit into the groove, it would remove material from both sides in equal amounts, keeping the sides more or less parallel lengthwise. That is a potential problem because I want the planks/grooves to have straight edges and more or less the same width through their entire length. Making the grooves "\_/" shaped runs the risk of having different widths at the top edges (edges not straight), and that would be visibly noticeable in this application (deck planking). For what it is worth, I did file the bottom edges of the paper "grout" to make the bottom of the plank a bit narrower. This helped get it started in the groove. But I didn't want to make it too tight because the paper is easily distorted if you force the plank into the groove, pushing the paper up and possibly out of the groove. If that happens you have to start all over again to replace the distorted "grout." So you really need a groove wide enough for the plank to easily slip fit in place. I should also say that I really didn't have this problem when planking my topsail schooner deck because the planks were 5 mm (about 1/4 inch) wide. They did not bend easily. These 1/6 inch planks bend like wet spaghetti! And I was able to place straight runs of planking that were nibbed only at the outboard edges - no tapering to fit around a deck house with non-parallel sides. The MSI built posed some new challenges.

Good ideas! If you look at the second photo in my original post you will see two hobby knives with #11 blades. The blade on the right has been ground down to make a narrow chisel about 1/2 plank width. I used it to make the initial cut in the nibbing strake where the plank end is nibbed into the strake. I also used the sides of the "chisel" to scrape the edges of the groove to widen it. It did work, but it was slow going. On the other hand, I did want to remove material gradually until the plank just fit into the groove with a slip fit. So slow was good. I didn't mention this at first because I didn't want to bias answers. I do have a set of wood chisels that I use to remove material from grooves (but none as narrow as 1/16 inch). Usually I use a saw to define the width of the channel and a narrower chisel to gouge out material between the saw kerfs. I don't know that I have a steady enough hand to work a plank width chisel between the adjacent planks and keep a straight edge along the sides of the channel. Any other suggestions?

Thanasis and Druxey, Thanks for the suggestions. I don't want to shape the plank - it is already shaped to the desired width, and has the paper grout glued to it. I am looking for ways to widen a narrow groove, preferably keeping the more or less vertical sides of the groove. I suppose I could glue sandpaper to a thin enough stiff object so it could fit down into the groove.

Could the steam in the photo in post #222 be a whistle instead of engine exhaust?

I have been planking the decks on my MSI model and ran into a challenging problem. The planks are pretty thin (1/16 x 1/16 inch or 1.6 x 1.6 mm) and flexible. They are nibbed into a nibbing strake along the edges of the deck. The deckhouse sides are not parallel, so the planks have to be tapered to fit along the house sides. Planking at the bow and stern is pretty simple, but these deck sections meet along the house sides. Keeping the decking pattern straight and parallel to the centerline was pretty tricky in this area! The planks have 0.005 inch (0.13 mm) black paper "grout" glued along the edges. The last plank between the forward and aft planking is nibbed into the nibbing strake and sandwiched between two neighboring planks. Because it is the last plank it has paper grout along both edges. It is a very tight fit into the groove between the neighboring planks. And because the planks actually varied quite a bit in width it was a problem getting the last plank to fit into the groove. Here are a couple more photos to illustrate the problem. QUESTION: How would you go about widening the groove so the last plank would fit? This is a pretty narrow groove! The small file shown in the pictures was 0.055 inch (1.4 mm) thick, only slightly thinner than a plank. It didn't remove much material and I had to be careful not to foul the opposing top edge of the neighboring plank. And it tended to remove more material from the bottom of the groove (not good) than along the sides. What other method would you suggest to remove very small amounts of wood from the sides of the planks along the groove?

I'm back! I was occupied for about 2 1/2 weeks auditing the books for a non-profit that I am Treasurer for. I was checking every penny coming into and leaving the organization for 13 years, including restricted and unrestricted funds. I found a few errors, and after corrections everything balances for every month of the entire 13 years! Then I finished laying all of the deck planking on the Cape model. Don't ask how many individual planks there are - I have no idea! But there are a lot! Just aft of the superstructure are two grouts running perpendicular to the plank lengths. This was a "portable" or lift out deck section directly above the main propulsion engines. This is still a rough planking. I have scraped, filed and sanded a bit, but the final smoothing and finishing is still to do. The planks varied in width and height between 0.052 and 0.072 inch (1.3 and 1.8 mm). I carefully measured distances from centerline to deck edges all along the length of the ship - and they were the same everywhere (I was pretty careful with this when I put the plankshears and nibbing strakes on). I figured random choices for planks would even out to port and starboard, but it didn't work that way (Murphy again). The starboard side at the stern gained about 1/4 a plank width at the edge of the deck well. From there I used thinner planks on the starboard side and thicker planks to port. The port side came out perfect with a full plank width finishing out the planking along the stern planksheer. But the starboard side was still almost a half plank too wide and had to be cut into the nibbing strake. But I doubt anyone would notice, and that area will be covered with minesweeping gear anyway. The next time I plank a deck - especially if the planks are so thin that they bend easily - I will draw a series of lines parallel to the centerline and equally spaced on either side. These will serve as references to catch any planking "creep" wider or thinner on one side from the other. The deck planks are about 1/16 x 1/16 inch (1.6 x 1/6 mm) and that is pretty small to be making nibbing. Because the deckhouse sides are not parallel, and the nibbing strake curves along the deck edge, the planking pattern was pretty complex along the sides of the deckhouse. This led to a problem with tapering planks along the deckhouse sides and nibbing planks into the nibbing strake. Bringing the decking from the bow and that from the stern together caused a problem, and this was exacerbated by the varying plank widths. The starboard side came out almost perfect, but I had to do some creative planking on the port side to make things come out right. The last plank on the model ended up sandwiched between outboard nibbed planks and inboard tapered planks. It had to fit into a one plank wide groove - and was nibbed into the nibbing strake. And because it was the last plank it had paper grout strips down both sides. I picked a pretty narrow strip (about 0.060 inch or 1.5 mm) but it was a tight fit with the paper grout glued on. This called for some creative widening of the groove between neighboring planks. But it finally dropped into place with a bit of pressure. I know some people think the grout between planks on a model should be more imagined than seen. But the Cape's decks were holystoned and bleached, and the grout stood out very visible. The "grout" on the model is black paper 0.005 inch (0.13 mm) thick, and that is 0.24 inch at 1:48 scale. The blueprints say the grout was 1/4 inch wide in the ship's decks.

I would search the US Patent Office for vertical non-condensing steam engines. I would expect to find quite a few - with drawings. Just pick one dated from about the time the tug was built.

By all means do start a build log! No build is perfect, and our explanations of how to do things aren't always clear. Another log will just provide more information for others to follow.

Your last photo shows the outer edge planks with "hooks" that the next plank fits into. But the drawing above it shows only one plank "hooked" where a separate "nibbing strake" fits into. The subsequent planks are nibbed into this nibbing strake. In some plans the nibbing strake is called a "margin plank."

Interesting. Hogging in pointy boat hulls results from less water displacement at the bow and stern, and therefore less lift to support those parts of the hull. Midships is broader and displaces proportionally more so it has greater lift. So the bow and stern droop, causing the hogging. But in your sternwheeler the hull is rectangular. If it was a 3D rectangular solid it would have the same lift at all parts of the hull and would not be subject to hogging. I suppose it might have been tapered wedge-shaped below the waterline at the bow and stern, like typical flat bottom fishing boats. This would lessen the displacement, and therefore lift, at these parts. That would result in hogging. The placement of heavy machinery and deck houses would also influence displacement. For example, the weight of the paddlewheel hanging aft of the hull would pull the stern down. The deckhouse up forward would push the bow down. I doubt that a lot of nautical engineering went into the construction of this boat so it could have been very prone to hogging. The pipes you show could have been an add-on after a few years of operation when the hogging became apparent.

I nibbed the deck planks on my topsail schooner build, and I am currently nibbing the planks on my minesweeper build: https://modelshipworld.com/topic/19611-albatros-by-dr-pr-finished-mantua-scale-148-revenue-cutter-kitbash-about-1815/?do=findComment&comment=605072 https://modelshipworld.com/topic/37060-uss-cape-msi-2-by-dr-pr-148-inshore-minesweeper/?do=findComment&comment=1109001 The schooner planking wasn't too bad because the planks were 5 mm wide. The minesweeper planks are 1/16 inch (1.6 mm) and it is much harder getting neat nibs! I hope someday to resume my 1:96 scale USS Oklahoma City CLG-5 model, and I was planning on planking the deck with nibs. But those planks will be about 1 mm (0.040 inch) wide and there is NO WAY I can nib those tiny planks neatly!

The studding sail booms were wood, the boom irons were iron. The position of the irons and booms depended upon if the ship was continental (Europe), British, or commercial (non-warship). The irons were attached to the yard arms in several ways, again depending upon who operated the ship.

Some lines will not have large coils at the belaying point, especially if that they haul on is let all the way out. For example, if a foresail is reefed the halliard will be let out all the way with little left to coil. On the other hand, if the sail is hauled all the way up there will be a lot of extra halliard line to coil at the belaying point. As you say, the stays on the jib boom and flying jib boom do not have to be adjusted much, so there never will be a large coil of line at the belaying point.

serpe, What do you want to achieve with your model?

Most of the wood we use for modelling has been dried - unless you cut strips from fresh wood. Wood shrinks significantly as is dries, and swells when it gets wet. Even just high humidity can cause wood to swell a bit. This swelling and shrinking can cause cracks to appear in seams between planks months or years after the model was built. I coat the interior of the planked hull with thin epoxy to glue everything together solidly. This prevents cracks from appearing due to changes in humidity. When you soak planks for bending, be sure they are dry before putting them on the model. If you bend planks on the model, as I do, use only a small amount of water brushed on the strip, and heat until the moisture evaporates.

I followed Tom Lauria's YouTube procedure in Making Sails for Ship Models From Silkspan. Here is a link: https://modelshipworld.com/topic/19611-albatros-by-dr-pr-finished-mantua-scale-148-revenue-cutter-kitbash-about-1815/?do=findComment&comment=1035392 Using your frame should give better results!

I use a small paintbrush to loosen the dust. I hold the end of a vacuum cleaner hose close to the model to suck up the loosened dust. CAUTION: Remove any loose parts (not fastened down) first or you may have to sort through all the dust and lint in the vacuum bag. Guess how I know?

Most people seem to use a plank bending method with the planks off the hull and in some type of jig. Some boil or steam the planks, and some people just soak them. In my opinion this is all way too much trouble and the results are less than perfect. For me the best way is to shape the plank on the hull, where the hull serves as the jig and has the exact curvature and twist necessary. Here are a couple of links that illustrate this method. https://modelshipworld.com/topic/37060-uss-cape-msi-2-by-dr-pr-148-inshore-minesweeper/?do=findComment&comment=1074225 https://modelshipworld.com/topic/37060-uss-cape-msi-2-by-dr-pr-148-inshore-minesweeper/?do=findComment&comment=1075263 You don't say what type of "plank bender" tool you are trying to use. That could influence the method you try.

When I first saw your pictures I imagined an auger screw stoker mechanism as used on some steam locomotives. But then I realized it was a conveyer bucket system. These were in common use so it makes sense. But it would be interesting to see how it actually worked. It was probably steam powered. When steam pressure was high the stoker would run slower, and when the pressure was low it would have to "shovel" faster. I hope you find more information about how it worked. I wonder if it was patented?

Sagrado, Since the HMS Beagle was a British Royal Navy ship you should look for information about how the Royal Navy was rigging the lifting tackle in the first half of the 1800s. I would bet on the rig shown in your first images from "The Age of Sail." However, keep in mind that there were probably as many ways to rig these tackles are there were ships, Captains and Bosuns. If you cannot discover exactly how it was done on the Beagle (and did the method change over time?) you are free to do whatever you want so long as it is reasonable.

I have been planking the main deck. As you look at these photos keep in mind that this is the rough deck. It has not been sanded or sealed. The blueprints say plank ends will be spaced at least four frame spaces with three passing strakes between butts in line. The planks should be laid parallel to the centerline "... in as long lengths as practicable ..." How long was "practicable" when they were building this ship? The planking strips are 24 inches (610 mm) long. I decided to use 5 inch (127 mm) long planks (20 scale feet or 6 scale meters) because that is 16 frame spacings. This way I can use multiples of 4 frame spaces (1.25 inch or 31.75 mm), or planks 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 and 1 plank length long to stagger the plank ends lengthwise. Some of the planks are actually longer that 16 frame spaces at the bow and stern. The blueprints specify deck planks 2 5/8 inch (66.7 mm) square, or 0.055 inch (1.4 mm) at 1:48 scale. The closest commercially available strips were nominally 1/16 x 1/16 inch (0.0625 x 0.0625 inch or 1.6 x 1.6 mm). However they range from 0.055 to 0.075 inch (1.4 to 1.9 mm) and none are actually square in cross section. I cut the strips to the desired plank length and then glue a strip of black paper to one side. I usually place the narrowest dimension of the plank vertically so it will take fewer strips to plank the deck. The paper is about 0.005 inch (0.127 mm) thick, and this is 0.24 inch (6.1 mm) at 1:48 scale. The blueprints call for a 0.25 inch (6.4 mm) grout so the paper and glue are just about the perfect thickness. The paper strips were cut on an ordinary paper cutter, eyeballing the widths, so they are not uniform. They protrude a bit above the tops of the planks. With handling the tops of the paper strips "fuzz out" and appear wider than the nominal width, making the grout look non-uniform. But after all the planking is done the deck will be scraped, sanded and finished with #0000 steel wool and the grout lines will be much more uniform in width. Nibbing the planks into the nibbing strake along the edge of the deck is much harder that it was on the topsail schooner build - it had 5 mm wide planks. As you can see in this macro photo the nibbing isn't "perfect." It has taken a bit of practice to get it more uniform in appearance, and I screwed up in a few places. Fortunately part of the fore deck is covered by a steel chafing plate where the anchor chain runs, and this will cover the worst of the screw-ups! Phil 1, Murphy 0! I soon learned that I could not cut uniform nibs with just a #11 hobby knife blade. The solution was to use an old, dull #11 blade with a broken tip, and shape the tip to make a "nibbing tool." I used a grinding wheel in my motor tool and cut the tip to about 0.030 inch (0.76 mm) wide, with a chisel tip on the end. This is about half a plank width, and that is how wide the nib tip should be. I ground a cutting edge on the end, and then sharpened it on a whet stone. I first use this tool to make the initial cut at the edge of the nibbing strake. Then I cut back from there to where the plank edge meets the edge of the nibbing strip. The plank is then shaped to fit the nib cutout. I usually have to trim the plank a bit narrower at the nib to account for the thickness of the paper grout. No two nibs have the same angle cut, and the nibs get longer as the planking progresses toward midships. Some of the planks will have very long tapers, especially along the deck house sides. It is pretty tricky trying to cut long straight tapers into the nibbing strake.

Valeriy, I am aware that the calculations for creating truncated cones are on line - I even have them in an ancient printed analytic geometry text book. But the Internet takes the fun of doing the trigonometry out of it, doesn't it? But where your experience comes into the story is that you know how to do it, and know what to look for to do the calculations. And of course you do excellent work with brass and soldering! That is part of your talent.