Veszett Roka

 - F.You, today is Sunday! We're striking! 

 Superb work Daniel!
 

Nice to see you on duty again Bill

To be honest, i never seen such complex paper model yet. I built only one in my childhood (Jylland, a Danish tug from the 1920's) but that ship was far simply compared to your model. Excellent workmanship.

Hi Patrick,

what these thingies are at the yards' end?

Happy to hear you again Nils, i hope your wife is healthy again!

Beautiful model Bill, very well built! I saw many model in my career (i'm a member of a modeling club) but yours have a certain sign of careful and thorough work.

And i agree with you, this is an excellent website.

21 hours ago, mikegr said:

However I believe in smaller scales its easier to hide imperfections, 1/700 is a quite forgiving scale. 

Because very few people have a microscope in their pocket :)

This is always reminds me a gossip in our modeling club. Some airplane modeler club came to friendly visit us, and shown a few of their model planes. All were first grade work, and we admire them. They told us that their usual scale is 1:72 or 1:48 because the detail. We laughed, and shown them our shipmodels in 1:350 scale. From that point the shipmodelers were considered as 'crazy gang'.

And Mike, you're working in 1:700.

For me, it's a decision point. If you intend to build she as current state, include the stabilisers and build the bridge with modern navigation instrumentation (i mean radar screens etc.) as shown on the pictures. If you'd like to omit the stabilisers, i think you should build the bridge as an older look too. Plus, in this case you have to omit the WD40-Duct tape combo from the machinery shop.

On 2/15/2025 at 10:14 AM, KeithAug said:

Natural wood. Although above the waterline is a little more uncertain at the moment.

If my vote counts, i'd go for full unpainted wooden hull. That mahogany is far too beauty to cover - for me.

A bit more seriously: what are you planning below the waterline? Any antifouling, perhaps white or green like the original? Keep the hull unpainted? Also, some marking on the hull, like Plimsoll mark etc.?

Keith,

I feel a disturbance in the force. You covered the beautiful mahogany hull with 16 layer of warnish, which i found a happy move - i think the paint/warnish competition won by the wooden look. But, if the hull is depicted as wood, why are you need to depict the anodes as well? I know they are attached on the original Cangarda, but a bit odd on a wooden hull, aren't they?

I would cut the base plate a bit shorter and oval form to match the desk shape. But anyways, the current stand is perfect - You're the builder Mark, and your pride and joy the most important factor.

From beautiful to totally beautiful. Just 14 layers away.

So stunning Capt.

Will you add crew to the ship Bill? Then hang two rope and a crewmember with tiny paintbucket here. He is just repairing the ship, so any different color and wood spot is his fault, not yours

Try clean vinegar. Here we have a mold cleaner, but it contains chloride and it fades away all paint in no time but removes the black spots also very fast - so if your sails are white you can try bleach. Also you can ask a paint shop, they have a clean fluid addition for wall paints (sorry, don't remember the name) which kills germs, fungus and black mold. This fluid contains ammonium, but i never tried it on fabric. Be careful, i think better to try those liquids on a spare fabric, or a hidden spot of the sail.

Yes, i already noticed that too - the cover was aligned to be below the upper battery. I was brave enough to say this misalignment because knowing your seeking for perfection. So i don't know what would be the good solution

Daniel, i'm afraid the covered inlet (? i dont know what is it) is mispositioned.

I cannot find any weak spot. Valery is the Professor of shipmodelling.

2 hours ago, Keith Black said:

 Veszett, what dispute? No one is disputing Ian's use of 3D printing.

Not us Keith, but the dispute in general, whether the modeler could use a 3D printer, or he/she must use his/her own skills and tools to model the subject. The PRO-3D folks (including you, Ian and me) says it is just another tool. The CON-3D guys says that 3D printing is just programming and anybody could produce a fine model just behind a monitor whilst he/she could be totally untalented, don't need to understand the ship in general. They thinks 3D printing is not a work.

I think the torpedo tubes are bullseye hit. See them here

http://combinedfleet.com/torps.htm

I think this dispute is as old as the 3D printing in modeling industry. I agree with Ian too - this is just a tool. It is helping you to get the same, or even better result. Someone building the pieces from Evergreen slices or rods, someone fabricating them from excess pieces of plastic. The only important thing is the final result on the ship.

If we're talking about artistic sculptor talent and patience thats another topic i guess. Personally i find an accurate 3D model as attractive (artistic) as a sculpted one. Just different working hours invested into it.

18 hours ago, Baker said:

And some may be disappointed, but there is no room for toilet facilities at the front.

Oh sh.t happens

Don't forget to put a coin under the mast, Yves. Neat work.

I saw that fingerprint somewhere Dr. Watson. 🙃