Moltinmark

Finished

If you have a couple of scraps of the thread you can try a fabric shop

And if I'm going to understand this thread of conversation should I be removing the name sea witch off my current build as nothing is known about that ship other than a couple of paintings as I understand  from my research. 

Thank you Bob for a further explanation of building ships to standards in relation to our quoted conversation.  It's been really interesting and I think it should be a regular thread  for newbies . Are there other standards where you just build from a kit and must use just the kit ? Also I'm curious and would like to ask how often is it that a historical ship's new information is found ( when nearly nothing was previously known) in that a new historical model can be built ? Plans are found or a wreck is found well-preserved and maybe laser scanned

I just got the POB kit also. I will pull up a chair and follow your build. I have a ship to finish soon and will join you building this kit. I am looking to as they say kit bash mine into a great lakes Schooner if I can find one from the early 1800's since I live in Michigan. 

Installing a storm door for a friend and had to shim the frame so I used wooden yardsticks and had to trim them down and realize that they would be good for making Masts

On 1/12/2021 at 1:15 AM, GuntherMT said:

Hi Moltinmark,

 

Looking nice.  I don't envy you the task of placing all the running rigging with all those sails in the way!  haha.. 

 

One quick thing I noticed from your pictures - the 'bands' on the anchor crosses should be painted black, as those bands would be iron.

 

Edit: Oh, and to answer your question earlier in the thread about standing rigging, it was not loosened in port unless the ship was being de-rigged for overhaul or maintenance.  It would normally be all left in place and tensioned up. 

Thanks Gunther it's always good to have a second pair of eyes. Yeah I'm a little nervous about getting in there being so close the end of the build and Wrecking something and having to redo it 

Very nice. I didn't care for the tool bins either. I like the cannon ball racks and barrels nice touch

1 hour ago, ulrich said:

What criteria defines the term "semi scratch" build?

Ulrich

Read thru above posts and you'll see that its a gray area

Impeccable, I love the detail

For me the hull planking was the most difficult. I would do a plank at a time each side. then work on something else to let the glue set up. Its just the nature of the beast and required me to take my time. I think I spent a week on just planking. 

Sails are on. Just have to finish some deck details and the running rigging. She's coming alive!!

I would wait. Work on the deck furniture. Let it rest for a while til you get your wood

3 minutes ago, RichardG said:

 

I agree except my inflection point is an inch. Bigger than an inch I visualize in feet and inches, smaller than that mm is easier. I can "see" 4mm much easier than 5/32 (and 0.15625 inches is impossible). I grew up in the UK and was totally non-metric until an adult. Working in the construction industry moved me to metric. I then moved to the US which is still mostly non-metric. I'm currently making something where the core parts are metric but the tools need to put the parts together are not. So I have an 8mm rod - but what size drill in inches will work?

I have a chart at work that converts drill sizes. You can also stick the 8mm rod in the drill holder to size. My guess would be just under 3/8 inch. My chart which I'm not in front of presently converts mm to decimal. 8mm= .315 " = 5/16 (looked up a rapid conv chart)

21 minutes ago, Jaager said:

For kit builders, a scale preference is pretty much subsumed by the designer of the kit.  In that situation, a scale preference of a modeler would only serve to limit the choice of kits.

My prejudice tells me that a kit manufacturer starts with a small range of final model size and selects a scale that yields that finished size.  No historical based factor is involved.

(For one notorious kit, Mamoli's Beagle, I think they had the Bounty hull to hand and just changed the scale on the new plans such that it came out to be the length of Beagle.  The shape is not even close to a Cherokee class brig.)

 

When I began this, it was steel rulers and vernier calipers.  The kits and plans still reflect the past requirement to work  with 1/64" being about as close an increment as could be seen seen.

This is why 1:96,  1:76, 1:64.

The dominance of 1:48 is because the majority of available original plans are this scale.

This heritage and now museum scale (1:48) allows for a lot of detail.  A problem with it is that for rated ships, for frigates and larger, a model is an inconvenient size.

 

For me, metric or Imperial became irrelevant with a availability of digital calipers.  It can measure in decimals.  No more fractions, so Imperial is just as useful as metric.

 

I like the detail at 1:48, but not the size.  I use 1:48 as my baseline, though.  I figured that working in a scale that was 1/2 museum would still allow for detail but an easier to manage sized model.

This is 1:60.  The reduction in X, Y, Z  is 0.8.  The numbers are easy to keep track of.  I just divide the full size data component value by 60.  The volume of a model is 50% of a museum scale model.

The more common 1:64 is very close - X,Y,Z  0.75  and volume is 42% of museum.

Some other scales:

1:70 is 0.7 and 33%

1:72 is 0.67 and 30%

1:76 is 0.63 and 25%

1:80 is 0.6 and 22%

1:96 is 0.5 and 12.5%

1:120 is 0.4 and 6.4%

1:192 is 0.25 and 1.5%

 

 

 

 

 

Thank for a very well explained answer. I am currently working 1/96 which makes drilling a single block very difficult. I've dropped several and have yet to find one in the carpet. 

I agree totally I'm just finishing up on 1/96th scale sea witch. My first build was Le Renard and that was in 1/48 scale.  I like that a lot better. Were you going to build the kit as is or make it into an another ship, kit bashing I think they call it

Thanks Steven and ccoyle. Thought thats what it was but wanted to make sure I was picking up the lingo correctly

Is it making another ship than the kit? Looks like my next build will be the pride of Baltimore. I am thinking of making a great lake war of 1812 Schooner. Also saw a video where it warns of bulkhead warpage after assembly. Anyone familiar with this?

Looking good there Rachel!

I will take the Baltimore off your hands. Ill pm you

Dri-Fit of the sales. as I was doing that I realized it's going to get very tight on the deck to add rope coils and sailors and the like so I started adding all the sailors. I have them unfurling the Mainsail and getting ready ready to deploy the four main sales

Dry fit of the sails. Realized its going to get tight getting back on deck for details before the last bit of rigging. Started Added sailors ect deck details. This picture caught my eye !

39 minutes ago, Rach10199 said:

Such a great job! I'll be happy if mine turns out half as fine as this👍 

Thank you Rachel. This is my 2nd build of a ship. 1st plastic build. I saw this in a outlet store and thought it would be helpful learning rigging a mult mast ship. My first ship I did during the initial lockdown last april may before I knew about this website. Lots of helpful people and resources. 

Take a look at the top of the main page in the gallery. There are some pics of a deck that I think will put your mind at ease!

Ever watch Bob Ross paint? His famous line is" there are only happy mistakes"  what you think is a mistake is actually a happy out come