Snug Harbor Johnny

Ahoy, Rick !! And thanks again for informing me of this consignment item ... which happens to be of interest, in part since the Admiral and I have long been historic re-enactors in time periods ranging from Italian Renaissance, Tudor and Elizabethan England, Colonial, 19th & early 20th century ... eclectic, no doubt. 'Guess I'm a learning, costume and dance junkie. The inflation factor going back to the late 70s (USD) is easily 4 to 1 (400% cumulative inflation - Gee, guess the 2 long-term hazards for personal savings are inflation and market risk ... how do you balance them? Our answer in semi-retirement is to continue to earn an income stream by part-time work and self-employment). A new kit like this today (modified to reflect current information, and less reliance on large format drawings - made up for by better instructions/photos a-la OcCre) might retail around $900 since there are not extensive carvings and complicated fittings like on the Sovereign of the Seas or the Vasa. 'Scaling back to late 70s prices and you get $225. What the heck, I might as well add a few pictures of my historical interests. I can't lay hands right now on my best photo in Henry VII finery (like in Henry's famous portrait), but I'm seated showing my order of the garter in one picture of our dance group friends in the Tudor period. Bvr Bllrm 150dpi_layers copy

OK, let's dive into the box. 'Sorry for the glare where items are plastic wrapped - I don't want to tear anything open yet. When I do a build sometime, there will be better pictures. A blue plastic holder (with compartments) holds bronze castings that include a real nice dragon head for the prow, a grappling hook to hang from the bowsprit, a royal crown for the top of the bowsprit as shown on the Anthony Roll, rigging cutting knives for the fore and main course yard ends and a bunch of small decorations (perhaps for the castles). Very slight oxidation is present from nearly half a century of storage - nothing that won't clean-up. Below is the open box with a WHOLE BUNCH of planking stock, decking, mast and yard dowels (most stuff is walnut, but some is light) ... haven't yet bothered to delve into what passes for instructions. The mast & yards are not tapered (Billings old Wasa had pre-tapered stock) - but the forum has several threads on how to do that ... I'll use my Unimat lathe (lucky me). So here's some of whats in the framing box. All of this is cleanly cut with virtually no burrs and NO char marks (laser cutting wasn't done when this kit was produced). I'm REALLY impressed how everything in this box (which is most of the structural pieces) is done and numbered. You'll see later that there are three sheets of ply with printed parts that have to be cut out ... but they are for a castle configuration that I don't plan on using. Now there is a little warp on a few of these pieces ... nothing that I either can reverse-bend out, or at worst replicate. Most pieces are flat and true. Below I've spread stuff out in the box for a better view of the stock, the planking is thin enough to easily bend a fair amount without even wetting - and wetting would allow for tighter curve bending. The stock seems perfectly fine and not cracking ... care was likely taken in the orientation of the wood it was cut from. Now for the packs in the fittings box. First up are conventional chainplate - which is not like the simple chain used on the MR, but what is supplied will be useful on another build. There are very well made deadeyes - again not the tear-drop shaped, 7-holed period type (again from the MR) - they could be used as-is, but I prefer to make my own and use these elsewhere. They are really quite fine. There are single, double and triple blocks that are better than average ... must be that during this time period of production the Sergal fittings were a very good quality in general. The blocks may not be 'early', but I'm inclined to use them as supplied. And there is a group of 'kits' to make the nest-shaped tops - a nice touch that I really appreciate. The next group includes a bunch of swivel gun parts, a couple sizes of cannon kits (one of them contains sakers), 3/4 cannon (culverin) barrels designed to protrude through the side gun ports ... they fit into holes the builder drills into supports recessed behind the hull planking and that will have a nice appearance (no one would see the gun carriages anyway) as opposed to a contemporary kit-supplied method of popping inserts into square holes made into a the hull after it is planked. One can generally see the shallow back of these inserts even if they are painted black. I'll either use the recessed Sergal method or perhaps go to the trouble I did on the Vasa by placing 'dummy' carriages with the back part of the cannon barrel made of dowel drilled to accept the brass half-cannon (or in this case they are 3/4 barrels turned out of brass). There are a slew of gun port liners (which I won't use) as well as demi-lune liners which I'll probably use to 'pimp' the castles a bit. There are also a lot of other fittings and some grating strips. There are etched shields on the left that I don't plan on using. Last up is the rigging rope, which I must say surprises me how good it looks. It is miniature rope, and by far the best rigging rope I've ever seen in any kit from a large producer (note that I have not seen any of Chuck's kits, but know that they have his excellent miniature rope). The anti-boarding netting seen underneath the rigging rope is ... eh .. I suppose OK, but I don't plan on having any netting so you can SEE the decks and whats on them. Netting would likely only be deployed either during a drill (temporary) or before an engagement with hostiles. OK, old Johnny's nattered on in his typically convoluted way ... so how would he describe this vintage kit on one word? SWEET !

Yes, the model is large ... but perhaps not quite as large as it seems. The kit was made before the raising of the Mary Rose, and did not have the benefit of all the knowledge gained thereby in the decades of study to follow. So they had to have based the design on the few contemporary pictorial records available, plus their understanding of 18th & 19th century ship proportions. The ratio of length at the waterline to maximum beam of the MR is 3.25, so the GH should be about the same. Experts estimate the GH's beam at 50', which would yield about 162.5' at the waterline using the same 3.25 ratio. The widest frame (bulkhead) in the kit measures 7.75", so multiplying that by 3.25 should give a model waterline length of 25 1/4" Hmmmmm, the actual (full scale) drawing of the model has the waterline measuring 28 1/2" ... an 'Ah-ha' moment that provides a rationale to reduce the model length by 3 1/4". But then there are some slight alterations to make the bulkhead shape conform more closely to the MR, so the resultant adjusted width (with allowance for planking) will be 7 1/4 (or marginally more). Re-doing the ratio calculation will give a model length at the waterline of about 23 1/2 inches - taking 5" off the 'as designed' length of the model. The hull (less bowsprit) will end up being 30" instead of 35". This will make a difference in 'buildability' and management of the project - not to mention the size of the case eventually needed. The scale of the drawing (in length and height) to what is probable on the original ship is about 1:68, yet the scale "in width" of the bulkheads are 1:80. What about the guns included in the kit? (There are many !) I picked out a saker barrel (originals are about 9.5' long) and measured it through the plastic bag and got 1 3/8" ... (x 85 represents 9.7') pretty close to being in proportion to the model's beam. The biggest cannons (11' originals) and culverins are 3/4 length turned brass to be mounted into recesses behind the gun ports below deck (a common practice with models), so my reckoning of the full length (if they were fully turned) is about 1 5/16" (x 85 represents 11.1') ... so the gun are about 1:85 scale, still al little smaller than the proportions of the bulkheads. Most of the drawings are the elevations only, but where drawn, the view of the decks from above look somewhat 'stretched out'. So we have a situation just the opposite of the old (1st edition) Billings Wasa (Vasa) where the scale length of the hull should have been 24" but was reduced by 4" to fit the box they were using for all their models then. Sergal (in 1975, the date on the drawing) sized the length of the model in their best guess of how the proportion should be to the largest bulkhead size they chose (not knowing then what we know now, I don't blame them a bit). They chose not to be limited to any size box and 'went for it' as one might say now. So based on current scholarship, parts can be adjusted or re-made as needed to adjust the length and height downwards a little. There is no way of 'stretching' my Vasa now (but it could have been done at the outset if sufficient information was readily available in the 70s ... (isn't the internet a trove of info?), but with a little planning there should be no major difficulty in trimming the Sergal Great Harry to a length proportional to its beam for Henry VIII's big ships. So lets look at a few more plans (they are VERY large and I don't intend to post pictures of them all) ... they just don't print plans like THESE anymore ! The plans are the primary 'instructions' for the build, supplemented by ten 6" x 8" pages of typed material (in Italian, French and English), that mostly tell you to refer to the drawings for each step. Obviously this is not a 'beginner's' project, given the scope of the work, the modifications that should be made to the 'as supplied' configuration, and the reliance on the drawings (nice as they are) as the only effective means of instruction (other than just a few pointers in the booklet - to be picture further down). Prior ship modeling experience is recommended, unless one want a 'baptism of fire'. The drawing below (and on others) indicates belaying pins (supplied, of turned brass) - which had not been invented yet. I'm not sure about kevels, but there were knight heads and railings of various sorts. On the drawing below, one can note the exaggerated tumblehome in the central area of the frame layout on the left, and on parts of of the framing in the upper right. How to adjust these and also how to make a better construction of both castles will take some study and experimentation. I anticipate making a number of replacement framing parts and trial-fitting everything multiple times. One still can simply 'build as supplied' and get an impressive - and large - display piece, bristling with about 180 guns of various sized. If its 'Guns R US' one is looking for, you've come to the right place. There is a cool wall poster over 2' x 3' which is pictured next, and the brief 'instruction booklet' is at the lower right corner for comparison.

Ahoy from Snug Harbor Johnny ! This is my third unbuilt kit review (reference Endurance by OcCre and Khufu's Solar Barge by Woody Joe) and this will take a few posts to do this fine old kit justice. Like the man asked, "How do you eat an elephant? ... One bite at a time !" As mentioned in the 'What did you Receive Today' category, I was informed about the availability of the the LARGE scale Great Henry by Rick from the Modeller's Workshop in Montreal, Quebec. BTW, he was a pleasure to deal with and the parcel was received much faster than I'd have guessed. We were discussing a completely different old kit he offered to the Forum, when he mentioned that there was a group of 4 kits that were dropped off at his store for consignment that included the HMS Victory and the USS Constitution. There are many fine builds of these, as well as the Bounty, but the prospect of a BIG version of the Great Harry piqued my interest as I've only seen a couple of pictures of this version anywhere. Rick noted that it is unlikely that Sergal produced more than 100 of these, with drawings dated January 1, 1975 - well before the Mary Rose was raised (much less conserved and studied enough that quality reference books became available). He posted some pictures of kit components without 'digging' too much into what he described as entering Tut's tomb, and he suggested a price including shipping of $500 ... yet went so far as to say I was welcome to bid lower if I was interested (as this item was considered a 'slow mover') and he'd relay that offer to the consigner. No way was I going to risk offending anyone, and I was willing to 'pay to play' and agreed to the initial price suggestion. I don't risk giving too much away by saying that I think it was fair value given the unusual nature of the kit, and to do it justice will take a real commitment of time and effort. As mentioned in the other thread, the box weight 15 pounds and I was surprised by the mass - as if there were bricks inside the carton. 'Turns out that the large box was fully packed with materials (wood, metal and paper) - enough to be considered a 'solid' mass. The picture below is of the first opening. Sergal had to design this based solely on a few contemporary illustrations, and their experience with 17th through 19th century ship kits of various types. Prior to receiving the parcel, I'd procured three great reference books on the Mary Rose (pictured below) because Sergal had 'gallionized' the Great Harry somewhat as exhibited by putting too much tumblehome in the widest places than we know is appropriate based on the recovered hull of the Mary Rose. The Great Harry, after all, is a larger and better armed version of the MR - and was built to match (or exceed) the newly built Scottish warship the Great Michael. These might be thought of as 'Carracks on steroids' - taking the recent carvel-below, lapstrake above construction developed in the late 1400s (reference the Danish ship Griffin - Griebshund - now located and featured on a PBS NOVA documentary) and expanding the size with 'less tubby' lines and more powerful weaponry, 4 masts and the new innovation of sealable gun ports in the sides so the heavier ordnance could be lower in the ship for reasons of better stability. Sergal had three full decks in the stern castle (although the top is narrower, what, so it looks a little more like a galleon? ... and its DEFINITELY not "Elizabethan", even thought Elizabeth I was a Tudor Queen). They've played a bit with the forecastle as well, but then I'm not 'knocking' the manufacturer at all - considering the date of production and the paucity of accurate scholarship in the 70s concerning Henry VIII's fleet. In fact, the re-build of the GH in 1536 (the MR was also rebuilt, but loaded with more and heavier guns that likely played a key role in her demise - but much to our present scholarship, so look on the bright side) the sterncastle of the Harry was reduced to lessen the heeling it was previously noted for. So the original version should have 3 full decks in the stern castle, and reportedly did not have top gallants in the pre 1536 version. My intent (when work will be done on the GH) will be to incorporate information in the book pictured below to build a pre-1536 version: OK, time to have a look at the first drawing that lay on top when the kit box was opened. Yup, this model is BIG - and the length at the waterline is 28 1/2", and the hull from the beak of the fore castle to the stern (not including the bowsprit) is 35". And talk about height ... if taken at face value, it will take a larger case indeed. Baggins might consider this a 'mathom' - or perhaps some might think a 'white elephant'. Bur wait - a 1:75 Vasa or Cutty Sark will be as large, and there are many who build models this size. I've been struggling with 1:96 and smaller for a while, and having more 'elbow room' might be a good thing. So in the picture below I placed a yardstick for scale - and also the largest hull frame that points to a rationale how this model may really be 'not as large as it seems'.

You are fortunate to have those nice bronze castings ... a reason for someone with enough of a nest-egg to find and buy the Classic kit PLUS the new version with improvements in drawings/ templates, etc. Then they can have the best of both worlds, besides having plenty of material should anything go wrong along the way. Nice as the bronze castings are, they can be improved by working with tiny Dremel bits and miniature files to accentuate fine detail and make them 'super cleaned-up'. I could see spending the better part of a year just going over all the castings this way. THEN after buffing, one could have them professionally GOLD plated ! For that process there are several cleaning/chemical treating steps, then the substrate is nickel plated for longevity and to sequester the gold to be plated on the surface. The final step is to electroplate with gold, which will burnish to an unmatched brilliance that will STAY brilliant for a very long time ... like the golden mask of King Tut !! Yeah, it would cost to have all that done, but I think it would be worth it.

Eye, eye, Sir!

"I tawt I taw a puddie-tat ..." (Tweety Bird in the old Warner Brothers cartoon) Then there was Yosemite Sam, "Great horny-toadies!"

Ahoy Steven, sorry for the delay in reply - as I often miss activity. The 'marriage' painting I referred to might be in your collection of images somewhere. I'm pasting it below: Cool picture, eh? Brave crewmen are walking the yards (but seem to have one hand on a line), and there is great detail in certain aspects of the rigging and how the sails actually looked under a breeze. I note on the large ships in the foreground that they have three decks on both castles, with the top deck on each not going the full length of the one underneath.

Ah-ha ... I'd forgot about the heat-treat step Chuck uses. That is, wind the poly mini-rope around a metal pulley and put in a toaster (or other) over at 350 degrees F for no longer than 5 minutes - then allow to cool on a rack. I will try that. As for linen, many 'old time' ship modelers used a generic type of fly fishing line known as "Old Cuttyhunk", which was mass produced (many different labels and brands, ergo they're now in collections) through the 1940s and available for quite some time afterwards from stock. It's a collector's item now and very expensive, and the thinnest version (something like .015" diameter) is the rarest. It was often white, so for standing rigging it would have been dyed. I've seen some here and there in antique shops still on a reel (for a rod and reel) as a collector's item ... and very $$$. But I handled some of the line, and indeed it was true miniature rope that was very flexible ... as it had to be for fly fishing. I think my old friend used to fish with it back in the day.

'Just imagining ... based on the classic movie with Bogey and Hepburn when the Queen went out to torpedo the Louisa. Some choose to model 'imaginary' ships - like Captain Jack's Black Pearl (as seen in the movie), the H.M.S. Surprise as seen in Master and Commander, the first Disney Nemo's Nautilus - complete with giant squid, and even (on this forum) a cartoon Asterix boat heading for a Viking ship. It's all up to the whim of the builder. Now I knew a man years ago who built an 18" long version of the African Queen with a working mini steam engine (it was 'lake worthy') as well as a working model sailboat with a 'vertical multi-blade' windmill for propulsion. His name - Richard Derby Elwell - who was on the U.S. fencing team in the 20's that competed in the olympics, a self-employed designer of warehouses and serious fly fisherman who would not hit the streams of Long Island until well into the season when the 'easy fish' were gone and the ranks of fishermen had thinned. Outfitted by Abercromby and Fitch in NYC, he was a rare example of an accomplished gentleman and connoisseur. I was a boarder at his residence in the 70s for one of two semesters of paid internship for the Navy at Grumman Aerospace and worked on the F14, among other projects (they PAID qualified interns in those days, whereas today young hopefuls are free labor 'for the experience'). Perhaps I was just remembering that grand old man, and regretting not availing myself of his mentorship more than I did.

This is a great model. 'Wonder if anyone ever did the Koenigen Louisa and the African Queen as a pair?

Hey Gustav ... want me to 'pimp your ride'? I've long been pondering what to do with the gallery and cupola roofs on the Vasa, since the original has a lot of curved carved sirens (or other figures) mounted for decoration. They are very skinny but still painted. Kits today (1:75 and 1:65) have moulded figures that go all over the model, but the 1:100 old version I've been fooling around never had any. You've seen the military miniatures (HO, N and I've found a few Z for good measure) that have been modified and painted to be 'good enough' for my purposes - as well as the moulded stern piece (from plastic wood formed by a latex mold I made over a plasticine original) that painted up pretty well. Yet the irregularities in my built-up clinker (lapstrake) roofs preclude the application of uniformly molded bits. Rather than leave the roofs plain or try and just paint decoration in, I tried using fine chain - first 'flattening' the chain a bit by using a planishing (flat faced) hammer and a flat steel base. Still, the chain was fiddly to work with (a pain , actually) - and after dong some, I thought of another approach. I braided three pieces of 26 gauge soft beadwork wire from the Admiral's horde (with permission). The starting end was twisted a bit and put in the edge of a vise, so that the 3 strands were tugged into an ordinary flat braid (like braiding hair). Before trimming anywhere, a small amount of regular CA was dabbed on the location (where it 'wicked' into the braided structure) and touched with a little accelerator for a quick cure. The braided strand can be bent as desired and is MUCH easier to work with than the chain. The top end of a section to be applied was pinned into place and a potion of the run was tacked with CA (and accelerator). A dental tool was used to control the amount of glue applied (sort of, since thin CA tends to want to 'run' everywhere), and a dabber applied the accelerator. The next bit of run was then positioned, then glued. The place to cut was glued first (to prevent individual wires from shifting at the cutting point), and the cut end was pushed into place and glued. See photo below. 'Looks 'good enough' for me - so I'll do the other side with braided wire before attaching any painted figures. Now it was so much trouble getting the chain in place that there's NFW I'm even going to think about pulling it off to re-do. I expect that before long there will be a development concerning perhaps the 'next' build I do once the Vasa is done as far as I want to go. But I'll wait until the chicks have hatched before any crowing. It will mean either putting off a clipper build - or perhaps dong one concurrently. That can be a way of doing things on one build while glue cures (or whatever) on the other. That would mean a longer time to the completion of both, but not as long as the time to do each sequentially. Hmmmmm, we'll see. Fair sailing! Johnny

I love the planking with trunnels.

Everything's looking ship shape! Well done !

... SO many Springtime activities and other 'life gets in the way' stuff that I'm not getting much done in the shipyard right now. I thought I'd write a letter to my teenage self - not that he'll ever get to see it, but what the heck. Dear Young Johnny, You can do anything you sets your sights on if you believe in yourself ... except Calculus or advanced Physics - well, other really hard stuff that takes a near genius mind that can recall lots of facts/data easily. And forget excelling at things that require an athlete's body like gymnastics, high diving, ice skating or any professional sport - you'll hurt your body. You can practice piano many hours a day, but you're going to 'hit a wall' where you just won't get any better - so play keyboard to amuse yourself when no one can hear. Steer clear of trying to run your own business, running for public office or trying to 'change the world' - there is no Field Marshall's baton in your foot soldier's pack because you're an 'expendable', like all the other grunts. Focus on achievable things like safe driving, tending house plants, cooking pasta in the right amount, caring for your family ... stuff like that. Don't despair, for with time and some luck you will achieve competence in a limited number of ordinary, unremarkable things that you can do almost every day with repeatable results. You'll always be the 'star' of your own sitcom, but avoid speaking to the imaginary TV audience ... people will think you're strange. You can write that novel, but do it for your own satisfaction since no one will line up to read it. Save some money along the way - you're going to need it later. Yours truly, Old Johnny

I'm betting that polyester thread is a good bet for making scale rope - don't forget that 'stretching-out' the rope is an important part of the process, just as it is for making full-size rope (which I've done for demos at historic sites). Cotton and silk can be subject to deterioration over time, as I've seen with a model ship my father made 70 years ago and now needs re-gigging (he used cotton). Flax is approved in the 'rules' for museum quality models, but flax thread fine enough is hard to find and costly. Although high quality polyester (Mettler or Guterman) has not passed the 'test of time' yet, I'm betting it will.

Steven, I've been looking into the history of the HGaD (my acronym, to avoid confusing it with the Great Henry built by his father Henry the 7th in 1488 or the earlier Henry Grace), and the sources available have high concurrence that the re-build in 1536 lowered the stern castle (and possibly the fore castle) enough to lessen her tendency to heel (a bit top heavy?), thus reducing her tonnage burthen to around 1,000 ... AND added top gallants. So perhaps her former tonnage was something like 1,200. Now Henry the 8th may have built the HGaD (launched 1514, finished 1515) to counter the Scottish Great Michael, who's stats vary considerably depending on which source one looks at, and many estimate the tonnage at around 1,000, possibly more - a 'Carrack on steroids' and the largest built at the time. With an ego like Henry's (perhaps a megalomaniac), he had to outdo the Scots. The painting of the embarkation of Henry the 8th (for the Field of Cloth of Gold, an event that occurred in 1520 - although the painting had to have been done after the fact) is truly remarkable and in quality is comparable to the painting of the 1521 voyage of the marriage party depicting similar ships. Both commemorative paintings most likely were painted within a couple years of the events portrayed, given the importance of the events and the PR value of painting them. Neither work shows any top gallant sails, nor do any other depictions I've seen dated before or no later than the 1520s. So if one were to attempt a model of the tipsy HGaD "pre 1536", might that have (apart from an extra deck on the castles) only yards for main sails and top sails (plus lateens on the 2 masts astern)? I note that in both of the above-mentioned paintings, there are shields around the tops of the castles. This would be a practical feature to protect archers or hand gunners on the top decks from anti-personnel fire of various types from opposing ships. Any thoughts on this? Johnny

What look like 'gun ports' on clipper ships function as 'water doors'. Clippers navigating rough seas (like around the Horn) had big waves crash over the gunwale and onto the desk. Scuppers alone would not drain such huge quantities fast enough, but the weight of the water would push open the water doors and drain out. The weight of the doors (after drainage) would shut them again, and any wave hitting the side of the ship would only push the door against it's recess - thus keeping water out ... it was a 'one-way' system. This is a detail that can either be left out, or perhaps simulated by gluing thin veneer squares at the places where the doors were, then painting over black.

You chose a great scale for the CS ... not as "small" as in 1:96 (but even so the 1:96 is a decent size for a ship model of CS - what, something like 34" stem to stern?), but not as large as 1:70 or 1:75 kit ( about 46"?). 1:84 should be 'in between' at about 40", and a little easier to deal with some of the small details. Using blocks and such slightly larger than 'strict' scale will still look OK.

A couple things I've observed on the Revell CS - the larger spars have (imitation) sheave openings at the ends where you can pass sheet chain through. Some have replaced wood yard for plastic and made tiny metal sheave units mounted to the front side of the yard end - which is fine, but at 1:96 I'm thinking of using at least the thicker molded yards as provided and still use the 'in the yard' sheaves, as such a method was not uncommon. (Since the Thermie was sunk, no one knows the rigging details of her - so when I get around to building there is more leeway to use various documented rigging options.) At the foot of the masts of the Cutty, there is a 'crown-like' collar of eyes that blocks for hauling sheets hook onto - and making them seems challenging at 1:96 (don't know how one would attempt it for 1:168 per Hackney). I'm of a mind to just install deck eyes around the masts for the same purpose, and pre-install blocks as mentioned in my previous post. Another MSW member suggest installing standing rigging from the mizzen mast forward (instead of front to back), and there is always Rob's technique (and others have also done so) of having mast sockets in a piece of wood so that test fitting and dry assembly of the masts can be done off the model - then placed (whether glued or not) into the sockets on the model. Hmmmm, come to think about it - perhaps one could consider not 'gluing' the masts at deck level (since they appear to be 'positively located' as molded). Once the standing rigging for the first level is in place, the masts won't be able to come out ... yet there still is the practicality of being able to remove them for repair, rework or modification. (You never know.) Having 'reversibility' can be a real advantage in a pinch. And once the plastic is "welded" by glue, going back becomes a virtual impossibility.

The assembly order of certain details take some thought beforehand. For instance, having perused (and I'll have to do a lot more of it) the Hackney book - there are some halyards that end in a double block going to one side or another near belaying pins for the associated mast. There is a corresponding double block below, whose becket is held by a deck eye below the pin rack. A line from the becket on the lower end of the halyard block is sheaved through the deck block, back to the halyard block - then down and back for a second sheave before going to the assigned belaying pin. I occurs to me that said deck block would be best installed on the deck even before the deck is cemented in place, as getting one's fingers or tools into tight spaces can be a pain. The blocks on the original are 'internally stropped', which is why some have used the plastic ones in the kit (even though out of scale). The fully scale blocks form HIS seem a little 'too small' for my skills, so I'll probably compromise with something 'in between' out of wood and strop them with line. The deck block could be tied to the intended deck eye, and I'll use a commercially available one (one source is the parts department of Model Expo ... their new catalog has NO Black Pearl or pirated kits that I can see), or just make what I need and put the end of the deck eye clear through a small hole drilled in the deck so the end can be bent and epoxied underneath. The halyard block can be laced to the deck block (again, before deck installation - and this goes for several such block arrangements extant on the CS) with extra line temporarily wrapped around the lines running between the two blocks. Much later, when the masting and sparring are being assembled as they would when building an actual ship, the end of the respective halyard can be put (stropped) around said halyard block - the method I use is to tie a small 'hangman's noose, then pull tight, cement and trim. The final adjustment would them be made on the sheaving line already between the two blocks - which is then belayed, with a 'fake' coil places over the respective pin. 'Seems like a lot of thought to go into this particular detail, but it will make the rigging process less frustrating in the long run - having pre-thought out every move ahead of time instead of just 'winging it' as I go along. I note that there are also blocks mounted on the pin rail itself in places. Every line has a purpose, so I have to learn them all. This is why (after much pondering) I'm eschewing sails altogether ... they 'hide' a lot of the model anyway. Without sails, bunt lines can either be 'stopped' by a stop knot at the bunt blocks - or omitted entirely. Underhill shows how a luff line can be combined with the outer bunt line (bunt bent to leech p.169, fig.151 ... IF one wants to include sails) and two bunt lines can be rigged so that they are controlled by a SINGLE resultant line whether sails are included or not (p.163, fig.150) that goes down to a belaying pin at deck level ... a compromise that will reduce the 'spaghetti' effect of all separate lines while maintaining authenticity. Yup, more advance study and planning.

Masts are sections of tree trunk, of course - so the growth rings (harder than the early season wood in between) encircle throughout. Take a look at the 'end view' (or a stump) of a newly felled tree and you'll see what I'm talking about. a living tree has an awful lot of water content, and much of this is lost once cut as it dries ... but there is always a water content (unless left in the desert, and even then there is a little). Wood shrinks width-wise as it dries, so the further out in circumference the greater chance of a serious crack developing - which will run up and down. Oiling dried wood helps lessen the travel of moisture in or out of wood in the short term - furniture makers know all about this. Strong forces can bend and snap a mast, and if you simulate this by snapping a branch often large 'shivers' connected to one piece or another can be produced. Wrapping rope around in bands will significantly reinforce the mast section against snapping. Perhaps you've seen period cannon with iron or steel 'bands' around the barrel ... they also do reinforcing.

'Seems for once I'm 'first in line' ... so contact me by e-mail per the info in my private message. Fair sailing, Johnny

I've just re-read your entire log, and find it to be highly instructive ... I'm still mulling over how to deal with the Revell 1:96 Thermie kit - that is with modifications to make the deck layout closer to the original (once I've finished my present project). Everything about building the hull, painting, etc. is food for thought. I recommend leaving the log on MSW as a benefit to those with an eye on building these kits. Hull building is one phase ... and the rigging of a ship appears to be a whole different trip - perhaps more demanding than building the hull in phase one. I'm half dreading and half anticipating the challenge when I get to phase 2 of my build. Edison said, "Invention is 1 percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration". Yogi Berra said, "Baseball is 90 percent mental ... the other half is physical". I suppose both may apply to ship modeling.

I find myself constantly repairing one snafu or another. Patience and persistence can go a long way in this hobby ... as well as imagination. Then there was a time (as a teen) when my all-wood Cutty Sark (can't remember if it was from Sterling or a Scientific kit)that happened not to be in a case received a direct hit from my kid cousin's shoe that he'd thrown across the room with great force (trying to hit my sibling). The damage done by the shoe was further increased by the model's 6 foot fall to the floor. Of course I was stunned and dismayed, but did I recon the ship a total loss? ... well ... yes, regrettably - and the teenage 'me' just didn't have the heart to try and rebuild all the masting and rigging (the adult 'me' would have). Incidentally, that cousin did so much damage around the house - such as ruining my father's 'war trophies' of an Orisaka rifle and a Japanese Naval Officer's sword (with a samurai blade) ... as well as attempting to burn our house down, that his parents were told in no uncertain terms that the bad boy would never again be allowed to visit (perhaps at least until he'd 'grow up' quite a bit). Hmmmm, parents tend to defend their offspring 'no matter what' they've done - so none of them ever visited again. I plan to make cases with acrylic panels (glass is heavy and can break) for things I'm working on these days that won't fit into a hutch with glass framed doors.