Snug Harbor Johnny

You never know where something useful might turn up ... like not long ago I came across the finest chain I've yet to see in a 25" 'multi chain' necklace (made in China) in an ordinary sewing store. It was bright silver in appearance, but easy enough to paint - and fine enough for the sheet chain on the yards of a 1:96 Cutty Sark or Thermopylae. Once COVID is under wraps, there will be Bead Shows again - and some of the dealers have stock in the real tiny chain.

The mermaids were painted and the prow assembled. Then I had to carve a lion - once again, the basswood is not suited to fine carving, and I'm no Michaelangelo ... but he come out 'good enough' for my purposes. The prow is trial fitted, and hold on by a friction fit on the keel stub. This might be wise because there is a lot more to construct in this area, and it could be prone to breakage in the process. My photos don't have quite the focus, but it is an inexpensive, borrowed camera and I'm an amateur when it comes to photography.

I've been 'dragging' pictures from my camera (once plugged into a USB port on my PC) onto the desktop (these are copies of what was photographed with the camera). Then as I add to my log, I just 'drag' the photo on the desktop into the space just below the text I entered, and release. Shazzam, a copy of the picture them appears on the log below the text! That seems pretty easy. Then I drag the desktop icon of the photo onto the file icon I've left on the desktop, and the picture then is moved from the desktop into my file - that helps keep the desktop from getting cluttered.

I though to marry a bow extension to the existing wood, and cut basswood stock with a dremel-type jig saw into three pieces. So I'm adding said saw, plus a jeweler's saw, small files and miniature carving tools (for duck decoys?) to the previously mentioned list of tools - as well as whatever clamps are handy. I decided to try and carve the mermaid (from the original), plus a second one to make a pair (my idea - hey, the old kit as it is has a number of differences with the state of knowledge today - so the whole thing is a learning experience.) As it turns out, basswood is harder to carve tiny things out of, since it is relatively soft (but not so much as balsa). Fruitwood would be better, or even maple, so sharp tools are a must. Below is a closer shot of my 'mermaids', and small wood fibers are also a problem. I used a sealer to help quell fibers, and will paint the figures before proceeding.

A big 'Ah-hah' moment ... I found a small folded paper from my Billings kit WITH a stated scale - 1:100 by gosh. So my 'calculated' scale of 1:105 was off by 5% (not too bad), and I have edited my title to reflect the manufacturer's stated scale seen in the picture below. I have also found some small figures at attention in a local hobby store that can be modified for use on my build ... carving the tiny ones would be quite difficult. The larger model kits at 1:65 have molded sets of figures to work with, and they are big models indeed. I'll try to focus on fixing the bow as the next phase.

There is a good view of the stern profile in one picture ... 'reminds me of the Thermopylae stern. A clean angle seems more graceful that other profiles that have near vertical portions.

In one photo I notice that her stern angle is very nice - and reminds me a little of the Thermopylae, although the "Big T" has a slightly lower angle. I prefer the Glory and Thermie look of the sterns much more than the Cutty Sark and other clippers with near vertical portions in the stern.

Now that the glue has set I have to fit (trim) the old forecastle deck pieces to fit inside the bulwark. The first pic show this material. The pieces were damaged somewhat by prying them off so I've glues some reinforcement. I realize now that this sort of planking is meant to be glued to a false deck beneath ... I've got to play the hand I'm dealt with this model. The next pic show the installed decking (with some patching done), and it didn't come out all that bad. ... 'Good enough' for me on this project, which is more of a 'salvage'. I remember the movie 'Cool Runnings' about the Jamaican Olympic bobsled team. The coach told them, "Winning a medal is a wonderful thing. But if you're not good enough without the medal, then you won't be good enough with it." What Island you from, man?

Ahoy! After a couple days thinking of the next step, putting in a block of wood to drill (after decking) a hole for the fore mast would be good. Also, to re-mount the decking that used to be a forecastle deck onto the weather deck (upper gun deck), I'd have to glue support strips on the sides, and a couple of small pieces of fill elsewhere. Below is a pic, and the glue is drying now. I'm using Titebond (aliphatic resin) since it has a reasonable work time to allow for re-positioning, yet 'tacks' readily after 5 - 10 minutes. I have a bottle where the glue has lost water through evaporation, producing a much thicker glue that 'tacks' in about 3 minutes. The planking wood Billings used for this kit is indeed mahogany, as many of their 'old' kits had. Mahogany does not bend as readily as other types of wood, but it has natural coloring and does not need staining. Actually, I've seen a few model ships where the stain was overdone, at least some seemed too dark. Wood like mahogany, some oaks and exotics or black walnut (my favorite) they can be left 'natural' or, if desired, given a SPARING rub with boiled linseed oil thinned with turpentine - both natural products available for many centuries. I'm surprised how well I was able to plank the hull all those years ago. As I recall the wood was soaked a little in boiling water and I used my teeth as a 'bending jig'. The 'mouth feel' and sensitivity is such that I could sense when small fibers were starting to break, so I could avoid over-stressing. If one avoids outright breaks and minimizes gaps (regardless whether one is single-planking or planking over an underlayment), the model will look well enough to please. Once I got over my trepidation about tearing-out the forecastle deck, I dove right in (with care). The tools used so far have been simple: an X-Acto knife, a model train track saw, tweezers, straight and curved files, a variable speed Dremel-like tool (and attachment set) with a foot control (found at Harbor freight ... how appropriate) and sandpaper. The work is not that hard, as long as one has thought out the steps to take beforehand. THAT is where the new modeler is at a disadvantage. Without much prior experience, it is hard to plan out the needed steps in sequence. One often has to learn by mistakes, hopefully most of those can be corrected. Patience is a virtue in this hobby. Yet studying the same or similar builds in this Forum can help make-up for lack of first hand experience. I suspect that the biggest challenge further down the road will be the carvings. There are no available ones for the Wasa in 1:100 scale, and even so they would be expensive. I may try to find about the right size figures made for small dioramas that old-school war gamers use, since many of the Wasa carvings represent men-at-arms, roman emperors and kings. Otherwise, I'll have to try my hand at chip carving on a small scale. I'm using a piece of headgear with a light and drop-down magnifiers of varying strength to compensate for 'senior vision' ... and I've had prior cataract surgery to replace the lenses in both eyes, so I no longer have 'adaptive' vision. BTW, I found the mast pieces and spars, and Billings provided them properly tapered in the kit ... a pleasant realization.

Its fascinating to follow this log ... some real dedication there. Right now I'm gleaning what I can from available Thermopylae photos - another ship with quite a history.

In some locations there are single-owner shops that carry hardwoods and 'exotics'. You have to google several ways and look at the maps expanded to your drivable range ... then check them out. Some non-chain hobby stores have old stock laying around. I knew one that I scored some materials at, then it nearly went out of existence when the owner wanted to get out of the business - but one of his sons took it over, and has moved twice as he changed the business to accommodate changing hobby fads, etc. There is less stuff there now, but still a local source for basic hobby building.

Ahoy! So I found the broken part meant to hold the brass half-cannon down in the hold, so now its glued with epoxy back onto the false carriage as seen in the picture below. Sloppy, yes, but won't show from the outside - as seen in the next picture. Smalls steps, but what's the rush. BTW, a friend sent me a couple of pictures I haven't seen in decades. Back in College (I think I was 20 at the time) I built a 12' long three-man Viking dinghy, Two could row while one manned the steerboard (on the starboard side, of course). It also had a mast and square sail when the wind was favorable. The strakes were white pine bent over plywood frames, and it was carvel built. I painted it black on the outside and red inside. It had slow leaks, but nothing that couldn't be handled by a trusty bilge pump. The first shot is on display at the library of the University of Maryland with repro. Viking gear in the cases. The Herjan (the boat's name) was used in conjunction with the See Earn (Sea Eagle) - a converted surplus Navy Whaleboat that our Ship's Company turned into a Viking ship (28' ?) - perhaps more like a small knarr than a raider - that plied the Severn River from the Valentine Creek down to Annapolis, MD. Since the Herjan (aka 'short ship') was used for shore relief, some called it the 'John Boat' or alternatively the 'Half Moon'.

Want to see an ancient Greek Solar System earth-centered model? Try Googling the Antikythera Mechanism and see what comes up. There have been reproductions of this incredible device that account for all observed lunar and planetary motions as seen from Earth. The main 'flaw' is that the models accuracy for Mars can be off at times by as much as 30 degrees, The other planets are very close and the moon is 'spot on'.

The 1956 repair cost of $210 is equivalent to about $2,500 today. Since the failures in the interim are similar to the earlier failures, and due to the deterioration of the oldest (original?) rigging left on the model (reportedly apt to crumble into bits if touched) - perhaps the best restorative efforts should focus on a more secure attachment (reinforcement by unseen drilled wire?) of the parts apt to break in future, as well as replacing all rigging with durable material (not sure exactly what that should be). I'd expect that an investment of $2,500 today in a 'longer-term' fix would be a good investment for the owner, since the auction value of a properly restored antique bone model would be at least double that above what it would bring in the present sorry state. Any serious buyer would figure on an expensive repair, and would lower their maximum bid accordingly.

Ahoy, mates! Well I've had the benefit of some feedback, and I've decided to take the plunge (walk the plank?) and try to cobble my old (and 'dated') BB kit to more closely resemble the 1628 Wasa known today, thanks to the amazing amount of original material recovered and preserved (95% of what is on display in Stockholm) and the unsurpassed conservatorship of marine scholars. That means, yes, taking the route of cutting away the forecastle deck on the model. As mentioned before, I don't fault the manufacturer since the ca. 1970 kit was based on very limited data compared to what is known today. Anyonecoming by any earlier version of a Wasa kit can see the superb level of craftsmanship exhibited on Model Ship World, and use that as a basis for making appropriate corrections. So first I pried off that deck to remind myself of what lay underneath Yup - bulkheads, stringers and a (too small) piece of balsa meant to be drilled into for the fore mast. You can see the toothpick ends (representing treenails from the outside) and the wee bit of false decking to supper wooden mounts for the turned brass half-cannons that will be seen from the outside ... that seemed to be a good enough arrangement. Then I took metal cutting wheel on an equivalent to a variable speed Dremel to slice away what needed to be sliced away. I also cut down the bulwark amidships to resemble how the original ship has been reconstructed. There's plenty more to do, but I have to be careful how and what that should be ... more pics will follow in time. BTW the model hull measures 19" in length, compared to an approximate hull length of 166' on the prototype (226' "sparred" length that includes the jutting beak and bowsprit on the original). I state again that whatever I do will be a 'compromise', as there are a number of inaccuracies permanently 'built into' what I have already ... a "legacy" form myself as a well-meaning teenager. Nevertheless, I hope that whatever finished state I can manage will be 'recognizable' as the 1628 Wasa. It is perhaps fortunate that higher education interrupted the work (such as it was), or it would've been finished per the original ca. 1970 drawing (thus 'unmodifiable'). In the above view, one can see a distinctive "bulge" amidships caused by the middle bulkhead being a little too wide in relation to its neighbors (greater tumblehome in that spot?), and this is typical of that kit version. I cannot hope to come close to the level of craftsmanship and accuracy of many models seen on this forum, and I'm not blaming poorer vision and unsteady hands these days either. We shall see ... Fair Sailing! Johny

'Seems the Wasa has had several 'periods' of scholarship. In the early days after she was raised, Billings put out a kit where they made a stab at 'filling in the blanks' (and there were many then) - perhaps influenced by another Wasa built a century later and their own version of the second Norske Love (also 18thc.) ... there very one I'm trying to rectify now (which makes me glad I didn't do more work on it since th e70s). As more pieces were recovered, preserve and fit together in a giant 'jigsaw' puzzle, more correct versions came out and a common opinion was that the original Wasa had a blue stern and gilded carvings ... and there is a lot of artwork and also models built that way. Curent scholarship favors wide use of red pigment (apparently blue was hard to make and costly) and the carvings were polychrome. There is a 1/10 scale model (with red paint) on display with the original ship in Stockholm, and as it would probably be a good idea to take their lead.

As Kirill4 noted, the lines are different - but that is how the 'old' (first issue) Billings kit was, and as teen in the 70s I didn't know any better than to try and follow the plans provided with the kit. (My Dad gave it as a gift, presumably to keep my busy - which it did for some time.) In the intervening decades Billings radically changed and upgraded their Wasa kit as a wealth of information became available. I have a 'legacy' situation and will try to cobble things to be more like the original, ... 'warts and all'. There was indeed another 'Wasa' launched a century later, and a model of that likely influenced the kit manufacturer more than the ivory model of the Norske Love shown above - at least looking at the side view of the original BB drawing. The present aim is to make the best of what I have, since starting over is not an option.

Ahoy Popeye! Thanks for the reply. I opened the box on the Fair American and conclude that it was likely under the water damaged BB Vikingskibbe box. All the plywood for the hull is Really warped ... of course, the pieces can be copied on new stock, as well as increasing the number of bulkheads. However, there is insufficient drop in the keep going aft, per drawing of a nearly identical ship Andrea Doria of the same period . It seems that they were built on the ways so the keel drops at the angle of the ways fro launching but the deck (and waterline) are level. There may be some improvement in the lines as well, so that will essentially mean customizing the hull design - as scratch build. The masts and spars are that of an 18th c. clipper (like the Agilis kit), in that they have royals. Not so with the brigs of the Revolutionary war. The mast/spar stock can be used, but I'll have to research the correct mast architecture (sizes and all), and since the tops are way simplified in the kit that means scratch built. The directions in the kit are scant and the rigging is over simplified - so R.C. Anderson's book will have to provide the details. Hmmmm, since the deadeyes and blocks in the kit are plastic, I'll have to get wood ones elsewhere. Gosh, this turns out to be a scratch build if I want to be close to accurate for that particular ship (captured on the Delaware by the British and re-named), so I won't do that until A.) I'm happy with the Wasa and B.) I've looked into Thermopylae. I've lucked out to get a Revell kit (mostly complete, yet unbuilt) from someone in the forum who passed it on just for the shipping. (The box is damaged, but the components appear to be there.) What I'm considering is to do a wooden hull of the same scale but matching her lines correctly, then using parts from the Revels kit (like the figurehead, pump, wench and the mast/yard components that were steel on the original. The Hulmes model is a guide for how to do the correct deck configuration, and I've ordered a couple books on rigging. Now I have two other kits to compare/contrast. I picked up an Artesania Latina 'San Juan' Spanish galleon not long ago on sale at a local shop (supposedly 1:30, but its more likely to be 1:60 in actuality). I knew that it was a 'simplified' galleon type, but I wanted more materials to use on the Wasa (since a lot of stuff went missing decades ago from what was left of the original box) ... wooden blocks and deadeyes, tiny brass nails, rope, parts that assemble for grating/ladders - and plenty of wood. I'm impressed with the quality of the drawings and instructions (that include some high quality color photos), and can say that it would be a great kit as a first build PRIOR to taking on a Wasa (or Victory for that matter). The hull components are laser cut and appear precise with no fuss. But my Dad left me one other kit that I've just examined closely - an old Mamoli Milano Golden Hind (stated 1:53) kit. Now the materials in the kit are impressive - several sizes an types of deadeyes (round and triangular), single and double blocks - plus all sorts of fittings and a wonderful selection of wood of several species and thicknesses. The hull components are fully separate (not just laser cut but carefully packaged - fully cut out and accurate - ready for assembly. There is attractive painting for the sides of the stern printed by some dort of lithography (very precisely I might add) on a large, wide piece of veneer. The instructions show it being trimmed and applied to the stern above the second planking (this is a double planked kit) in the stern area - probably what should be done by someone learning how to model), but these pieces can also be carefully trimmed (by many successive light cuts with a SHARP ex-acto) into planks to match the thickness of the second planking - so the appearance on the stern can look even better. There are SIX large sheets of drawings (five of them printed on both sides), and aside from some simplifications on this intermediate model, with a little research the kit can be 'mildly' busted into a very nice work indeed. I have forgotten entirely the idea of scrounging material from this fine kit, but fully intend on building the Golden Hind in future (I hope to have at least 20 years of retirement ahead of me) and do it justice. The Artesania kit excels in rigging instructions and pictures, but the Mamoli has better materials and draftsmanship. Both kits, I fear, put the old Steingraber kits to shame ... plastic deadeyes and blocks, hard to cut components, excessive simplification, too much borrowing of design elements from other kits in the line and too few instructions or drawings. I'm learning a lot by viewing build logs on the forum, and will proceed with care - I've delayed this long, so there is no need to rush and certainly no FOMO. Fair sailing ! Johnny

Ahoy Popeye! 'Glad to see your work on this build. I inherited the SAME kit from my father, and I remember quite a few years ago that he had the hull planked and ready for the deck strips to go over the false deck, but somehow in the 'cleanup' some well-meaning people did in his workshop after he passed, the hull was never found and may have been discarded. So I have the box with mast/spar materials, fittings and stuff ... That's just as well since I don't want to make a 'slaver' - or at least a kit that has been identified as such for a long time. I DO have an intact Steingraeber kit for the Fair American, and THAT is one I intend to build. My friend John F. Millar of Williamsburg (an expert in things Colonial and Nautical) said that the model of the Fair American in the Naval Academy Museum in Annapolis has some 'inaccuracies' and he has provided some drawings for me to refer to. Before I take on that, I MUST finish, or at least bring to a greater degree of completion - perhaps as an 'Admiralty' model - the original 70s issue of the BB Wasa my Dad started me building as a teen back then. I have started a build log and would greatly appreciate you taking a look at it and perhaps to give any feedback you care to offer. 'Guess its under build logs of the 1600s (or whatever date range that falls into), but by typing Wasa in the search field, my log should be near the top since I'm not seeing any other current Wasa logs going on right now. There are sure plenty of past logs, and I'm pouring over then like crazy ... I have 40 years of catching-up to do. I sure enjoyed your Thermopylae build, and that is another project I'd like to do sometime - just not at the same scale (1:124). I procured the lines and have scaled them in my computer to produce them in three scales: 1:124 (a tad small), 1:110 and 1:100. I'm leaning to 1:110, but if built in 1:100 it would be comparable to the Revels size. Plenty of time to think on that choice... Fair Sailing! Johnny

Ahoy ! ... I've been doing more homework the past couple weeks, and I've gained more insights (and some 'aha' moments) concerning how to proceed on my 70s version Billings Wasa (original issue) previously pictured. The planking is mahogany, a wood often used by BB back them - and is harder to get these days. An inherited BB kit of a Vikings Skibbe (same vintage, and an improved version is now called the Roar Edge) also uses mahogany for the strakes - but the outlines are merely printed on veneer, as are all the other parts on plywood ... everything would have to be carefully cut out individually and the thin flitch-cut hardwood veneer (1/64" thick) splits like crazy. The kit suffered water damage anyway, so I salvaged materials for other projects from the box. I now have the current Oseberg kit - a well planned laser-cut version - and will glue very thin black walnut veneer to the plywood strakes on the outside so I won't have to apply stain, just a little 'boiled' linseed oil thinned with turpentine - something I've used on furniture and scratch built firelocks many times. The mahogany strakes on my Wasa look just fine and won't need staining. I'm surprised how well the planking turned out (done 45 years ago as a teen). Before putting on any decking, my idea of 'lining' the gun ports (balsa was used and tined darker), putting in strips of 'false gun decks' and making ersatz wood gun carriages to accept the brass 'half cannons' in the kit worked out also. I'd be inclined today to have double planked for better fairing, and would cut gun ports after the first planking slightly smaller than the port to be cut in the second planking, but still employ false deck strips and simplified carriages. That was the good news. I still have to do major surgery to make the stern right, but have a plan which I won't try and describe here - but will show pictures as the process goes forward (slowly, I'd say). Now for the forecastle deck. R.C. Anderson has a lot to say about the ORIGINAL Norske Love launched in 1634 in his book 'The Rigging of Ships in the Days of the Spritsail Topmast 1600 - 1720'. Another source indicated that Captain Henrik Span commanded her in the battle of Koge Bay on July 1st, 1677. She was named for the Norwegian/Danish Coat of Arms and translates as 'Norwegian Law'. A magnificent ivory and silver model of her was made between 1651 and 1654 (while she was extant) by Jacob Jensen Nordmark for Fredrick III, and is still on display in Rosenberg Castle in Copenhagen. An photo in the public domain (from the book) is pasted below. NOW it should be clear why I've studied this near contemporary of the Wasa. The two ships appears almost like twins, although the Danish model (a rare survivor from the 17th c.) shows a single gun deck, with a smattering of lighter guns above ... hence more sea worthiness than the over gunned Wasa. Note the forecastle deck on the Love - something that every period drawing/painting of large warships before and after also have forecastle decks. Whether the piece of ivory 'bridging' the middle of the ship represents canvass shade cloth or some sort of walkway is unclear. Another view of the same model is shown below. BTW, the cost was no object in the commissioning of this model, and the ivory with silver rigging and guns has survived without deterioration that other materials have been subject to. Note also that the OTHER Norske Love built in the 18th c. is a very different ship indeed, with models and model kits made of the later vessel. Now the present conservations of the original Wasa in Stockholm does not have a forecastle deck but one may have been intended, due to the hight of the bulwarks in the forward area. The way the first issue of the BB Wasa is put together internally (not just bulkheads but with fore-and-aft plywood interlocked), the sort of surgery needed to try and cut away the forecastle deck (a logical presumption at the time, considering the 1654 model, contemporary artwork and drawings) and everything already well glued-in (including solid wood to drill the fore mast hole) will be more difficult and messy than what I propose for increasing the height of the stern (which is mostly adding material to build it up). My thoughts are now to leave it and bring everything else into reasonable conformity. After all, building in any particular scale involves at least some compromises (for most builders), and my result should still not be confused with other ships - given the specific heraldry and other features of the stern, plus other distinctive aspects. So far my build site has had a few observers, but no comments as of yet. Perhaps the above arguments might promote a few comments or suggestions. 'Almost forget ... the out-of-scale guns on the forecastle deck already pictured there don't belong - just put there on a whim. The railing to be installed wouldn't take serious gun recoil anyway, so there won't be any.

Crikey, you're taking the 'kit' to a whole new level. What was in the box were resources to make a model as good as 'scratch built'. Makes sense - why re-invent the wheel?

I have crafted several 'heirloom' pieces of furniture made of Honduran mahogany, and the only finish I considered was a traditional French Polish with shellac - and I dissolved my own dry orange shellac flakes in Ethanol, but if you can find Zinnzer orange shellac in an unopened can not more than a year old it will do (they use methanol as the solvent). It takes weeks to slowly build and level enough layers (with a lint-free cloth bag containing absorbent material, then abrading with rottenstone or 600 grit paper when each application has had a day or two to cure) to gain what is known as chatoyancy - a jewel-like luster not unlike cloisonné enamel work. Once finished I applied only a very small amount of paste wax. No 'maintenance' is required - unless someone leaves an alcoholic beverage glass on a horizontal surface that leaves a 'ring'. Then it is a case of a repair to blend out. My 25 year old pieces look as good as the day they were finished, except that the underlying mahogany has darkened naturally with age. BTW, fine furniture should not be exposed to habitual UV radiation (sunlight).

My mom used to say to me, "All things in moderation." ... good words to live by. As with any hobby, do what you're interested in for your own satisfaction - and don't get so carried away that you neglect the other commitments in your life. It was said, "Do not compare yourself to others, for there will always be those greater or lesser than yourself."