Snug Harbor Johnny

Superb !

Fair question but ... everything is relative. $16 vs $30 is large expressed as a percentage, but then $14 does not represent a 'lot' of money per se. You obviously want the best tool for the purpose, so if the cheaper one turned out to have disadvantages - you wouldn't be happy with it compared to the other. Soooo ... the $14 question is Which one is better? Now below I've pasted a Youtube where a guy compares both. He starts out noting what he considers to be the main deficiency of the Tandy when it comes to cutting thick leather strap - and that is breakage of blade or wood with use. He manipulates a sketch (cleverly) to demonstrate the differences - but the wood on either side of the blade on the cheaper tool is exaggerated in the sketch when compared to what is actually on the tool. If you watch the whole video, his opinion keeps going DOWN concerning the cheaper tool due to a couple of things: 1.) the possible gap (to accommodate different stock thicknesses) is WAY less on the cheaper one. 2.) even though the end knob looks better than the metal thumbscrew of the Tandy, there is almost NO adjustment on the cheaper one. 3.) the blades on the cheaper one are non-standard, with no indication of haw to get replacements (although they can doubtlessly be honed as needed) 4.) He doesn't like the 'feel' and lighter weight of the cheaper one - probably like comparing hickory with something more akin to basswood. His conclusion is that the Tandy is superior. 5.) The cheaper blade sticks out a lot both top and bottom ... and this seems dangerous - at least a slip could cause a nasty cut ... whereas the Tandy blade is entirely covered by the reinforcing plates. 6.) the end screws are easily adjusted with a screw driver on the Tandy, compared to the the need of a hex key (not included0 for the cheaper tool. At the end of the video, the guy says he wants to send the cheaper one back. Now I realize that the application at hand is to trim the width of relative thin stock used for planking ... so having a more limited thickness capability on the cheaper tool would not be a disadvantage compared to a user who wants to cut thicker leather. I also note that there will be far less force to trim planking stock than to cut thick leather, so the wood in question on the tool would not be likely to break. The available wood on my own stript-easer is even LESS, but there has never been breakage. I also note that there are metal re-enforcing plates top and bottom on the Tandy tool, that is adjusted, make breakage unlikely. Once can just as easily glue reinforcement wood to the leading edge of the Tandy jig if one has any doubt. The Tandy blades have available replacements (if one does not want to hone occasionally), and they are not as wide as the cheaper ones. This will permit the mounting of the Tandy blade at an angle (before tightening), which I've always found to be an advantage. Since the application at hand is for thinner stock, so it is unlikely that blade breakage will be a problem. After all, the guy in the video was running LOTs of 1/4" belt leather (for commercial purposes) through the Tandy tool. If the greater width of the cheaper blade would hold up better for thick stock, the inability of getting a thicker gap between the horizontal pieces effectively nullify any advantage in maximum blade strength. As for me, I'm going to try the Tandy. But each individual should make a choice based on their own tastes and preferences. https://www.google.com/search?q=reviews+of+craftool+strap+cutter&rlz=1C5MACD_enUS1049US1049&oq=reviews+of+craftool+starp&aqs=chrome.3.69i57j33i10i160l2j33i299j33i671.11968j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:484cd395,vid:y4ATkSRR-Nw,st:0

Tandy leather used to offer a tool called the 'stript - ease' - pictured below (I still use mine). It is for cutting uniform width strips of leather - and if you start with either a round (or rounded edge oblong) piece of leather, you can make a very long continuous thong or even pretty narrow lacing leather. The second picture shows how I set the bit of razor blade at an angle ... seemed to cut better - like using a block plane at a 'skewed' angle. This tool is not available (leather crafts are not as popular as they once were - and Tandy stores were close when they went to online sales), and one might be on eBay ... However, there IS a strip cutter online on the Tandy site called the Craftool Strip Cutter (third picture below). It might actually be a better tool, since there is a pair of outriggers (adjustable for the stock thickness). This may keep the stock from lifting up, which I find happens with the original cutter - depending on how one holds the stock. With either jig, for cutting wood, you have to be mindful how the grain runs - and only trim the side where any grain rises away from the cutter. That way, it won't 'dig in' to the stock as it may if one cuts into 'diving' grain. This also can happen if too much wood is being trimmed (trying to save time). Marking the strip stocks to be narrowed with a penciled arrow can prevent accidentally reversin the stock from the way you need to draw it through. The way to narrow wood strips is to take several light cuts, where all the stock you want narrowed is passed through the jig taking off a quarter mm or so. Then adjust to take a little more, until you get the strip width wanted. I used to teach handicrafts at a summer camp, so I inventoried the cutter as a 'stripteaser' ... Johnny

Heck, when confused I'll often just 'wing it' and use whatever is handy to make a project 'look right'.

A SUPER build ! The lighting is effective. I can picture this display in a museum ...

A very nice build !

'Looks like your Bluenose in the background is coming along nicely! ... Love it !

Take your time, and measure twice - cut once. BTW, the early version of the kit are molded better (fit-wise, etc.) and don't have the Revell Logo on the deck ... I suppose one can skim the characters off and scribe a little wood grain to camouflage.

You have an excellent library. I can recommend 'Masting and Rigging the Clipper Ship & Ocean Carrier' by Harold A. Underhill. I happen to have a duplicate copy if you'd like to add it to your collection.

I've seen several builds that began with a partially constructed ship. So why not start one. Besides, you've got past the grunt-work of framing and planking, and there are plenty of builds that go into these. Now you're into the 'interesting' part.

The lower the plane angle, the finer the cutting (at least I found it so). Also, I like to 'skew' the plane at an angle where possible. But the SINGLE most important thing that can improve planing performance is a super sharp cutter. The Goingmake system I got at Woodcraft (and there are other sharpening jigs available there and elsewhere) makes it easy ... especially getting an extra 2 degree 'micro bevel' after the primary angle is achieved. I use graded Japanese water stones (true them after use by working them against each other) and an ultra fine ceramic honing stone. THEN be sure to strop the edge (for burr removal) on 1/4" thick shoe leather. The blade will be as sharp as a surgeon's scalpel, so be careful how you handle it. You want to cut the wood, not yourself.

THAT'S why it always seems so cold in hospitals, and patients seldom get an adequate explanation ... just an extra blanket. As a hospital worker, I know that for every 10 degrees in delta T downwards - microbial activity goes down by half. Disease control and the prevention of nosocomial infections are a major concern, so the temperature is intentionally set to the cool side for everyone's benefit. Where do really sick people go? ... to the hospital, of course. Being a Pharmacy Technician (thought, in the hierarchy, to be above housekeeping and perhaps on par with Nurses' Aides) during the height of the pandemic, we only had paper masks, hand washing and fresh scrubs to defend ourselves - since the better masks were allocated to Doctors and Nurses. We still are regularly exposed to all sorts of 'bugs', e.g., tuberculosis, resistant bacteria, hepatitis, noro-virus and other 'tummy bugs', flu, colds and worse. So we don't mind 'chilling out' for the sake of disease control.

There are builds where the ratlines are sewn (just passed with a fine needle) through the shrouds. I've seen the ends treated with a tiny bit of CA, then clipped ... but that still leaves a little 'whisker' poking beyond - and the same thing happens if a clove hitch is used on the end. Sine those stubbly bits are not really attractive, the solution is to use a "cow hitch" - which points the very end inward, and back to the direction of the ratline just secured. That way, when the very end is trimmed, the stubble points inward on the back side (if the hitch is tied correctly), so it 'disappears' from view.

'Been thinking about the difficulties of stropping (and using) smaller blocks at 1:96 scale - still popular, especially with some classic kits - and also at 1:124 - and there are many old wood kits and still some contemporary wood kits made at 1:124, or thereabouts. Not that it can't be done, as those having high dexterity and skill have made amazing models at even smaller scales. But the 'rest of us' generally go at least a little out-of-scale on some items, and blocks/deadeyes are among them. Yet, as the scale of a model becomes larger (e.g., there are many fine kits made at around 1:72), the need to enlarge certain components relaxes somewhat. This suggests to me some sort of 'sliding scale' (a pharmacy term) whereby the percentage of enlargement is rationally increased for smaller kits, and decreases as the scale gets larger - where its easier to handle the fiddly bits. I note also that blocks from a wide variety of sources tend to come in 'even' millimeter sizes, although there are some half-sizes available, e.g. 2.5mm (and a couple others). In a Bluenose 2 by Travis (underway), he notes that in certain scales, larger blocks simply 'look better' to the observer, and I agree with him. Model building is an art, so some artistic license comes in handy. To make a long story short, I've drawn up a matrix (for me, at least) showing a few block or deadeye sizes (full size in inches), the size they'd be at various scales if they were 'true to scale', and modified sizes to help old modelers (like me) where the percentage of enlargement is reduced as the scale gets larger - until "par value" is reached. There has been slight rounding of values as needed. It can be a little confusing to read (lines help), so a second summary appears below the first as a suggestion for block or deadeye selection on a sliding scale.

The guy in the video uses LOTS of glue, but (no doubt) one can use somewhat less for 2nd planking with relatively thin stock. I intend to try this in future on a fully faired 1st planked hull - or one that has 100% blocking between bulkheads .... or even on a solid hull.

The single planking on my old 1:100 Vasa was mahogany (as many vintage Billings kits were supplied with). Mahogany is not as dark as American or English walnut, and has a richer tone than most cherry stock. (Old-growth heartwood cherry may be comparable to mahogany, but I found that cherry can be prone to splitting more than some other woods.) My favorite is new-world mahogany (although pricier now, and harder to obtain) although some don't like the grain size (not as pronounced as oak can be), but that depend on how the wood is cut. There are some walnuts (not sure of the origin) that are a lighter brown, but any of them can go a lot darker if oil or almost any finish is applied.

OMGosh, Travis - you've hit upon another method of doing ratlines that might not have struck you as such ... but when I saw the photo showing your green (starboard) light right above the deadeyes, I pictured the application I'll describe. Rather than have a paper template behind the shrouds to follow, and that means often making them for port and starboard (due the the reversed angle), and are often different for each mast and level aloft ... One can take a piece of thin, bendable metal (thin lead sheet, or copper) that is the thickness of the space to be between each successive ratline, and bend one end over to make a clip, so to speak (whether one is right handed or left handed would determine doesn't matter, since the clip can be turned upside down to put it on the 'other' side, as desired). The clip can be longer than needed (to some degree). Clip it on one side at the outer shroud, and bend the other end over the outer shroud on the opposite side. It would begin by resting on that horizontal bar over the deadeyes. Then a ratline is attached to whatever shrouds are involved, along the line of the top of the metal jig. Then unbend one end (eventually there will be metal fatigue, but if so, simply bend a new strip). The strip can be easily cut, since it is thin, on a 'guillotine-bar' (hinged on one end) paper cutter found in a stationery store. Slide the jig off the still bent end. Move the strip above the ratline just tied, slide the jig on and bend the opposite end. The jig will rest on the ratline previously tied. Going 'up the ladder', one ratline at a time, will give evenly spaced, horizontal ratlines. Hmmmm, it just occurred to me that you don't have to use metal at all, but just apply a piece of "painters' tape" of the width you want (one can always use an X-acto around the edge of roll of tape to get the desired width) on the shrouds. The tape will stick (but not aggressively) to the shrouds, and one ties or sews a ratline using the top edge of the tape as the guide. Then remove the tape and move above the ratline just tied. EUREKA ! Moving the tape a little from side to side before 'sticking' means that one piece can be used a number of times before it sticks less securely. Then just pull off a fresh piece of tape from the roll and you're good to go. "Oh frabjous day! Callooh! Callay! He chortled in his joy." (from The Jabberwocky) Another matter ... I've obtained a copy of the L.B. Jenson 'Bluenose II' book - and it far exceeded my expectation. It appears that his drawings and specs are of the 1963 'as built' version of the Bluenose 2 - his work was commissioned in 1970 (done over 3 1/2 years) and first published in 1975 with the imprimatur of the first owner (who sold the craft to the Province in 1971 for $1 - Canadian). There was a LOT of controversy over the EXPENSIVE 'rebuild' that went over-long and over-budget (American were blamed by some due to our seaworthy laws, yet similar vessels have been built for a third or less of the aprox. $20 Million Canadian effort). There were changes made (just compare the sterns seen from astern, for one), and many say that the original Bluenose 2 was effectively 'put through a shredder', and the virtually all-new construction should have been named Bluenose 3. So perhaps the A.L. kit built "out of the box" is closer to the present ship afloat as rebuilt. (Heck, the U.S.S. Constellation was 'refurbished' in the 1850s (in a trick to get Congressional funding) ... not a new ship at all ... just fixing up an old one ... Using the Jenson Book to get closer to the 1963 version is the way I'd like to go. Of course, another builder might want to portray the ship afloat at the present time - and use the many photos available to help in that regard. Almost all ships go through 'phases', and one can choose whatever time, place and/or configuration that one can document.

Perhaps using less wide (simulating scale) planks might help. An 8" plank (about 200mm) would be 2mm wide at 1:100 ... and 2.7mm wide at 1:75 (3mm would be fine).

Standing rigging should be black 'for sure' (or at least a dark brown to simulate a dark oil treatment). Note that the H.M.S. Victory is also a 'museum ship' in dry dock, and they also have tan ratlines and deadeye lacings on it ... perhaps this is the reason that there are many Victory (and other) builds 'copying' this practice, thinking that it 'must be' authentic if its on the ship today. As for running rigging, I prefer a 'definite' (medium) tan or light brown color, because if it is a light tan it tends to photograph as 'white' ... too much contrast. White rigging line is 'right out'.

Soft wire sold at hobby stores is indeed bendable, but also 'unbendable' if later put under tension. Then again, with the flexibility of some yards and masts, the rigging has to have minimal tension to avoid bending.

I suppose a place to store an Admiralty model in progress would be a roll-top desk. You can find them at thrift or antique stores.

Welcome to the forum, mate !!! These's much to see and learn, so dive in and enjoy!

There's a racing dog like that on the sides of Greyhound buses ... better in 3D.

When I planked Vasa, I tapered BOTH edges the way barrel staves are tapered (apparently you can 'get away' with a curved taper on one side) ... for can't a ship hull be compared to an oversized barrel? This is NOT a 'straight' taper, but one that is curved (also like a barrel). But the lines of the ship's hull vary from zone to zone, more complicated than a barrel. So just drawing a straight line will give you thin gaps ... you need the 'tick marks' to give you the needed width at each bulkhead (or frame). If just drawing a straight line from max to min width worked, Chuck would have made the video that way. Believe me, he knows what he's doing.

An item related to Australia ... a country I'd love to visit (NZ also) Commercial steam lasted over a decade longer than it did in the U.S. ...