shipman

Bob, thanks for your response, I appreciate that. I have the ram removed from the tailstock. I have several spare centres, so I know how long they are. Measuring from the rear of the ram, it's clear there's roughly an inch of metal between the bottom of that hole and the back of the centre, however, as I said, there does appear to be a central 'pusher' pin in there. It's out in my garage soaking in release oil overnight. I have the manuals, but this pin (if that's what it is) isn't illustrated. The exploded diagram in the literature is of the earlier none-flanged ram/spindle, so it may be different. I'm convinced there must be provision to drift this thing out; it may be stuck in there with dried lubricant. I'll go back to it tomorrow and possibly apply a little heat. I'm very aware of possibly damaging parts, hence this cry for help, in an attempt to avoid that I have trawled the net, to no avail and I don't use facebok. Like lots of restoration projects, there's plenty of info telling you what should happen, but often other peoples experience can be the only solution when it doesn't!

Hi guys. I now have 2 Unimat SL lathes and 1 Unimat 3. I've recently been making a dedicated work station, drawers, lamp etc. The first issue I have at my very first step upon stripping and servicing one of the SL's is.. how do you remove a dead centre from the tailstock ram? I've removed the ram. (no corrosion). Inspecting down the hole at the rear, it looks like there's a pin in the middle. Is that correct? All 3 lathes have been in long term dry storage and need to be checked over. There is no rust on the steel parts, but they are obviously 'dull'.

I think I'm correct in remembering that the tall 'baskets' on the stern deck house ('monkey poop') were for the crews use; one contained apples, the other water. I assume they were at that location so the captain could monitor their consumption. They would have been strapped to the deck. The ones at the break of the poop were fire buckets, much like the leather ones on the 'Victory'.

As I understand it, many of the Maritime Museum models are in storage at Chatham Historic Dockyard, with a selection on display in the public areas. Both organisations allow supervised access to specific models upon request, by appointment. It would seem the Science Museums collection is also in storage. However, several 'modern' builders models (HMS Vanguard for example) are now at the Glasgow Maritime Museum. Many were on loan to the SM, and were returned to the owners, some of which have sold via auction houses. Someone somewhere must have records of where everything went, but as time goes by it may be difficult to trace each item. The whole episode is quite a scandal in my opinion. A large and historically significant number of the models were bequeathed to these 'National' museums, with the proviso they were on display to the public. If I was in a position to loan or give something significant to any museum, I wouldn't feel confident that my wishes would be respected, or the item cared for properly. Things ain't what they used to be. I would encourage anyone who had the opportunity to take good quality photo's of these collections to download them here or somewhere accessible on the internet, individually or as albums, for the benefit of all who no longer have and been denied access to these valuable historical assets.

Druxey is correct. The neptune Hall was a bit creepy, with the dim lighting and the noisiest bare board floor in the world! The Science Museum seemed vast. Such a wide variety of periods covered from sail and steam. Anyone know what happened to their star model of the 'Prince'? Hope the evident woodworm infestation had been arrested.

I recently obtained a copy of the Chapman book on fleabay.....£10. It's the English version published in London by Adlard Coles. My good fortune is that a previous owner had (very cleanly) removed all the pages from the case; so I've re-bound the text pages and left all the plans individually separate, which is a much better and convenient way to view them. Both elements sit squarely in the original case. Though there are a wide selection of drawings, by modern standards, they are limited in value. A nice thing to have.

Such a pleasure to follow work of this quality. The figure carvings: are they styrene? If they are. I'm amazed. I'm amazed, period!

Hi there, I'm trying to establish which version of the Merlin engine 1:24 Corgi Spitfire engine is? My guess is.its the Mk3 as fitted to early Spitfires and Hurricanes. I've contacted Corgi and they don't know! It's an excellent depiction of this motor, produced in a plain overall silver and is begging to have a decent authentic paint job. I'd like to produce a decent display model; apart from the re-paint, most of the interest for me would be to make a period wooden delivery crate stand, of which I'd like clear photographs or drawings. Can anyone help please.

Good grief! I'm used to working on aluminium multi cylinder bike engines. Crankshafts and gear clusters are always steel. And they are still heavy. The Porsche engine is a lot bigger. Can't argue with your photo's, but I'd be wearing steel capped boots and a hard hat anywhere near that.

Thanks Yves, I wasn't aware of the engine kits. I suppose the wish list would be endless. Separate kits from the recent Airfix 1:24 Typhoon and Hellcat would be possible, again the tooling is there. KP........ don't know if you've ever lifted a real car engine, but I'm sure that Porsche motor is no featherweight. Though your stand is functional for the model, it would give a better impression of the mass of the thing if the stand was a little more substantial. If yours was real, the health and safety guys would have a fit. Keep at it, you're doing another fine job.

Impressive as usual. Personally, the only part of this feature I'm interested in is the engine. The rest is a waste of space! There you go; I'm already a sinner. I'm always wondering why the manufacturers of these highly detailed kits (cars, bikes and aircraft) don't capitalise by selling stand alone kits of the engines. The tooling is already available, bought and paid for. I'm probably one of many petrol heads that would buy them.

WOW! This gets more impressive each time you post. Considering the scale, I'll say you're making a fabulous job of this, your first ship build! It does highlight what can be done with the venerable Airfix kit. This is the best build of it I've ever seen (and I've been looking at them since it was introduced).

KP, you made a fine job on your car, I'm seriously impressed at the results, well done, mate. You could do endless rebuilds in endless configurations (should you wish). Thanks for sharing.

I suppose combat situations change, but in close action, the lower fore and main lower sails wouldn't have been in use. At the short ranges of the day a ship would have just enough sail spread to provide enough headway for steerage. In that way, the nets wouldn't have been a hindrance. I would expect someone at the NMM library could shed more light on this issue. Oh, and I'm looking for a girl called ........... Annette.

Yes, that sounds logical, thank you. For the benefit of our Colonial Cousins, Mark lives in the smallest county in England, about as far from the sea as it's possible. BUT they are blessed withRutland Water! Take care, wherever you are. Thanks Mark.

I share your interest with what always seemed to be referred to as 'ochre', a nebulous term as the pigment can be found as a 'sandy' colour and varying through to a definite red. A small point is that in the steam era, the 'yellow' was usually adopted on vessels serving in hot climates. If the normal white's and light grey's were used, the harsh tropical sunlight would have been hard on the eyes of the crew.

Good question about the boarding nets......I've always read of them but have no idea what they looked like or where they were used exactly. At one time nets were strung above the upper deck to catch falling debris from aloft; never seen a picture of that either.

Wow! Lou's splendid photo's made me sit up. Such good quality images. It would be great to see more of them, please. I think the deck house roofs were originally planked (like the deck). I've read so much recently, but I think that was an observation from Longridge. There is an etch brass set of the bow and stern decoration available, which I have and are so much better than the kit decals . Can't remember exactly where they came from, but if you ebay the kit, the source comes up. When I lived in London during the 80's I visited the ship a couple of times, but it wasn't open, so never got to see the deck areas. It struck me to be a large vessel, but I just got the 1:350 kit from LEE. When comparing it to more modern ships in that scale the 'Cutty' is tiny! That kit was originally boxed by Imai and later by others. The current 1:350 Revel looks to be the same moulds, but they did offer an entirely different version in that scale some years ago. So happy to get others input on this subject, which is very refreshing.

Thanks for the drawings Bill. Just compared the Underhill drawing with his drawings in Longridges book. They aren't identical. Longridge states Underhill updated his drawings to include his own research, based on a stay on the ship while she was still afloat. As I understand it, the original plans/drawings haven't survived; only a sketchy diagram from Lloyds Register. The Portuguese owners did their best to ruin the ship, nearly sinking more than once and drastically reducing the rig. Apparently the fore deck house wasn't an original feature. The 'Dolly Winch' just in front of the chain pipes has fittings which are clearly there to bring the anchor in, yet again nothing lines up. My suspicion is, the original chain locker may have been below what is now the forward hatch. I accept my suggestions are extremely speculative. Photo's of her as a training ship show several high deck bulwarks full width and several extra boat davits forward. Another suspicion is that a lot of the deck 'furniture' is not where it was when she was a working ship. Continuing this theme, I suspect a lot of these fittings were initially absent on her return to England, but were 'salvaged' and re-fitted to retain some semblance of original character. I don't think we'll ever know the truth, but time has a habit of providing evidence which is sadly lacking at the moment. Also, the beak-head rails and stern decoration are pure fiction, having gone missing at some point in history. I've read that the original stern was decorated with a rather racy tableau with scantily clad characters from Shakespeare's tale, which caused embarressment and scandal in polite society at the time! Considering how much money was spent on the recent restoration and the use of supposedly superior modern paints and varnishes, she's already beginning to look rather shabby. I'll close by mentioning I have an extensive collection of books on the ship dating back to the early 1920's.

G'day Bill. I haven't yet found what would have been 'best practice' for anchor/chain management on other Clippers during that period and would appreciate input on this from other members, hopefully with some reference. When Cutty Sark was 'rescued' from the then Portugal owners, she'd undergone many changes and modifications, few of which were recorded. Indeed, accurate descriptions of her in her finest years are scant. An example would be the deck rails, which I suspect, would have been polished brass?

Following your build with enthusiasm. I have a couple examples of this kit. One is an original version with the copper painted hull. A few features puzzle me. The anchor chain exits the pipes from the cable locker underneath. It then trails forward across the deck and runs alongside the coaming of the fore hatch. If you've ever seen a ship drop its anchor, the chain runs out with some violence and speed. Well, as this feature is commonly depicted, the deck and the hatch would be destroyed! So I've never been happy with this. Before the ship was restored, it had the chain laid on the deck. The recently restored vessel has none of this. Another feature of the kit are the clearing ports, which are depicted on the outside of the hull. It would be nice to emphasise these; yet the inboard deck level makes a nonsense of them. It just wouldn't work. Otherwise, the kit is a fair representation of the ship as she is now. Looking forward to the rest of your build.

He He. I'm sure they are still called mudguards in Essex.

Love your wheels and paint. ALL Honda's at that period had silver painted engines. Indeed there wasn't any bare polished alloy anywhere. The material was rubbish 'monkey metal' and would corrode in a blink. Handsome looking beasts at the time, but had rubber frames and a propensity to throw con-rods. Believe me, I know.

Thanks Bruce, I'll bear your advice in mind. I can't swear all the AOTS covers are duplicates of inside pages but the half dozen I do have lead me to believe they are.

I wouldn't get too worked up about the inside cover illustrations in the later editions of the AOTS titles; you'll find the same picture inside the pages. Bit of a wasted opportunity, if not a con. I have several of the first editions and their later ones with this feature. If you hang around fleabay constantly, you'll eventually find a bargain. I've managed to collect the whole set that way. AbeBooks is now owned by Amazon, consequently bargains there are few, but do come along.