CAd My Fingers

Thank you, MarisS. for explaining your planking techniques--your planking looks excellent! Getting good fits with the planks looks especially challenging since both the bow and stern narrow. Cheers, Jay

MarisS., Russ explained the English definition perfectly. I checked Google translate to see if spile crosses to Croatian but it didn't work. Yes, your English is excellent and you manage very! very well!! Cheers, Jay

Your planking looks excellent--very smooth and clean! Are you spiling your plank strakes? I think it's brilliant that you are going to include CDs of a kit's build in your kits!! Those will give a builder an idea of how things actually should look and so forth. As far as I know, you are the only kit mfgr that is doing this with CDs and it's great! Now a builder will have plans, instructions, and photos--with all these, it should be a very good experience for a kit builder! Hopefully other mfgrs. will copy your idea, as it will go a long ways in improving our hobby! Cheers, Jay

While maybe not catapults, Tony perhaps slingshots? lol Seriously, here's what I strongly think about these: There are two of these on the ship, based on the symmetry conventions of draughts, and they are boom supports. I strongly think how this feature faces us is for clarity and yet also tells us that they are positioned relative to the boom's swing from the mast (the lower forward arm relative to the aft higher arm is the draughtsman's convention of telling us this last piece of information). Here's a very rough picture to better capture how I think these features look on the ship. There are other conventions on the draught that lend support to what I've said above about how the draughtsman is conveying these support's positions to us. Slightly above the lower lines of the sheer rail, rail below the sheer rail, and wale is a faint line about a 1/2" (scale) above those lower lines. These faint lines are clues that the rails and wale are on a different planes, i.e., that they are thicker (but not by how much) than their surrounding planking. In the attached photo you can see the faint lines on the rails; also notice the shapes of the port and hawse holes--these shapes tell us that bow is markedly curving inward to the stem. Mainly, I need to confirm (i.e., the draughtsman's convention) what I think about theses features but I'm very sure that's what we are being told about these: There is one on each side of the ship and they are angled (high arm is outboard and low arm is inboard) relative to the mast and boom swing. Further, I think the dimensions of these are taken off from the higher (outboard) arm: from centerline of the 'U' upwards to the top of the higher (outboard) arm and from centerline to widest point of the higher (outboard) arm. Or, they really are slingshots! Cheers, Jay PS Several additional posts popped in before I completed my post. Very nice metal work, Gregor! Kester, I think you're right that the lips on these are to hold in place the lashing that would secure the boom into a support.

Tony, initially when I 1st began drafting the S., I also thought this feature was a boom support now I'm maybe/maybe not since gaining a lot more experience in how draughtsmen depicted features. You may not see it clearly in the picture you attached (due to low resolution), but take a look at where this thing attaches--it's to the outside of the ship. The give aways here are its black lines and its black, ovular fastener. If those lines were in red, it would mean that it was attached to the ship's interior side. For attachment to the ship comparisons, I've included a shot of the chainplates. It definitely didn't attach to the deck or etc, as that's where the rudder head passes through (the lower red lines in the 1st attached picture) the deck. Also, there would very likely be another one these attached to the other side of the ship. Its orientation towards us may either be for clarity, so that one can determine its shape, or is how it actually was attached and faced on the ship. This last aspect is rather crucial in helping figure out its function. If the orientation is how these actually were attached, then they cannot be boom supports; if the depiction is for clarity, then its possible. These have about 9" of attachment to the ship and pass through the sheer rails. I am not sure if this arrangement is sufficient for a boom, yet that fastener is huge in comparison to the chainplate fasteners and how it passes through the rail would, I suspect, provide strength and stability. The cross-ship distance between these is about 12', and the space in the crooks is about 8" wide x 6" high (fwd arm); the boom diameter on the draught is listed as 10 & 5/8". I haven't yet research Steel and company on boom tapers.... I'll post an update when I have a better idea about what these are. Cheers, Jay

She has beautiful lines and your work is very clean and precise, Pete! I've been watching and enjoying seeing your gems unfold! Cheers, Jay

I like these details of your build--false keel, rail extending 5 mm--and kit. They show that a lot of time and attention has gone into making a nice kit for a builder and it's very nice to read and see clear explanations of how the kit is built! Cheers, Jay

Lovely work, Darrel--she's looking gorgeous! Here's how you can add text to your post photos. Type what you'd like to share, then: 1st) select file 2nd) attach file 3rd) position your cursor where you want to insert the photo--usually looks nicer if there's a blank line between text and a photo--then click "add to post" If you insert several photos and want to comment on each one, put your cursor between the name brackets and then hit return. All the pictures after your cursor will then go to a new line. Put a few more spaces between each photo, position your cursor & type away. You then can click preview post and see how it all looks and make fixes. Hope this kind of helps! Cheers, Jay

Jeff, thanks for reaching out to gather additional input! While you provide incredible customer service and excellent wood (am your customer for life), I hope other suppliers, mfgrs., and so forth look over the results of your survey and perhaps adjust their products accordingly. While some may argue that providing quality wood will increase costs, I believe most model shipbuilders, and other hobbyists, are willing to pay that bit extra for quality wood.... Thank you again for what you've done for this hobby! Cheers, Jay

Mike, while the shipping to Sweden will be expensive give a Byrnes sander serious consideration: http://www.byrnesmodelmachines.com/discsander1.html Jim's tools are well worth the investment! My hope is that he'll next come out with an oscillating sander.... Richard, look at Fein's dust collectors. They're quiet in comparison to shop vacuums (a Fein is about as loud as a regular house vac), they're powerful, come with HEPA options, and so on but they're also not cheap.... Really am happy with mine. Figuring out attachments to machines dust ports is tricky but do-able. Cheers, Jay

Go Sam! Looking forward to seeing your log unfold! Cheers, Jay

Well done and congratulations on a superb build, Mike! Cheers, Jay

Looking very nice, Gregor! Here's a link to high resolution photos of the contemporary model on which Petersson based his drawings: http://www.modelships.de/Museums_and_replicas/Science_Museum_London/gIMG_0583.jpg This unidentified model was on display at the Science Museum in London but sources told me that the model has since vanished (I believe before the museum took down all their ship displays). In his Rigging Fore-and-Aft Craft, Petersson mentions that he believes this cutter that he based his drawings on is the HMS Expedition. Unfortunately, the NMM doesn’t have images of the draught available online. According to Lyon, the Expedition is of the Sprightly Class, 1777 (Sailing Navy List, 101). The draught in Lyon of the Sprightly clearly differs from the model photo. The Sprightly more resembles the Alert in terms of her rails, ports, and so forth; however, all that may not be applicable to the Expedition—hard to know without seeing her draught. The take away here is that though this ship possibly post dates the Sherbourne by about 15 years, you're probably on solid ground using most of the rigging details in Petersson and these images. One caveat, however, is since the the model is unidentified, it could be a cutter much later than 1777.... An issue that I haven't yet researched in depth is whether or not top gallants were consistently or inconsistently either fore or aft the top masts on small craft during the Sherbourne's time period. From about the mid-1770s onward, the top gallant is depicted as fore the top mast on the contemporary models and in the paintings I've looked at thus but for earlier periods I'm not yet sure. This one of those small details that’s been niggling at me for a while, and so far the material I've looked at has been inconclusive...I'm finding that the research on this detail will take a lot more time and digging. Anyway, I hope this is of some help! Cheers, Jay

Brian, Model Expo usually will replace parts like planks free of charge so might try reaching out to them: http://www.modelexpo-online.com/contact.asp Cheers, Jay

Ira, here's an excellent example from Dan Vedas' HMS Vulture log: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/topic/230-hms-vulture-by-dan-vadas-1776-148-scale-16-gun-swan-class-sloop-from-tffm-plans/#entry5141 Here's another example from Ed Tosti's Young America log: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/topic/3453-young-america-by-edt-extreme-clipper-1853/?view=findpost&p=109904 In a scratch log, go to the 1st log page and type in rabbet in the search box at the top of that page and you should get all mentions of rabbet in the log. Cheers, Jay

While it's your choice to either include or not include the rabbet, Ira, I think including it in (even if you don't plank) will give your build greater authenticity--they were very much a part of a wooden ship. Perhaps looking at some of the great scratch logs on the forum will help with your decision and choice. Cheers, Jay

From these reviews, it overall sounds like a decent work--definitely looking forward to the arrival of my copy! Thanks everyone for providing your thoughts on the book--most appreciated! Cheers, Jay

You and me both, Ben! This looks like it'll be an invaluable reference--have put it on my must buy list! Cheers, Jay

Thank you for your work on this, Wayne! Here's a blurb I posted recently that many may not know about but is a wonderful resource for gaining access to rarer, expensive books: Cheers,Jay

Good references for modeling resources can be / are relative to what one is seeking information about; for instance, if I'm seeking info. on cannons, I'd turn to Caruana, Tucker, and perhaps Muller. For general rigging, Petersson; for more specific information Lever, Steel, Marquardt, and Lees all come to mind. With that said, I highly recommend Gary's list of references! He very kindly has provided an outstanding, comprehensive resource for all of us, and I regularly return to his list if I'm seeking info. for which I don't have a reference for or etc: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/topic/21-nautical-and-model-building-resources/?hl=%2Bship+%2Bmodeling+%2Bbooks Cheers, Jay

Very nice artillery, Tony--excellent lathe work! Your cannons look great and are vast improvements over the kit supplied ones--well done my friend! Cheers, Jay

Mike, the big knob raises and lowers the blade height. The blade is "locked" into position by inserting the t-handle hex (Al's 1st photo) into the hole near the knob and tightening the set screw that's recessed in the hole. Yep, Mike I also ran into the same situation with dust port-vacuum fitting connections; still haven't found a decent adaptor setup that I'm happy with...more trial and error with this is in my future! Cheers, Jay

Many smaller vendors don't use PayPal because PayPal charge businesses (~3% + $0.30 per transaction--international can be higher due to currency conversions) fees for accepting customer payments. This is just one more overhead expense from the business' perspective and if the business' margin is tight, these added costs can be killers. Brian's suggestion probably is the easiest way to go. With that said, Jeff is great to work with and his wood and service are stellar! Cheers, Jay

Tim, hope you can grab one of these beauties someday. Though you may end up like Mike and me--one Jim tool leads to another then another.... Am hoping Jim comes out w/ an oscillating sander one of these days! Cheers, Jay

Crackers, I'd love to go to Oz as well--it's on my bucket list of places to see before I'm pushing up daisies! Cheers, Jay