allanyed

Keith, Unfortunately I have never seen a toothpick that is reduced to 0.016 diameter, and having upwards of 10,000 trennals on the hull is a chore I would never want to face. Just inserting them so they are all in the exact same amount and then clipping them off and sanding makes me think the diameter that is seen will vary quite a bit. Also, as the planking will be castello, and tooth picks are usually birch, they would definitely give a measles effect. After reading your kind reply I did measure a few dozen right at the tip and they were all over 0.02 at the tip. With an average taper of close to 8 degrees, the diameter after 0.125 along the long axis which would be the minimum amount they would likely need to be inserted, the average diameter is 0.042, (nearly 3 inches diameter at scale versus the 1 inch to 1.25 inch needed.) Bruce the diameter is perfect, but I have never seen fishing line in other than clear, light blue, green, yellow or pink. Would be great if it was close to the the castello color though!!! Also, I have used monofilament for fishing for many years but cannot say that I have ever seen 37 pound line. I checked the web and could not find it. Any hints on where it can be had? Tx Hakan, point very well taken and is one of my habits when trying something new. Druxey, I agree. I have usually treenailed at 1:48 and even then tend to undersize with excellent effects. At 1:64, I am leaning to leaving them off the hull, and definitely the deck planking as the deck will be holly. With the white holly, bamboo or any hardwood that can be made that small in diameter will look awful. We see decks on models here all the time that have treenails that are double or triple the diameter that they should be. In the past I have drilled holly decks and then sanded to fill the holes. A quick coat of clear finish holds the sawdust in place and is subtly different in color as would cross grain plugs. Plugs made with grain in the same direction of the planking of course would not be visible. Same idea for the hull, drill, fill the hole with a smear of dilute white glue and sand to fill the hole. This method does work well based on my experience. IF the test pieces look good, I may go this route. Otherwise, no trennals! Thanks again for your responses!!

I love seeing a build with machinist squares being used to check that everything is aligned and square. Looking good Maury!!

While I enjoy plank on frame construction more than POB, POB does go faster. As no internals will be viewable, POB is definitely a nice alternative to POF. The bulkheads are all cut out and mostly in place. The QD and FC bulkheads are yet to receive decoration and moldings and only set in place for now without glue so a couple filler pieces between bulkheads are not yet in place. Filler pieces are in place between the other bulkheads to give some rigidity and the entire unit has to be faired once the two loose bulkheads are complete and fixed in place. There is work yet to be done in fairing the deck line as well as the outside of the hull, but not too much. The bulkheads are not all evenly spaced. Some of the bulkheads are on the station lines which were very easy to draw and make. Others are offset to account for the gun ports that will be left open and the QD and FC bulkheads which do not sit on a station line so a bit of lofting had to be done in each case. At this scale, the top timbers are extremely weak and easily snap off. Once the filler pieces were glued in placed, this problem went away and stood up well to the preliminary rough sanding, even with a vibrating mouse. At this point I see no need to add additional filler/stiffener pieces between those that are in place and the keel. Not sure if I am going to treenail the hull and/or eck planking when the time comes. At1:64 the trennals would only be about 0.016 in diameter, the smallest hole in the Byrnes drawplate. I have found getting even bamboo this small to be a frustrating task at best, so am hesitant to even put them in. I realize these can be added even without full frames or filler pieces, just piercing the planking, but no sure how this would look at this scale. I could also drill the holes at this size and just fill them with a smear of glue and sand over the holes to fill the with sawdust. I would love to hear any thoughts and see any photos on how any type of tree nailing will look at this scale. Long way to go, but no major glitches so far even with only having the basic contemporary body plan drawing as a guide for framing.

Brett, when you say inexpensive, do you have a budget in mind? For some $25 is too much, for others, $250 is too much, and on and on. For the 18th century, the Shipbuilder's Repository 1788 is a great book to have but it is in the range of $400-$500. If you are looking only for scantlings, you can find copies of the 1719, 1745 and 1750 Establishments in parts of some books including the 1719 Establishment in Goodwin's Construction and Fitting of British Ships of War. This book also has a lot of details on all parts of the framing, planking, decks and so forth for a range of years from 1650 to 1850 for under $100. For armament, furniture and fittings, Lavery's Arming and Fitting British Ships of War is a great book to have for under $100 and covers 1600 to 1815. You can also find the Establishment scantlings and all the scantlings from the Shipbuilder's Repository in Scantlings of Royal Navy Ships for $45 at Seawatch Books which also contains the scantlings from David Steel's Elements and Practice of Naval Architecture, 1805. If you have a specific ship in mind you can sometimes find the original contract, especially if it was built in a private yard. There are hundreds of these available at the National Archives, in Kew, England at no cost if for private use. I don't know how far back they go but I have transcribed a few of these hand written contracts from the 17th century and 18th century that are held at the NA in Kew.

For securing seizings, knots, splices, etc. perhaps shellac (pH 7 to 7.3) is the better way to go.

Mike How do the sails look? If the scale is 1:75 or 1:98 it is nigh impossible to make cloth stitched sails to scale. As has been brought up in a number of recent posts, at scales from about 1:48 and smaller, cloth stitched sails are way out of scale and ruin what may be an otherwise beautiful model. If you could post some photos with some closeups, I am sure you will get a number of opinions and suggestions on alternative solutions.

Good information John, I am finding this to be a rather interesting and informative discussion, thanks guys. So will the low pH of PVA, including Titebond at 4 (according to several additional sources) or Elmer's white PVA with a pH of 5, destroy the rigging, or even the wood that we glue together, over time? Maybe it's time to go back to hide glue with a pH of 6.7-7.4, close to, or right at neutral 😁

That's the one. Which of the many Resolutions are you building? If it is the Corel kit of the cutter that they describe as 17th or early 18th century the tables are wrong so it should not be used. If it is the Ferret 1711 the table might work, but they do not cover cutters. Sorry this is not cut and dried.

From the American Bee Journal: Chemical composition As beeswax is the primary construction material of the beehive, its chemical composition is integral to how the hive functions. This same material, the storage location of food resources and developing brood, must be relatively non-reactive, so beeswax’s neutral pH (7) suits the need perfectly. A product of organic processes, this product is created from carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen—three elements taken from the honey and nectar the bees collect, which are arranged into long carbon chains of fatty acid esters and aliphatic alcohols. These compounds and their ratios vary from species to species, but retain similar chemical properties including a low melting point which, from a human perspective, makes it very useful for sculpting and shaping once it has been harvested and cleaned.

Clogger I use a 10" table saw to rip billets that can then easily be handled on my small (3") saw. The waste in the form of saw dust from the 10" saw, if cutting thin sheets, can be as much as the yield of wood to be used. I suppose it can be done, but I feel a lot more comfortable handling small pieces with the 3" saw compared to the 10". If you want to rip small strips, say 1/8 X 1/4, I think this would be difficult as well as possibly dangerous with the big saw. I am curious to read replies from others.

Tony, I know McCaffery and McNarry use wire on VERY small scale models, but for 1:98 and larger it will look like, well,..... wire, not rope. Guess it depends on how much realism one wants to depict on their model and in the end, whatever make the builder happy.

Lyle Don't use the kit string if at all possible. Search the many threads here and on the net on making rope. Gutermann and other brands of materials are reviewed and discussed. You will also need to decide if you want to go with cotton, linen, or poly.

Go to the top of the page and click "More" Then click on "Articles Data Base". Then scroll down to the Masts and Rigging section. Then click on Danny's spread sheet, third one down. Cheers

Hi Trond Actually the spread sheet here at MSW is based on Lees' Masting and Rigging. It may be close or the same as Steel for his era, but Lees covers the 17th-19th centuries so helps a wider range of model builders. Both are worth having and checking as appropriate. Used copies of Masting and Rigging are available for under $100, but if one is only interested in the mast, spar and rope sizes without drawngs and details on rigging, the Vadas spread sheet is a free way to go (not including the 1670-1711 time period which as mentioned above is not at all accurate, especially when it comes to the lengths of the masts and spars. For this stretch of years, Lees is a great source.

Thanks Hubac. I hope NYC will be getting back to normal for you soon. I miss the City, not being able to go for over a year now, thanks to Covid, after having lived nearby for 35 years and then traveling there the past 5 years for business and pleasure, mainly to Manhattan and Queens, (but I do love all the boroughs.)

Dave Have you looked at the mast, spar, and rope sizes on the spread sheet here at MSW? It is based on the formulas from Lees' Masting and Rigging English Ships of War book and is quite useful except for the period from 1670 to 1711. An incorrect formula was used on the length of the main mast for this time span so every thing else that follows is wrong. But, from 1640 to 1670 and from 1711 to 1860 all the numbers appear to be correct. Go to "More" on the ribbon at the top of the MSW page, then click on Articles Data Base, then scroll down to Masting and Rigging Spread sheet and click on it and the spread sheet will appear. Danny Vadas did a great service in creating this. I wish someone had Danny's original so the one time period between 1670 and 1711 could be corrected.

Hi Matt, I just joined your build log party and happy that I did. Your work AND your photography are both first class!!!

Rick The upper stunsail booms had eyes in each end from 1810 and beyond according to Lees on page 18 of The Masting and Rigging,. On page 118 he describes the hauling in and out of the booms as having two double blocks, one made fast to the outer boom iron, the other stropped to the hole in the inner end of the boom (I assume when there were no eyebolts.) He makes no mention of blocks with hooks, but that does not mean that method was never used. Henry, I am curious about the eyes and blocks with hooks. Can you give your source as this seems it would be a nice alternative if the year is appropriate? Thank you very much.

I THINK, without years of research, that the closest I could get to learning those secrets Druxey is to ask Richard Endsor. For anyone wanting to use the Heritage site, it appears that there are only several times it can be used for free without signing up for a basic plan, as I just found out. There is a 14 day free trial though, so have fun while you can. Was fun while it lasted.

You beat me to it Druxey. I agree with you completely. Don, it is far easier making one perfect barrel and casting as many as you need for your build. You can cast in metal or casting resin. Silicone molding material is readily available and far easier than using plaster or some other materials and there is no need to make lost wax castings with all the paraphernalia that is required. There are some tricks you can use so there is no need to make two piece molds which invariably leave a seam that has to be filed and sanded off. Making the monogram and vent field are projects in themselves so making these once is an advantage as well. If you decide to go this route feel free to PM me and I can send you information on making your barrels with a single piece mold.

This may help as I was able to save to clipboard. https://myhr.tg/14QNa6d4 https://myhr.tg/1LpsmpJl

Try this one https://www.myheritage.com/deep-nostalgia and then where it says upload a photo, get any photo from your own file to enter. Or you can save the Nelson image below if you want to try that one first. Or, go to the home page, click on Family Tree then click on Animate Photos. You can then upload a pic and it will do its thing. You may have to enter your email address and a password to get started.

Alan, You couldn't hide them so let the builder beware, do it right. 😀 Of course, the average viewer would not know a mistake except maybe for something glaring like a broken line or something similar. The members here are another story and would likely spot errors as long as the name, year, and nationality are known. Jan, do you have the name and era of that model?

Mark, If you get into the site, you can just insert any portrait image. I did Nelson, George Washington, and long past relatives. Seeing grandparents that I remember vividly moving and blinking was fantastic, but a bit on the creepy side. I sent the same link to a member here and he had it open right up to Nelson so you may want to give it another try. Free site unless you sign up for the premium package or premium plus which helps in building a family tree. Try this one for Phineas Pett 1570-1647 https://www.myheritage.com/deep-nostalgia/result/1103411981-500004

Discovered a new (for me) website that takes any photo and animates it. I tried it with a portrait of Horatio Nelson and got what you can see on the attached. Spooky, but interesting. https://www.myheritage.com/deep-nostalgia/result/1103411981-500002