Jaager

Of late, there has been some interest in the history of the first ship model kits. Yours may be from a kit or scratch from McCann's plans, but it is probably one of the first sizable generation (or close to it) of ship models built by someone not a professional model maker or an actual ship builder or a seaman. It probably has value as an historical example. It looks well done in any instance. When it is back to its prime condition, if you do not have one already, it will want to live in a protective case.

This is my own biased opinion. I have no experience with restoration or with anything like The Antiques Road Show - except watching it. What you have there is decorator kitsch. It is not a ship model in any meaningful definition of the term. It is something that sorta looks like a ship - from a distance, in dark light, thru a gauze curtain, if you squint. That said, it probably has value as its own thing. I doubt that the value involves much money, but as time passes, what was once one of many copies will become more unique. If collecting kitsch as kitsch ever becomes a thing, who knows? If you are wealthy and have too much money, you may find someone willing to restore it. It does not need to be anyone with experience with actual ship models, just with restoration in general. What you pay will be lost money. If you restore it yourself, it will be time donated. Consider it time spent doing something for fun. You will want to return it to what it was. There are no "improvements" to make it more ship-like that will not destroy any value it may have. Clean what you can and replace any rotted fiber (lines and sails) with something that is close to what was the original material. The goal is to make it as close to what it was as you can. If you want an actual ship model, there is a thread at the top of this forum - For beginners - a Cautionary Tale that will help with how to build your own.

Graham, Oh fun, a chance to fantasize! and remember, I would find it difficult not to over engineer (a thick layer of) sheet Styrofoam insulation and Tyvek. In the past, I learned that you have to be VERY careful with: if and where a vapor barrier is placed. Do it wrong and you have a condensation trap and liquid water in closed spaces. What works for a house, with a conditioned interior, does not work in a garage that is not heated or cooled. Your structure could be both if you only heat or cool when in use. I have a cousin who likes the sound of rain hitting a metal roof. He built his house with one. He discovered that a sheet steel roof will rust, with one side at the outside and one side at a conditioned space. I am thinking that if both sides are under outside conditions, no condensation - less propensity to rust. The metal would essentially have to float above the structure with freedom for underside air circulation. But, I guess with the nature of your structure, the fixed life span of asphalt shingles is not a problem. The structure will probably go first. For a sky light, if your budget is unlimited take a look at what Kalwall has available.

A Google chase seems to lead to the following: Pyro -> Life-Like -> Walthers My guess is that the copyrights went along with the sale of the companies. Walthers has some HO, N, O scale diorama style ship models. Even though nothing like the Gertrude is in their current inventory, they may not be in favor of you giving away total information that is not yours to give. For what you have questions about, the isolated relevant sections should fall into fair use category. Posting just those parts should be a benefit. A whole set of plastic model plans would only be of value to those who have the kit and they should already have them. Otherwise it is just esoteric and a waste of bandwidth. I do not think that this web site is setup to store large size files of ship plans - unless it is part of a group project. The Gertrude is one of the subjects in H.I.C.'s American Fishing Schooners. The two plans in the book are available from The S.I. for $10 each and are large scale. The book also has a section that features extensive details for the schooners.

The reason for mentioning the ethanol:water azeotrope is to point out that it is essentially impossible to have ethanol that is stronger than 95%. Even if you started with an expensive lab reagent bottle of 100% ethanol, unless you used it in a sealed chamber with an atmosphere free of water vapor, the 100% ethanol would quickly return to 95% by extracting water from its atmosphere. In the US, there is a significant Federal tax on drinking alcohol ( not as significant as it once was, because it is a fixed amount instead of a percentage of the alcohol value ). If a poison is added to the ethanol to make it unsuited to ingest, there is no tax. The common term for this is 'denatured' and its whole purpose is to avoid the tax. Long ago, I think methanol was the additive. Now I think the additive is an emetic agent. There used to be methanol available. It is available as 100%. The danger in using it is probably not worth any advantage. The vapors can be inhaled and while ethanol is metabolized to acetaldehyde and then acetic acid, methanol goes to formaldehyde and formic acid - you don't want it. Methanol also evaporates more quickly than ethanol. This is not an advantage during application of shellac. I had an idea that ~100% isopropanol (which is available, but is expensive) would have a longer application time and not have the 5% water. I do not think that the length of any additional time is practically significant. The 5% water in ethanol is as the azeotrope. That is a special state of water. Whatever straight water might do to shellac, the water in the azeotrope is not able to do it. That water is owned by the ethanol.

The openings at port and starboard aft are to the quarter galleries. They were small and mostly were officers' latrines. Where the captain's cabin was the width of a whole deck, I wonder why he would need two privies?

That was my first thought, but a comment here has me questioning that. If shellac in flake form is subject to oxidation, then a shellac finish that is 200 years old should also be subject to it? I would think adsorbing water into the flakes could be it, but then there is still the situation of why a shellac finish does not also adsorb water. Or perhaps it does but the concentration of atmospheric water is too low to affect a flat surface. Maybe the flakes have a higher surface to volume ratio? Maybe the flakes can absorb water? As for ethanol : water the description of azeotrope for that mixture should explain why it is a very specific situation.

It is a table saw. It works the same way as an 8" or 10" saw. For functional use and safety skills, an instruction manual for table saws in general is pretty important to read. In general, with the smaller modeler's scale saws, the damage that it can do to human parts going where they should not is less, but you still do not want it. As for the saw itself, I do not know if the company itself is in business. Even if you can get an illustrated parts list (IPL) it may not be of value if there is no manufacturer to supply them by a parts number. I would guess that any parts subject to wear can be had from tool parts vendors.

An old wood finishing book had instructions for French polish. The instructions were to use a cloth pad that had a small quantity of Linseed oil in the middle which was then soaked with shellac. The pad was to be rubbed on the wood surface with constant movement and a jet takeoff removal. Otherwise the cloth will leave its weave pattern on the finish - which was to be only a wet layer. I took this to mean that French polish is primarily shellac with a small admixture of polymerizing oil. It seems to me that Tung oil could be used instead of Linseed oil.

Hakan, I got that the Balsa comment was meant in jest. I apologize if my response came across as an insult. I took it as an opportunity to broadcast another shot at that terrible species of wood out to the world. In my mind, I imagine that inside shaping frames that are widely spaced apart is a totally unfun procedure. I fill all of the spaces with Pine that is temporarily bonded. The solid hull keeps the edges of the frames crisp and it is more difficult to remove too much while shaping and faring. As I said in another thread, I am still looking for an easy to remove temporary bonding agent that can stand up to the sheer forces of shaping and does not leave a tedious to remove residue, when I kill the bond after the fillers have done their job and I punch them out. I will offer another shot. Using Balsa as a filler for POB is probably one of those things that appear to be a useful idea, but later prove to be a bad one. It is probably just as likely to crush as it is to cut, plane, or rasp. The feel of working it is a bit creepy. Construction Pine is probably much more efficient to work and less expensive. Pine is a joy to plane. The worst dust producer for me is the rounded end of a 4x36 bench belt sander (80 grit) removing the inside of a sandwich of 6 or 8 frames at the stern or bow. The bevel is significant so there is a lot of wood to remove. That angle grinder disk can produce a cloud that no vac can totally collect.

Callery Pear - a group of ornamental Pear trees whose wood is also excellent for our use. The color is darker. The Web says that Pyrus calleryana is a native of China and Vietnam. Masa, looks like you have found a wonderful timber. My impulse would be to be greedy and hoard as much as I could.

Balsa is about the absolute worst species of wood for our uses. Apple is about the best. Almost impossible to find in quantity here. The moulded dimension is what is seen on the cross section view (Body plan). Thickest at the keelson and thinnest at the rail. All of the removal - but the shouting - should be done on the individual frame before adding it to the hull. (Unless you are into self torture and frustration, you want all of frames to be as bends. Bend = a pair of frames with timbers that overlap each butt joint of its partner. - A raw end grain to end grain joint is a very weak bond. As in: no bond at all.) Sanding - grit matters. Fast = course. But then it must be walked down to smooth using ever finer grits. A machine is faster. For inside a hull - about the best machine that I have found is this: https://www.kaleas.de//kaleas.cgi?action=show&sessionID=53362980167228376253362980&lang=en&page=shop-produktliste.html&cat=32&subcat=3230&catname=grinding, planing&arcode=x But choose the Right Angle grinder. Use very light force, someone here had a part in the drive chain wear out. There is a chuck attachment for the right angle unit for bits and burrs. The belt sander ( comes up with the link) will REALLY eat wood fast - too fast if you are not careful - and it will quickly throw the belt - I hold it with a piece of flat scrap wood extending over the top part of the belt to keep it on. https://www.kaleas.de//kaleas.cgi?action=show&sessionID=53362980167228376253362980&lang=en&page=shop-produktliste.html&cat=32&subcat=3280&catname=power supply&arcode=x The DC power supply works with a variety of tools, but I am not sure very many are worth it when up against their single purpose competitors.

We had one in the bathroom in the 1950's. The heat source for the house was an on oil burning furnace under a grating in the hall. More than one kid at the time 1"x1" or so grid pattern burns from falling on a red hot grate. That was a step up from a coal burning furnace that required blackgang work from an inhabitant.

Dave, Unless you intend to build for an academic audience and for a contest where the reward is the model becoming a museum exhibit, except for maybe some very specific details, you should consider the AOTS series to be close enough. For long lived ships, a specific version is selected. It may not be the version that you wish to model, so keep that in mind. Some of the vessels are complete reconstructions. Nothing definitive is known about their actual lines. For those vessels, as with kits purporting to be their models, what those AOTS volumes represent are models of the reconstruction. e.g. Susan Constant, Mary Rose, the Columbus trio, ... not AOTS but would probably sell if they were: Revenge, Mayflower, Half Moon, Magellan's five We even have models of ships that are only creations of the mind of a fiction writer. There is a range here of what is acceptable - from pure fantasy to completely documented using contemporary sources. I see nothing wrong with making educated guesses that are not anachronisms, but you would probably do the future a favor by inserting a bond paper -india ink script- document listing your guesses (- along with your name and the date) inside the hull. It is just a matter of defining your personal limits and being aware of that.

Jim sells bushings. They are excellent at adapting 1" arbors to fit a 4" table saw. One more difference with using a table saw for milling lumber: It really wants the stock it cuts to have at least one face surfaced and one side edged. 4x4 lumber that is S2S is actually 13/16" thick - about 1/4" is lost to the planer - but you pay for the full 1". A band saw is more forgiving. I use rough lumber. The first cut of a rough edge riding the face of the fence is usually scrap, but sometimes the thickness sander is able to salvage something. A 4x4 board produces a 1" wide slice. I have to watch for checks. Any ripping of the slice wants the face that against the fence to be edged. For frame timbers, the condition of the edge does not matter ( except for deep checks ). I prefer 8x4 stock. I can get less waste by having a 2" wide surface to arrange my patterns. ( At 1:60 the floors for most ships need 3" and a first rate needs 4" for the frames close to the bow and stern. I do not use cant frames. Since it can't be seen, I now make those floors be two pieces. I have the cut at the edge of the keel and alternate the side in the sequence. )

I do not think that you will find it helpful to opt for a blade with a smaller diameter. The height that a blade can rise above the table is set by the machine and is usually around 2" or less with a 10" blade. A 10" blade can be set to as small an exposure as anything smaller. The target would be a 10" rip blade with as small a blade thickness as can be had for a quality blade. I have an old Craftsman 7.5" - I think it was a contractors portable for its designed use. I used a hollow ground planer blade - all steel - The kerf was less than other type blades. Because of the grind, the depth of cut was less for even a 7.5". The teeth were not designed for rip cuts thru thick stock. It tended to burn the wood if I was cutting 1" stock. The message is not that a 10" saw will not be adequate for milling 1" stock - it certainly will. And it will probably be faster than a bandsaw. If you are careful with the feed, the cuts are almost always straight. The blades are much less likely to wander or do wedge cuts. It will not be easy, but with the right fence increment fixtures, which you will probably have to design and fabricate, the thickness of a cut can be just as controlled as a Byrnes. The cost is: That there will be significantly more loss of stock to kerf. Doing multiple passes and flipping stock to cut thicker stock will probably be messy and need a lot of thickness sander work - more significant loss. The degree of tissue damage possible because of inattention or poor technique is greater with a 10" than a Byrnes or a bandsaw. A kickback missile will have significantly more kinetic energy.

The foot print is not as large as would be guessed. Not that much more than a 9" or 10" bench top - considering that they either stay occupying valuable bench space or have to be parked - and are not light weight or easy to lift. The 14" saws are on wheels so that they can be moved into an open enough area to allow for lumber excursion. One factor that you really want - if there is any way to get it - is to have a 220 V outlet and a motor that is rated for that power. Blacksburg may be a location with access to old Apple trees - a species that is as good as can be used, but in Florida - there is Orange, Lemon, Grapefruit, and ... Loquat. Addon: I have found that two feet is a sweet spot for lumber stock length. That is way longer than any one piece of a ship could be, fits on a bench, is convenient to stack, and not too heavy to feed into a blade - even an 8x4 12" wide board is not toooooo much.

Alan, Next time you might consider scraping instead. There are specific tools for this, but a Gem single edge razor blade or the straight edge of a piece of broken glass will also do the job. It leaves pores open that sanding will fill with junk. Burnishing may be more effective at sealing pores, but that whole process sounds like a bad idea for a wooden ship model. Prime the scraped surface with 1/2 strength shellac, then follow with as many coats of full strength shellac as it takes to get the depth and degree of gloss that meets your taste. If it goes too far, 0000 steel wool or a Scotch Brite pad can be used to dull too much sheen. I also suspect that Renaissance wax will provide a finish layer that will satisfy you. If not, Mineral Spirits will undo it. I also suspect that shellac will work on your burnished surface. There is not much that it will not cover or act as an undercoat for. To save on risking having to perform a tedious and time consuming undo, should things not work as desired, you should do a serious trial of whatever you select on scrap first.

I absolutely agree. When I was fighting with my EmcoMeyer 3 wheel, and having endless tracking problems, I had it in mind that a wider blade would tracker better. I now believe that blade width has nothing to do with it. I think that a wider blade is for a larger machine working thicker stock. It is probably more about blade life and the tension that the blade needs. For wood and a 14" saw, 1/2" width is probably as wide as is needed. A 3/4" blade probably does not track any better, costs more, and generates more friction within the cut. I think that when a blade starts cutting more slowly, begins wandering - it means that it is dull - it is soon going to break.

I add my vote to what Chuck recommends. I fought with a 3 wheel bench top for way too long. I went an increment further with a Rikon 10-353. It is 3HP. It has also about doubled in price since I bought it. A 14" bandsaw with more than the minimal powered motor is what is needed for serious resawing. Any bench top bandsaw will struggle with real resawing. The blade on an undersized and underpowered machine is likely to wander or bow in the cut. The loss of wood to misshapened cuts is significant. If you are serious about this, a benchtop machine is a ticket to frustration and regret, the very definition of false economy. I would not call any of this an investment, but if you buy a big boy machine you can always haunt the kit forums and when a post about "where to I find wood strips?" comes up from someone stateside, you could always try doing a deal IM if you have the time. You can also obtain wood species that are not available any other way, if you are young enough. Apple, ornamental species of Pear, Hornbeam, Hophornbeam, Dogwood, Hawthorn, etc. You may find wild Holly that is not snow white - but the yellow and Blue mold infected wood is perfect for our uses. And besides, the color of the much desired snow white stock does not match any wood that was used for actual ship building. Sugar Pine and Basswood is about as close to white as any shipbuilding wood could get. @Chuck If you have not done this already, if your blades do not last as long as you wish and a carbide blade costs more than you want to pay, a Lenox Diemaster 2 Bi-metal blade is likely more cost effective. It lasts many times longer than a steel WoodSlicer - a tad more kerf and a tad more set - but the much longer lifespan more than compensates. https://www.bandsawbladesdirect.com/lenox-diemaster-2-bi-metal-band-saw-blades a 9' 7" 1/2"x0.25" 4tpi is $51.12

Topic drift here.... but I remember from Physiology that at a certain point - the brain will go into sleep mode - neither conscious or conscientious effort will be able to stop it. It seems perverse and ineffective to punish for sleeping on guard duty if the individual was not allowed a nap before that duty.

I use super blonde flakes. A fresh batch dissolves fairly quickly. Old flakes have a residue (a translucent gel) that never dissolves for me. Ethanol has a special affinity for water. It is 95%:5% ethanol to water. The bond is not covalent, but it requires much more energy and effort to break than is possible with distillation. One way is to distill from benzene. Doing this in a closed atmosphere WILL yield 100% ethanol. BUT, as soon as it is exposed to our atmosphere, it will pull water vapor in until it becomes 95:5 again. I have not read anything to indicate that it will continue to pull in water beyond that concentration. The ethanol will go to its gas phase if left in an open container.

Druxey was not referencing not doing a model version of the prototype, for historical reasons. There have been at least two 18th or 19th or even 20th century models that used iron and that are subjects of recent journal articles. These articles showed that the iron was gone and the wood around the holes where they were is black. Our atmosphere contains enough water that when combined with the organic acids in wood works relentlessly oxidize the iron. "Rusting never sleeps." I have decided to place the deck clamps, then use a jig to determine the top of each sill and the bottom of each lintel. This way both are sloped to follow the deck camber at each port. If you intend to plank the topside out and in - an oversize hole in the frames will be hidden.

As I understand it, there were 4 hour watches, but of the six per 24 hours, an individual was assigned to two of them. It probably came from fiction, but a continuous four on - four off was termed watch and watch and was used as a punishment. But that was mainly for midshipmen and officers. I suspect that a sleep deprived foretopman was a danger to the ship as well as himself. It sort of makes the calling of "all hands" take on a more profound significance. The RN was a bit more perverse with the crew as far as punishments. They got them addicted to two highly addictive drugs and used withholding of them as a punishment.

No. It may not be available. My search points to it being another protein based adhesive. I suggest that you give Old Brown glue a test, but use dots. Try a layer of wedding gift tissue paper along with it. It should mechanically separate. Hot ethanol will have it roll up into little balls. StewMac has this really neato seam separator knife: