Jaager

The basic tool is what I have been using and it has done the job. I got mine from Otto Frei. I would suggest looking at brand name jeweler's supply sites because although all of the units may come from the same shop in China, the QA on the machines going to brand sites is probably better, with economy sites getting the just so units. I added an XY table. For a while, I kicked myself for paying MM for a table that cost about as much as the drill. There are low cost ones at AliExpress, but there is the same QA issue and a low cost unit probably has loose tolerances. I had to drill a hole in the base to mount the table. I mostly use the XY table to hold a piece of 3/4" AA Birch ply as the work surface. You also will want a momentary foot switch. HSS bits. I am fairly confident that my unit will serve as a wood mill - as long as the passes are light and the tools are SHARP. For metal - especially steel, you will want an actual mill - this becomes a factor if you make your own tools. It has been as good a drill press as I have needed. For wood or brass, you will want to use a sharp awl tip to make a starter hole so that the drill bit does not dance. You want to pull the drill tip to the surface at the pilot hole before you engage the foot switch. Sock foot for feel - switch fixed to a piece of scrap flooring.

It would not surprise me if there was only one or two manufacturers of the basic chemical components - especially PVA - and all of the brand name suppliers just mix, package and label. But in the case of Gorilla - I am having unkind thoughts about the telephone sanitizer sort of mind that makes "Gorilla" so prominent in the nomenclature that the actual chemical nature can be confused among most every sort of chemical bonding agent available to the public.

Andrew, Welcome aboard. The part of antecedents that I identify with are from Braynefield in Caroline Co. From the subjects that are enticing you, I think that you will find this to be huge planet that is different from what you were expecting. At least you do not have to overcome the effects of deceptive and manipulative advertising for inappropriate and complex sailing warship. If you can hold tools, big fingers are no problem. An Optivisor can solve a focus problem. I will have to get back to you if it is cataracts. I am on the beach until mine get fixed. Opinion: Columbus - no actual plans - everything is a best guess - much may be pure fantasy - I would suggest serious research before entering. WWII - steel is better represented by plastic as modeling material. It requires serious skills in finish painting to simulate steel from a wood surface. Starting with an open boat is never a bad choice. The large sailing ships all carried open boats that will want modeling. Knowing what they are about is a big leg up. You are not that far from The Bay and it is all about boats and fishing vessels.

Suggestions: Drum rotation - max 1700 RPM With rolling pin - try a double ( both surfaces ) coat of rubber cement - both dry before mating - you will miss not having a "V" so that a raw edge does not meet the on coming work. Light cuts only - the motor wants to be 1/3 HP - this will seriously stress your lathe motor - source a replacement now. The next option is a separate motor - pulleys - when you design, do not enclose the motor - it will get hot Make a 5 sided box using three laminations of high quality corrugated box cardboard - PVA - 1/4" x 1/4" sticks for the 8 inside corners enforcement - with a hole in the base for your vac hose attachment. This sucker will produce much wood dust. You will probably need a sky hook to hold it since there is no fixed base for feet.

From what I have been reading, your Model Shipways first kit choice has sufficient information. There is much pretension - advertising that says a how-to book is much more complete than it really is. I sense that POB kit how-to books are particularly guilty of this. There is too much author ego - my way is the best way - when there are many paths and only a few rules. If you intend to translate text as well as following the pictures, until you decide on an area to specialize in and a type of build- POF, POB, carved - it may serve you better to filter thru the build logs here and look for what shows you the answers that you need. POB is well covered. It is scratch POF where various written sources become important - because of the many paths and the complexity.

The Dremel reason for being is rotational speed. There was an old Mad Magazine full page ad parody of a guy with a wooden mallet, an open can, a tomato, and tomato pulp covering everything. ~" I'm the guy how gets the 10 giant tomatoes packed into each can." A slower speed battery rotational driver with a chuck might be safer at keeping the liquid in the bottle. Bamboo skewers with a slit to hold a wing may work as well. A different skewer could be used for each color, so the cleaning step could be avoided.

It takes a library. It helps if you specialize as to era and ship type i.e. wood vs steel sail vs steam To dip your toe in: Historic Ship Models by Wolfram zu Mondfeld Neophyte Shipmodeller's Jackstay by George F. Campbell The CD sold here covering the back issues of three journals have much information.

A picture of what part has been damaged would allow for more creative suggestions. There is nothing magic about any wood. We all have our favorite species, but most of us who do are scratch builders or kit builders who are painting with wood. I was imagining the pseudo deck beam portion of a typical mold as being the part. The hull shape being acceptable and the beam being abraded too much. In that case, it would be covered by the deck, so how it looks would be irrelevant. Even clear Pine would work. For a one off plywood replacement, you could use what is about the best quality plywood available = aircraft plywood from a hobby store. In bulk, it is expensive. For spot work, the expense is not significant. With a variety of thicknesses, a sum of what is available can get you where you want to be. An advantage of wooden ship models is that all of the parts are easily replaced by other wood. Unlike synthetic plastics, it grows in trees. The kit mfg is just supplying an easy path. With a bit more work, any of it can be placed by material that is right at hand. A beginner just lacks the tools and experience to do this. Unless you reside on an asteroid, there is probably someone nearby who does have the tools and experience to help you with general woodworking.

You could keep kits in your conditioned environment. Work on the model in the garage and take the parts back into the house with you. Any tools that are iron or steel - keep them coated with conservators wax - Renaissance Wax here.

Is it possible that sturdy hardwood planks be scabbed on either side of each plywood "beam"?

Based on history, for about any kit, the only profit to be had is in the personal experience found in its assembly (and for plastic) the finish applied. For plastic, the skill and challenge is in the surface presentation. For wood, the finish is just something that has to be done. The challenge is in the fabrication. With even an elaborate wooden kit, an excellently build model would probably only sell for what was the original retail cost. The hundreds or even thousands of hours expended on the completion is an uncompensated donation. About the only ones who value a ship model are those who build them, Anyone in the 1% who would pay top dollar would also want something unique - scratch built by a name brand modeler. Most anyone else cannot cannot see the difference between an actual ship model and a starving artist decorator kitch piece of junk.

This not intended to high jack. It is fun to take a sidebar for a wider view of this project. It is interesting and unique. It is also a bit of an exploration of the taproot of watercraft evolution - at least in Europe - in the place where most of the early action was. To speculate: The pacific islanders used outriggers to add stability. The illustrations at the beginning had me thinking "outrigger" for this. This looks like a scaled up version of a dugout - which seems like the logical progression. In the Bay, early backyard builders constructed "log canoes". There was still old growth timber - tall trees with a significant diameter. The vessels were not the sort of shape that comes to mind as canoe the personal watercraft. The length was constrained by maximum log length, so they were not as long as the Med vessel here. They had a greater beam to length ratio. They were made of 3 or 5 logs joined side by side. The thickness would make the hull resistant to puncture. My thought with this is that Dorian vessel would be maybe something like three logs butted end to end at the center line and two overlapping rows on either side. As the large trees were all cut down, I can see how the hard won skills in joinery and waterproofing would evolve to using split out planks to replace the logs.

A floating vessel is like a living thing. It is subject to many forces that cause the structural parts to flex, rack, and twist. The keel does not always move the same as the bottom planking. The seam where the garboard plank meets the keel needs to be as strong and leak proof as can be had. A static model is only subject to micro movements. As long as the joint of the garboard with keel looks as though it is secure and water tight, it does not need to be a rabbet. The rabbet is a "thing" with scratch builders whose object is to mimic actual practice. With a POB or full planked solid or POF hull, a straight butt joint runs the danger of separating with an unsightly gap if time and temp and humidity flux acts in that way. "You pays your money and takes your chances." A hint for the garboard: the edge that meets the keel, stem and sternpost is a straight line from tip to tip. Any wood removal is done on the outer edge. Removing wood from the edge where it curves up the stem gives it the wrong shape. It really messes up the rest of the bow planking.

Both books in Mike's newsletter sound like they will be winners. It is a win for all of us that he could get Grant Walker back on board with the Annapolis project.

The site admin would be who probably has the answer to this question. It is in the outside sponsor link section. So even now it is a "relying of the kindness of strangers" presence. This question is an irresistible opportunity to wax philosophical. The database seems to have been a solo project. A gift from a then undergrad for whom the demands of life made continuing it impractical. It has been 2 years since he was last here. If he follows the usual pattern, he will be back to serious ship modeling in 30-40 years. It is a useful resource. Even more useful if more data such as quality and accuracy were added. Value judgements need an unbiased and objective filter. This would be a lot of work. With the elimination of slavery, about the only way to make the effort worthwhile is to pay enough to make it attractive. This is not a pay site. If it was a pay site, the forum could be mined to produce a FAQ that would totally eclipse any how-to book. Seeing a need is a fairly common occurrence. Having the skill and enthusiasm to begin to fill the need happens from time to time. Maintaining the initial enthusiasm beyond the initiation when the reward is the thanks of those served is a fantasy. The degree of masochism required would have to come from a mind that did not have the capacity to do the job to begin with. The specie reward factor is unrealistic. If evidence is wanted, just check out how few of the members here are also members of the NRG.

Mike, Your list reminded me of a trail that I gave thought to when I was wading into this. To continue with your theme but broaden your possibilities, skill, and confidence, The deadrise boats, skipjacks, and log canoes of the Bay can be a side branch investigation. These were built by backyard builders, not schooled in the art. There is a paperback by Steve Rogers covering a skipjack - the methods are a bit eccentric compared to the methods done here. H.I. Chapelle wrote a paperback - "Notes on..." that is available second hand. Ben Lankford wrote a paperback to accompany the model of the Willie J Bennett that he developed for Model Shipways, that may possibly be found second hand. The S.I. has skipjack plans for sale. The Chesapeake Bay Maritime Museum used to sell actual blue prints for various Bay fishing craft. My point is that this branch is a very approachable area for a first time scratch build. It does not require a second mortgage to obtain the needed tools and wood. It just requires and interest in the subject. You have been wise in your path so far. If you are tempted by the flash of lots of guns, liners, frigates, clippers, etc. be mindful: that way lays a time sink and possible quicksand. When you know, when you do not have to ask if you should, that is when those can be essayed with confidence.

Mark, I will take on the role of curmudgeon for this. and advise this: Take good care of and store your collection carefully. You may wind up selling off many of them. Two of the camps here are 1) kits as a gateway to scratch building (a small group) 2) kits as an end in themselves If you catch bug number 1 .... If you are one for whom what is popular or sticking to the well trod paths are things to be avoided...... The OcCre kit is probably best kept for last. Not up to the quality of the others and a full set of 3 masts and all that rigging plus lots of guns. The MS Flying Fish is a 1850's era large clipper, The kit is 1:96 scale. There is a lot of detailed rigging and a scale that requires art and finesse to do well. It is a real challenge to do well. The hull of the whaleboat is just a step beyond what you are doing. This kit is about the equipment details. There is a small book by a former NRJ editor. There are articles in the CDs in probably all three journals that are for sale here. For the fishing vessels, HIC wrote a book that provides graduate level details. For the solid hulls, check out StewMac for good quality rasps. I doubt that a POB kit mold is sturdy enough for a rasp. If you want your expenditure to pay off, try to avoid the historian, topic specialization, and explore new paths bugs.

Maple, Beech, Birch, Holly*. White Pine Lime is really pushing it, but Basswood is too soft and fuzzy to provide a crisp look. * I saw in the Wood Database that there is a European Holly. This Holly is not the snow white color of American Holly. It is actually a similar golden as is the first three above. So, the use of the white Holly for deck planking is actually a misunderstanding.

I think you are basically screwed if you get CA on a visible surface. If you using it on a surface that is too large for the whole to be treated before placement without the first part setting up, it is the wrong glue. If you are determined to use CA, see if you can find a flavor with a longer open time. I mostly use a single edge razor blade or #11 blade to remove PVA squeeze out. Franklin Hide Glue has a LOT of water. For planking that is veneer thickness, it is probably too much water. For a permanent bond, I would use Old Brown Glue. For veneer thickness, I would probably use flake in a hot pot. PVA is so much more convenient, I have to make a compromise with what was 17th century material. Hide glue is a protein. Hot ethanol will completely denature it. Zero bond. I tried using it as a reversible bond. Even on a pilot schooner @ 1:60 the depth of the bond on the moulded dimension face of the frames is too deep for hot ethanol to work without the blast area also affecting the PVA bonds ho;ding the actual frames together. I know that I could have used newspaper and or spots instead of a double coat of hide glue. The paper part is too many additional steps for me and the spots - well I am a bit compulsive and pre-programmed. I am not happy with Scotch Double Sided tape as a frame spacer reversible bonder, because of how difficult the residue is to remove from those tight spaces - why HMS Centurion is still on the stocks. A next hull will probably be done using rubber cement. The debonder - n-heptane - does not affect PVA or wood.

By precut, do you mean 8x4, 4x4, 3/4" lumber? A bandsaw will get you close to final thickness, but even the finest bandsaw blade will leave a surface that needs additional treatment. A thickness sander does that and the Byrnes model is the best. A 9" or 10" bench top bandsaw is a source of frustration for serious resawing. An under powered 14" bandsaw with unreliable tracking and low quality guides is something you do not want.

Dave, What you write indicates that you intend to build POB. That is an absolute 11 footer for me, but I offer the following: Long ago I bought the MM low end scroll saw. I found it unacceptable from the beginning. It is under powered, the blade clamps do not hold all that well, The up/down cutting action has the stock wanting to chatter. It just takes up shelf space and collects dust. IF you buy a powered scroll saw, going as high a quality as you can afford will save you endless frustration. I do significant scroll cutting of frame timbers, but a rough close enough is good enough is all that I need. What I cut is often 1/4" Hard Maple. There is no way the MM scroll saw could handle that. I use a generic 9" bandsaw with a Carter Stabilizer.. That saw is adequate for that job, but not much else. For POB and having to cut out a central spine and molds every couple of years or so, you may be better served using a high quality Knew Concepts hand scroll saw. I find the combo 1" belt sander/5" disk sander to be mostly junk. Unless you are going to sand plastic , the Byrnes disk sander is as good as it gets. If you have to ask, a 10" table saw is probably a bad idea. It is the least efficient and most dangerous way to mill scale timber from lumber. For getting planks and deck furniture from scale thickness stock, a Byrnes table saw is a magnitude better than its nearest compare.

Something to consider: PVA requires some 'tooth' at the surface of a wood-wood bond. 220 grit is right at the smoothness limit for a reliable bond. 120-150 grit is probably better, but my compulsion decrees 220. For a display surface very fine grit is personal taste. I very well may be off base with this, but there may factors at play with grit size that are not as benign as they seem. A Dennis Moore moment as it were.

There is a sort of Catch 22 involved. Anyone interested would already have their own library. Buying duplicates, especially at near retail? A beginner?, not unless they are foolishly rich. Books of the sort in question are not an investment. When my number comes up, I figure that a bequest that my library is kept as a whole will also require a substantial trust be included to maintain it as such.

It depends of your style of build. POF? POB? Carved? If you intend to be independent in your wood stock and mill your own, instead of buying it - it makes a big difference. The tools required are determined by the jobs that need to be done. The basic step is to define the jobs involved with your ambition.

I may be way off with this, but I think the only people who could produce a 4.5" slice and survive the economic cost would be an individual with a bandsaw at home. My money is on rotary cut and the curl is the equilibrium. Press apply being a problem, old school may be an answer. Scab lateral supports to the sides of the beams. Maple or a similar species. Use hitch chocks instead of clamps. Brass pins - drill holes in the deck layer and in the beams. Have small blocks of scrap between the head of the pin and the deck to provide a pressure surface. Thru drilling the beams is probably the best. When the PVA has cured, chip out the blocks and pull the pins. If the pins are small enough, the hole can be water treated to swell it closed. If too large, PVA/ wood flower can fill it. Real old school - push in a bamboo dowel. But that means a full pattern on every beam, angled and all that. As for plank length, my yard would use full deck length boards - no butts.