Jaager

It is a very fine and very hard wax mixed in an organic solvent - it is a bit thicker than Vaseline - the solvent evaporates fairly quickly - but would be no fun atoll to try to remove

Steve, About the resawing using the bandsaw, The 1/2" blade is the width that I use on my 14" Rikon. Wider does not seem to mean less wander. The floor model saws have access to a variety blade choices. For resaw operations, 3 - 4 teeth per inch work best. A lot of wood is being removed per blade rotation and a big gullet is needed. For expensive hardwood minimum set leaves a smoother surface - economy blades have too much set - bimetal blades cost a bit more, but last way longer than off the shelf steel. My guess is that your benchtop bandsaw has few choices in blades. My guess = all steel. Buy a lot of backup - the blades dull faster than would be desired. My unit tracks as well as I could expect after I followed the on-the-Web suggestion to site the blade teeth at the crown of the top wheel. My old manuals have the back of the gullet at the crown - this produces less than ideal tracking. The cost is that the teeth mar the wheel band. Now, when the blade starts to wander or do a wedge instead in vertical, it means that the blade is getting dull I am not sure that you are doing yourself any favor by using a zero clearance insert at the table for resawing. Nothing is going to be small enough to fall or jam even if there is no insert. You are discovering the wood chip problem by not letting the kerf travel down to the vac intake. It may also get between the stock and the tabletop? I also have a 9" tabletop bandsaw. I use it almost exclusively for scroll cutting. This operation does want a near zero clearance insert. Wood chips can jam the internal track of the blade - especially at the below the table blade supports. The chips also can fire off like a bullet. ( I do not care for the up-down pressure on the stock that a scroll saw produces. A bandsaw is downward pressure only. The downside is a rougher cut because of fewer TIP and some set to the blade. But a sharp blade does crew thru 1/4" stock about as fast as I care to feed it. My misreading of web page fine print caused me to make a mistake that turned out to do me a favor. Olson had a sale on 59.5" blades - I had been using 1/8" blades. The sale was for fewer TIP but thin kerf. I bought 10. Turns out that they were 1/4" instead of 1/8". I feared for a loss in cutting a sharp curve. Turns out that there is not that much loss in fine tracking and the 1/4" blades last way way longer. My 10 blades may out last me. In the US, we can get get some real crap in our choice of hobby tabletop bandsaw blades. PowerTec - I found to be not sharp and brittle steel, Bosch is now also VermontAmerican - they used to be OK, but they must have fired their QA department, because I got a batch that would have cut better if I flipped the blade and used the back side as the cutting edge. Olson - costs more - is sharper - lasts longer - the longer life is more than the additional cost - so in the end it is the economical choice. My experience with all this has provided me with the following lessons: If you will be doing serious resawing - harvesting logs and seasoning them - getting lots of 4x4 and 8x4 commercial lumber - not buying a floor model 14" bandsaw with a powerful motor - and expecting a 9"/10" tabletop bandsaw to fill in will turn out not to workout all that well. The big boys not only do the job, there are way more choices for blades. The tabletop - the advertised depth of cut is for Pine - not dense hardwood - the feed has to be slow and a blade will dull sooner than wished for. If you can accept a rough cut and have a drum, disc, and belt sander to fine tune to the line, it will be a better scroll cutter than a purpose built machine - especially if you are cutting thicker stock. So, it was not really a mistake.

You could try applying a coat or two of shellac now to protect against finger prints and when the model is complete, use EtOH to remove it and let our atmosphere get at it.

The programs that I have explored have arcs, but the function involves starting with two defined points on the circumference and connecting them. This is no help for whole moulding. Whole moulding - the center and one point on the circumference are the beginning data that is input . Modern programs allow the center to be derived, but not used as a beginning. I suspect that it is necessary to work thru the exercises in Anthony Deane's book to understand the tools needed. The key curves on the profile i.e. main wale, etc. have centers than are far above what paper is needed by a plan in its finished shape. The one or two drawings of ships being drafted that have come down to us (M. Baker) show the draftsmen using large flat tables. Which would be uncomfortable - backache and spasms - but a near vertical board would need to be impractical in height. A computer would be much easier - but what is needed is a function that starts with: define center - define point on circumference - draw arc. Least squares fit curves are not a favored method either as far as my past examinations have found. What is needed is a math formula that simulates what a long thin wooden batten does to connect three points. The math formula used to smoothly connect three points in the drawing programs that I have examined show far less restraint in possible solutions than an actual wooden stick would allow.

Two thoughts about the rigging: Both museums and builders here have hulls that stop with stub masts = no rigging Do not look at rigging as a whole. Think of it as one line going from its A to its B. Add each individual one at a time.

Oh well, it was worth taking the shot. It is appreciated that you offered what you have presented.

This is for a bucket list project that is a long shot at best. Is there a 2D drawing or CAD program that includes the following functions? The ability to select and place a compass center and use it to scribe an arc between two points on the circumference. Draw a spline curve using three or more points - probably a least squares fit curve function. The program would ideally be a hobbyist level cost or a cloud subscription sort of critter. The 16th and 17th century ship designers mostly used a straight edge, compasses - large and small, and flexible battens. This limited quiver of tools is why those hulls had a similar shape. Most current drafting programs seem to totally ignore these old methods.

If you find that this project is practical, you might consider becoming a site sponsor. I do not know what the costs involved are, but your cartouche could contain images of the blades and the link go to a page with the blades.. A descriptor with each blade at your site could provide the wood thickness that it is designed to cut. Sort of idiot proof the process. Since the blades are small and not heavy, you could explore the possibility of having economy mail to Europe or work a deal with someone in the EU. - recurring factors that show up here - sort of like it might pay Jim Byrnes to find a Maw & Paw distributor in the EU and you both use it.

I may be wrong about this, but as I understand it: carbide is mainly suited for use with metals like steel. They stay sharp longer but they are also brittle and allow for little lateral deformation. HSS allows for flexing. but quality steel is probably worth the extra. CML https://www.cmlsupply.com/drill-bits-individual/ sells drill bits

First - thank you for your visit here. I think that a significant number of us use machines with: ID 1/2" OD 4" max OD 3" when it is sufficient for the depth of cut For our uses it would make things more clear if you provided a table for TPI Assume that the material being cut is dense hardwood Maple or harder maximum depth is >1" Max TPI per thickness of cut We use expensive wood so we wish to minimize loss to kerf So the table should also include minimum blade thickness per depth of cut to avoid blade flex. What we go by now is from an old Hobby Mill publication: "For sheet stock above 3/16" or 4.5mm: Use the I-293 .040 kerf blade. Actually you can use this blade on thinner stock but it has a thicker kerf (more waste) and a few less teeth than the I-292 blade (chipout sooner with thinner stock) For stock between 3/32" (3mm) - 3/16" (4.5mm): Use I-292 .030 kerf blade. If there is chipout around 3/32", go to the #99 blade For stock between 3/64" (1mm) - 3/32" (3mm): Use #99 170T blade. Main change in blade is the finer pitch For stock thinner than 3/64" (1mm): Use #100 224T blade." These are probably the most often used blades. If you have better experienced based suggestions there would probably be interest here. For stock thinner than 3/64" (1mm): Use #100 224T blade.

Will this work to help with fine detail color application? I saw a video featuring an experienced boat/yacht finisher. I think he was advocating a rather vigorous technique for varnish application. (I think he favored organic solvent based varnish). The key factor that I took home was that he advised wrapping "masking" tape from over the heel to abut half way to the tip. The wrapping was fairly tight. It reduced the flopping arc of the fibers - stiffing them - and it makes migration to the heel a longer journey in a compressed region. Cleaning solvent can neutralize any bonding between the tape and fibers to remove it during cleanup.

Steve, I think that one answer is that it is up to you. If you are using a large bandsaw to do this resaw operation If it is planking stock that you are producing The easy way it to slice the plank width as the slice thickness - with extra for thickness sander removal Then the plank thickness is what your Byrnes table saw slices off. If the grain that will show is not what you want on display: That a much thicker slice for the first cut from the board - one that is as thick as you are comfortable feeding into your bandsaw. If you are stuck with using a 10" table saw - this slice is whatever the maximum depth of cut for you saw blade ~ 1-2" usually Rotate thisk stock 90 degrees. Then slice the pre sander widths. The Byrnes saw product will be the plane cut face There could be no grain or grain arcs depending on your luck. I hope that your Sycamore is the English species using that name - Acer pseudoplatanus If it is the American species using that name - Platanus occidentalis You really do not want it showing. It is a bit brittle, it stinks, another name for it is Lacewood - the grain is really busy. The Acer is almost as hard as Hard Maple - with Hard Maple - edge slices can show a variety of grain patterns - fire - fiddleback - all of the patterns that other sorts of woodworkers pay a lot extra for and that we do not want. It is up to chance and depends on the way the tree rings are oriented to the plane of the blade. For frame timber in the lower hull where there is a curve- there is no hope for invisible grain figures - I just let Mother Nature win that one. Your Pear looks like a challenge. If you have an edger - getting a straight edge - will cost you a lot of wood If you do not have an edger - you really want a bandsaw a ~1/2" carrier board to rife against the fence and be on the saw table. Fix the Pear plank to the carrier - drywall screws if you gotta - with enough beyond the outer edge of the carrier that the blade will get you your complete straight edge. The outer cutoff and be against the fence too - slices from it will just be ever shorter and the end grain will be really angled - but it will not be edger chips either. The carrier board on a bandsaw is also way way to mill logs and branches. Steel framing braces and long screws to keep it fixed to the carrier.

For bench top all-in-one a mill can probably fill the bill, However I predict that that a model that fit your requirements would have a significant foot print, be heavy, and be expensive. The advantage is that being a mill, the bearings would be meant to stand up to significant lateral forces - that is allow you to mill metal if that is something that you wish to do. The other choice is to have a smaller bench top drill press for bits in the #50-80 range for your in door work room and a free standing economy drill press for your unconditioned shop. I have gotten good use from my version of ah EuroTool DRL-300 - I probably lucked out by buying it on sale from Otto Frei - because they probably get the upper end of QA - while a discount supplier may not be as selective. Sometimes, trying to do it using a compromise one does it all winds up costing you more in the end.

It would be worth your time to read the pinned threads at the top of this section - for beginner suggestions - a beginner boat kit as a way to get your feet wet - while gaining perspective and skills while harnessing your necessary initial enthusiasm - to avoid water that is too deep. If this hobby takes hold of you, you progress to the scratch build ambition, and you have or have access to at least a big bandsaw and a Byrnes thickness sander A version of scratch building also includes Replacing less than ideal kit supplied wood with more appropriate species - Fabricating your own sub-assemblies - Adding more detail: In hyperbole this is called "kit bashing" but it is really kit augmentation and or kit adaptation. It is the common way for those of us with no fine woodworking experience to progress to plans only independence for modeling subjects. Why this post= Since I am not able to keep certain obsessions under control, this is what I think I would do in your place. Understanding that I have no concept to the actual travel distances. You have seeming easy access to wood that is not economically practical to get to the Atlantic coast. It is Pacific Madrone - from a shop that can kiln dry it without it self destructing https://www.snwwood.com/Northwest-Hardwoods/Pacific-Madrone It is Sustainable Northwest Wood in Portland. They seem to be a "do a physical visit only" shop. But then you can handpick for grain and color. (Pick'em up truck and at least 100 BF) The consensus here from those with experience with it is that you do not want the Port Orford Cedar. It seems that there are several regional mills that supply something that you do want if the scratch build bug takes hold. AYC Alaska Yellow Cedar - a site search will show you what it is all about.

Almost nothing is known about what the original Mayflower looked like and there are certainly no plans of it. There may well have never been any plans as we think of them. Kits that purport to be the Mayflower are pretty much imaginative fabrications created from thin air. Kits based on the reproduction Mayflower II are based on a design of Wm Baker, He made assumptions and choices that probably reflect nothing that actually existed in the past. A kit would only a model of his creation. The reliable way would be to use 17th CENTURY DUTCH MERCHANT SHIPS Text, Photos and Plans for the Ship Modeler by Ab Hoving and scratch build. It might be wise to start with a boat that was a part of the equipment, then do one or two of the smaller vessels. If you do not have a copy already, I would advise that you do so as soon as possible. Pier Books migrated to SeaWatch Books but I would not count on SeaWatch migrating to a successor. @Ab Hoving Perhaps Ab might have a much more authoritative suggestion.

We have very different imperatives it seems. The avoid Balsa part still stands. But you can use open pore hardwood - it just means using a sand-n-sealer to fill the pores. Hobbymill - a new European supplier has more than suitable wood. The premium species than he offers is best used with a clear finish. Painting it hides what is being paid for. If you have professional or amateur woodworkers nearby, you can ways buy construction lumber and have someone with the required tools resaw it into a thickness that you can use.

I wrongly assumed that the Balsa was for a filler for POB. I never dreamed that you intend to use it for something important. For a deck or anything that shows the only species that rates as "quality" is Birch. Lime is better than its American brother Basswood but it is only sort of OK, average kit sort of stuff. North American Black Walnut is "quality" but not for our uses - it is open pore and does not scale. Anything else called Walnut is there because it has a color that is sort of close. All are also open pore, often coarse grain and or brittle. None of it is scale appropriate. aircraft plywood is suited for use as a sub flooring if a deck is then planked wth a scale appropriate veneer that is too thin to be a single layer. If you can only find one supplier that is domestic to you, I would guess that you are not in either North America or Europe. Without you should tell us where you are, none of us can help you find a helpful source, or suggest species in your region that would be appropriate.

The more efficient and satisfying way is to avoid this inappropriate species to begin with and use a species that is better suited. In North America - the most economical is construction Pine, then comes Yellow Poplar, if you gotta, Soft Maple, Aspen or other Cottonwood. These are soft, but are less prone to crush and hold trunnels; and sand without tearing. Other geographic regions will have local species that serve. .

No data here. My guess would be that the decoration would adapt to the structure. To be cynical, the second option where the hull is damaged to accommodate the decoration - the carver probably valued the wreath more than the hull and did not wish to risk having to remake the carving.

It was sort of an exercise in what if were I in your situation. I admit that I have not needed to Foredom but for the one rabbet experiment. Flying by the seat of my pants, I opted for the LX model - favoring torque over speed. I haver never used any Dremel at anything like max speed., so I did not see needing the Foredom that featured that. As for the vac, I see a table saw and a scroll saw - a 1.25" hose to a vac lets you use them where the light is good and keep the dust down - if you progress to scratch, there could be other dustmakers. As for the hole, I would rough saw a ~2.5" hole and fit one of these on the wall on either side - as well as feeding a piece of 12G Romex thru it. You would want a 220V line but your saw room looks like it could hold a 14" bandsaw - with this and a Byrnes thickness sander - you are an instant sawmill. A Byrnes table saw is wonderful, but a 10" table saw is a waste of money - a bandsaw is way more useful - unless you are also building actual furniture. These are just thought burrs to sit in your mind for the future. It is too expensive, by I would want a Kalwall skylight to counter the gloom.

Richard, One of the "gifts" of aging is heed for more and more light when doing closeup work. LED clamp desk lamps are very handy for providing light. Your benches being 3.5" at the front rule these lamps out. But clamping along the front edge is less than ideal anyway. MM used to sell a lamp that had a metal block with a 1/2"(?) hole that screwed into the back wall . The lamps swinging in from behind the work is handy and less cluttering. I cannot find these type mounts on line. But looking at your setup: a length of 2x4 fixed to the back wall - 1.5" up/down and 3.5" as a sort of shelf. Right angle steel brackets/braces -lag screwed into the wall studs - to hold. Mount it just under the wall pug covers. 1/2" holes in the 3.5" shelf would seat the posts for the lamps that the clamps are used for. A spread of holes will allow for a variety of locations. If you do not have 110V outlets under your bench a hole at the back for a power cord will allow for the use of a foot operated momentary on/off switch when you get tools like a bench drill press or Foredom flex shaft or similar tool where always on is less than ideal. I also mounted a fold down steel shelf bracket on the back wall to hang the flex shaft motor - I bought the bench mount style and paid the few bucks for the hanging bale. You could also hang 4' shop lights using adjustable chains from eye bolts in the ceiling studs. With two rooms, you can keep a shop vac in the saw room, make a 2.5" dia hole for the hose, use a RIF remote router/vac on/off with a clicker. The vac and its noise can be in the room where you ain't. A Dust Deputy type cyclone trap is a good friend to have.

Kris, Good enough! you seem to have a realistic and sober perspective on the limitations of your fix. That is about all that can be expected. No more worries. I was startled when I saw the quality and style of the Resolution (1700) plan, because it did not look like any 1700 plan I had seen before. I investigated and it is Resolution (1770) a 74. A sort of typo that I am very prone to make. Many of us only wish that there were a lot of plans from around 1700 and beyond any hope that they were that complete. The mere thought of such is enough to cause ears and eye stalks to go to full alert! A full on Pavlov response. 😉 And as per @Egilman - stacking the layers of frame plans, shaping and faring a hull, faring the lines in 3D all will show what needs to be fixed from distorted plans. At the time, I sort of doubt that any ship was identical to its design plan. Wood is forgiving and requires adaptation. Iron and steel not so much.

This is probably me being impertinent and irreverent. Consider this as a passing non tenure track faculty member from a different department saying that you may wish to take a step back and look at the problem from a broader perspective.. No selling or any recruitment going on. no insults are intended. Wow! The plans in post## figure 1 are some seriously messed up plans. My point: I would be very suspect about how much more accurate any holistic repair of a plan this messed up would be. There are articles in the old NRJ and Model Shipwright that discuss the distortions from time on paper or vellum and from less than perfect camera lenses. It can be different in different regions of a large plan and a single formula for the whole could be just as unsatisfactory as the original. As an alternative to a holistic repair: The data on each station should be considered complete unto itself (until it proves that is not.) Set up a baseline. Set the station locations at their ideal intervals. Isolate each station as an individual. Rotate each as much as it needs to be vertical. Take the data points from that to connect the dots. resolve any bad curve runs (fare it). Fake it for ports, blocks, channels, steps, etc. that are between the stations. i.e - measure the distance from the nearest station. I do not do virtual modeling in 3D. I am dedicated to turning expensive hardwood into sawdust. Hardcore POF is my area of focus. I did hand lofting of all frames a few times and decided not to do that any more. Doing that using ink and a drawing board is nothing if not extremely tedious. Doing the shapes of 100 plus frames takes a LONG time. Searching for an alternative, I could find no 3D CAD that would not allow me to extract every frame should I be able to insert the lines plan. I am led to believe that a 3d modeler would allow this - which would then require a whole lot of work rendering a series of cross sections with tight limits. One for every frame or every bend depending on the framing style. (NURBS being much better at hard material curves than vertex - which is better for flesh type curves) (Old memory: Converting a NURBS prop to vertex version in a vertex based rendering program is like dropping a block of neutronium of a scale. Way too many points.) I have ultimately found a better way and I only need to use a GIMP clone (Painter 19). Now, I do not recommend Painter to anyone else -but I already had it, having used upgrades of it (Painter 3D) from my Poser 3 days - it does raster, but the bulk of the program is about simulating Bob Ross on a computer screen -- although not much tends to be all that "happy". A long way of saying that I am an austlander just paying a quick visit. But we do face similar (the same) problems with less than ideal plans.

Buried back in some old threads are discussions of linen yarn sources. Most obvious are Etsy vendors from the Baltic region. Most is natural so that it looks like greenish hemp. A problem is that the smaller diameter yarns have inclusions from being poorly combed. A Byrnes ropewalk includes enough stress that the yarn breaks more often than not. For nomenclature: plant fibers< yarn < thread With linen it is yarn = rope with cotton it is tread = rope There is some some really small stuff from Western Europe that is three yarns twisted, so it is ready made rope. The links are in the archives. But who knows what SARS-2 has wrought as far as all of them surviving? Which enforces my bias of picking one running rigging color ( half bleached or white if that is all that is offered) - buy a lot - dye it to make standing rigging. To me, rigging that looks like a piano keyboard just looks wrong.

Bob, I have no recommended source. My father worked for a commercial laundry that contracted with small local hospitals - back when they were closer to what was seen in The Godfather film. Interesting things were sometimes folded up in OR drapes. Some came home. I was also married to an RN and some equipment did not make it back to CS. It is all +/- 50 years old or so, but the quality holds. Even some of the sprung ones work well enough. Which is probably why they stayed with the laundry. Surgeons of that time had some really spectacular Ego demonstrations.