Jaager

https://www.rarewoodsusa.com/species/holly/?_product_categories=holly&_paged=2 Best that I can come up with is Rare Woods. Holly is a small yree that does not grow all that straight.

I did exactly what Roger suggested. Except that I paid a woodworker with a lathe to turn my Maple drum. I used the old NRG plans - at the time, there was no model scale ready made alternative. I made it 11" long with a 9" circumference- The available media then was 9 x 11 sheets. The diameter was OK, but I would make it 12" long I also used / use contact cement. It is a positive bear to undo and clean up. I am fairly sure that Elmer's rubber cement would hold as well. You can clean it up using your thumb and friction. I enclose the motor at the bottom. The bottom is an OK location. the enclosed is a very bad idea. Leave the ends open and cut a big hole in the base and raise the unit on large rubber corks for feet. Maybe big holes in the sides. The motor can get hot during a long session. A tapered groove/ wedge cut for the leading edge can save tearing but it is tricky to do well. All and all, my Byrnes machine is the much better option if you can afford it.

Allan, It is the inside the port - of the sill - at frame level - raised - not flush with the outside planking level - (shown with your JPEG model) that I am asking about. The Goodwin cover art also shows it like this, but the inner layer of the lid is reduced to fit inside the sill and sides - the outside layer being as thick as the outside planking it closes into. The Goodwin text does not seem to address this, or I am not seeing it if he does. If I leave the lids closed, the question of flush or raised will be moot. One point for that option. Another part - I think English style was for interior planking to cover the inside edge of the sill. The French seem to have had the sill extend over the interior planking and have a lip that was farther inside - like a picture frame.

Bill, I am not shilling for Jim Byrnes or anything. I believe that quality and realistic prices should be acknowledged and praised, with machines that match our needs. As for budget, I can't make any helpful guidance. For media, I buy rolls directly from Klingspor. They are just south of me in Tarheelia, but UPS is everywhere. It is my thought that your general situation is not unique and the open decision points would apply to others, exploring this scratch build universe. If you do replace, I hold a positive wish that you get a worthwhile return, should you sell your present machine. As for the Byrnes, be sure to get spare screws et al. A small screw top plastic container, a 1/4-1/2" thick scrap board with holes for the Allen wrenches, heavy duty double stick tape to fix all this to the machine base deck, and everything is to hand - as well as a place to park screws when you change media. If you just place them on your bench, small parts run away when you are not looking.

I tend to think in proportions, rather than absolute values in a situation like this. You are reinvesting about 50% of the total value in a used machine of inferior design. For another 50% you could buy a a machine that is more reliable, better precision, and allows for a less expensive and wider variety of sanding media.

Thanks John, That does make it much easier to fabricate. I just checked Goodwin - and the cover art shows lids with a mortise on all four sides, but the text affirms your observation. The figure with the text shows a bevel at the top and bottom, but no provision for a hermetic type plug for a lid. They are just two layer plywood. The outer layer is a continuation of the planking that it interrupts - with a goal to make it invisible when closed. The inner layer is 1.5" thick vertical boards - 4 of them. The two middle ones are equal and the same stock width and the two outer boards trimmed to fit the width. Because wood only changes dimension across wood fibers and not along them, the simple design would avoid jamming if the lid environment had a higher water concentration than that of its construction environment. The inner layer is too thin to pose a problem if swollen.

I am cutting the rough openings for the Gundeck ports. of HMS Centurion. I use a standard 4" for the port sill and 3" for the lintel. This is my standard for all decks. Most of their bulk will be planked over, so any difference from prototype thickness does not matter. How much if any of the top outer edge of the sill and bottom lower edge of the intel shows when planked? Is there a mortise for the port lid at the top and bottom? Or is the planking flush there? The sides: rather than try to sand a flat plane at each side and try to make the width exact for the frames at each side, I plan to frame the sides with veneer. For determining a minimum thickness for this veneer, the question is = what is the mortise at each side? How far short does the planking fall? What is the width of the lid mortise at each side? My intent is to dye the sill, lintel, and side fillers red - the shade is yet to be determined. A color chart from the first generation ANCRE monographs only has one real red : vermilion. I am thinking that like most colors, the stark, prismatic, pure colors had to wait about 200 years for the German chemical industry to develop. The pigment would be a natural mineral. The interior of a ship is a large surface area so the mineral pigment would need to be an economical one. The red that is the aniline dye red is probably too pure a red. Toning it down is going to be work. My past experience is that a little added black goes a long, long way. A grey would be easier, but there are no white dyes to add to the black.

I built my vertical drum sander around a Dayton motor from Grainger. General Purpose Motor, 1/3 HP, Capacitor-Start, Nameplate RPM 1,725, Voltage 115/208-230V AC It is TEFC and CW-CCW It seems to be top quality. It is also large, heavy and relatively expensive. The reversing function is of no use for a thickness sander, so this is not the motor for your machine. Grainger motors tend to be expensive and finding an appropriate one as your replacement - a major headache at the least. For my machine, the motor is everything I could want. but I wonder if the Grainger customer base is corporate buyers or university grants - a base where a premium level cost is no barrier. Given your task and the value of what you are repairing, you might should be ruthless in how much you spend on a new motor and avoid gilding the lily.

The advertising copy has the motor as 1/3 HP AC and drum speed 5800 rpm. MM re-brands a manufacturer product, often from China or Taiwan, so sometimes it is possible to skip the middleman and source a new motor from the mfg - who is a middleman for the actual motor mfg. The design as it appears looks to offer some options, if you are willing to do custom mounting of a new motor. The diameter of the pulleys can affect the ultimate drum rpm. The enclosed and vented box for the motor is a bad design for motor life. More air flow - more surface area - means a cooler running motor. Hot motor = decaying motor. I have been thinking that the sweet spot for sanding is a 1700 rpm motor. Too fast a drum and there is danger of burning wood. Any motor worth having may cost you ~$200 US. Which is a significant fraction of a whole new unit. Consider offering your old machine for sale for parts on Ebay or similat and buying a Brynes machine?

There are lines that belay at the base of a mast. There are bitts and sometimes pins or cleats on a mast. Rather than set up a situation wear a line would constantly rub by going inside the floor of a top and then on to the side, I would expect it would be more efficient to go outside the floor to the side of a ship.

Boats are relatively small. They are uncomplicated. A kit that uses short cut techniques and an inadequate mould structure is a red flag and indicates a poor quality kit. Scratch building a boat for a kit model used to be a gateway and introduction to making the jump to scratch building.

It is my thought that double layer planking is used when the number of moulds is too few to allow a single layer of planking of any thickness to support a proper run without hollows.

It is sodium bisulfate (bisulphate). Here is a quick link that I found : https://mistralni.co.uk/products/sodium-bisulphate-sodium-hydrogen-sulphate It is seriously acidic, but not so potentially violent as sulfuric acid. Concentrated sulfuric acid "wants" to combine with water. Much energy must be used during manufacture to concentrate it. When it recombines with water, it gives back that energy instantly, If there is more acid than water, the heat is high enough to flash the water into steam. Adding water to acid, this will produce a steam explosion and acid will be ejected into the air. The effect of the acid in skin is not unlike holding a live steam nozzle right on your skin. It will get your attention. If I read it correctly, given times and exposure to oxygen, a sodium bisulfate solution will become a sulfuric acid solution.

I think some of the disappointment in the instructions of most traditional wooden ship model kits lies in their different evolutionary pathway from plastic kits. I think plastic - being a new material - post WWII - and the subjects for the kits were metallic and heavily engineered with lots of detailed plans for the original ships or aircraft or rail or war machines. The plans for each kit were complete and self sufficient. Plastic kits are mostly about assembly of pre- formed components. Plus- now very sophisticated finishing techniques. In origin, it was just a few jars of Testors oil based paint and a basic small brush. Wooden ships - pre 1860 - had a different sort of plan. The construction the shipwrights art and was pretty much common to all vessels - with changes from generation to generation. So there were no voluminous detailed plans to copy for a kit. The original versions were solid carved hull scratch builds, using instructions in magazines like Popular Mechanics. I see the kits starting as a shortcut for those not wishing to carve a block of Pine or Basswood. There were a few how-to books that were expected to be the major source for directions. The kits just provided some materials for what was still essentially a scratch build process. Kits became more involved and reduced a lot of the scratch build aspect. It was still assumed that general instruction books would be used for learning the basic techniques. For wooden kits, it is about first shaping the components and then assembling them. The basic skills are mostly the same for all kits, so detailed instruction for any single kit is just repeating the same instructions over and over. It also involves a multitude of tools, that must be learned and practiced with.

I have no idea what the species in your photo is, but it looks like a poor choice for planking a ship model. If you can remove the already applied planking of this stuff, you should consider substituting the planking with a more appropriate species. Already milled planking in the same color range from Modeler's Sawmill would be Castelo or AYC. If you can do you own milling, there are more choices. Hard Maple, Beech, Birch, or even Yellow Poplar if you choose carefully for the light color cuts - probably about 25% yield.

If you are framing at a scale larger than 1:96, any of the species that go under the name Boxwood would be an indulgence. They would do the job, but other more available and less expensive would do just as well. The loss to waste in framing is significant. Beech is very close to Hard Maple in color and density. The variation in possible grain pattern is (I suspect) much less with Beech. In Europe, I suspect that Beech is less expensive and much more available than it is in North America. There, for a light color framing timber, the cost and availability options are probably Beech or Sycamore maple, European sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus). In North America, the price advantage goes to Hard Maple (Acer saccharum), Beech seems to be a premium price import. There are other domestic species of Maple commercially available, but most are close to awful when compared to Hard Maple in density and friability. If domestic Beech is locally available and the price is right, it may be worth using, with the caveat that Fagus grandifolia is less dense and similar to Black Cherry in this. For components, other than framing timber, The reduced loss to waste evens the field and makes availability the main factor. For commercial species that are darker, in North America, Black Cherry is much less expensive and easier to obtain than European Pear. Pear is by far the superior as far as density and uniformity of grain. If you can get and mill it, ornamental Pear (Pyrus calleryana var,) wins against either.

The main factor is the degree of accuracy in shape. More stations = greater accuracy

Tracing the kit, I find: Blue Jacket The description lists the paint colors supplied. One of the colors matches True North model paints. The kit supplies a thinner. - Were it acrylic - water based, no thinner would need to be supplied - water is commonly obtained. True North says their product is alkyd. This is oil based. I have always had a mental conflict with the term 'enamel paint'. I have tools and pots that are enamel coated. Whatever is used to make that coating does not seem to match what a model enamel paint does. What is seems to mean is that the pigment is suspended in linseed oil ( or similar plant based oil) and an organic solvent. Reducing the concentration of the linseed oil should reduce the viscosity and allow for a thinner layer more easily spread. It also reduces the concentration of the pigment, so more layers will be needed o get a desired final density. Use the supplied thinner. Alkyd lists both alcohol and organic solvents as possible thinners. The alcohol is probably 95% ethanol (denatured alcohol) , the organic could be mineral spirits, but turpentine works at least as well or naphtha. Turp smells better.

Jeff, The size of the chisel is determined by the job it is being used for. Dockyard micro chisels are a size for decorative carvings - usually 17 century and first half of the 18th century. For larger jobs there are FlesCut and UL Ramelson. FlexCut are not difficult to find. Mountain Woodcarvers sells both Dockyard and Ramelson. This company is having a sale on factory seconds from Dockyard. UL Ramelson has a web site and individual chisels are available there. It is a pain to wait and frustrating not to have what you need , when you need it. The economical way would to get to a task, guess the size and shape of chisel needed and buy just those. This advice that I cannot practice myself,

Willem van de Velde the elder has some work from before 1650. The Galleon by Peter Kirsch may have a few illustrations that are after 1600. There is a major spike in interest and available material from 1588 and another from around 1660 on. What was in between, and it was a period of major transition , seems to be lost to the fog of time.

Plastic model assembly is not really all that much help in preparation for the skills and tools used for building a wooden hull. A major advantage of a wood based model for a plastic one is that it is much easier to backup and redo - often with much better quality wood - if you so choose. The plans that come with the kit should have the patterns for the parts that have been poorly assembled. Obtain plywood stock, It can be AA quality and thicker than the kit supplied. Scan the patterns - double check for any scanner distortion and adjust and cement to the new plywood, cut the replacement parts out and assemble using your hard learned experience. Check the vendors here, planking stock is available. The species will be much more scale appropriate.

There is a strict code for houses. The width of the tread, the height of the tread - there is a strict formula. We have a learned expectation and it is almost instinctive. When steps are being used at night, with poor or no light, and the whole structure is moving, often irregular motion. The more extreme motion occurring when the pressure to move quickly is most intense, it would be a bad idea to have unpredictable tread intervals.

If the coat is continuous with no communication between seawater and wood, in theory the microscopic larvae would not detect the presence of wood to invade it. I think I wrote this before, I do not think that the actual copper was the protection from the mollusk. It was a protection for the fragile protection layers. The copper was also a surface that offered a less tenacious hold for seaweed and barnacles. There was the actual plank bottom, then a a tar - felt - organic fiber layer that was toxic for the larvae, then a softwood sheathing, then copper. The mollusk lives its development, and wood eating stage within a single piece of wood. It does not migrate to another board. The softwood sheathing scarfs up the microscopic wood seeking larvae. The joins of copper plate to copper plate was not welded. Water must have been able to penetrate. The gaps would have been a wide open highway for microscopic larvae.

It looks horrible and tacky, I wonder if the copper on a roll that is used for roof flashing was used. It looks so thin and dents so easily. The lengths of the "plates" look too long. If the ship is afloat, what is below the waterline is unseen. I would wonder if Boston harbor is warn enough for there to be a problem with shipworm mollusk larvae? If the gauge of the sheathing is as thin as it appears, blunt force scrapping of barnacles. mussels, and seaweed would probably damage it.

I have a question from way back when Badger was about our only choice. The small compressor was just the pump and pulsing was written about as a problem. The prices now seem to make this not economical, but would patching in a portable air tank ( remote tire inflation ) reduce the pulsing? Would an in-line pressure control valve give more control?