Jaager

That is the factor that concerns me. I see a balance between the friction and the contact time being half and the longer trip around the drum allowing for more cooling. If the fabricator can and will do it, and does not want a king's ransom I guess I will just try it and see. If heat is a problem, I can fit a larger pulley on the drum and take the machine to a local belt supplier and get the correct new belt. I see a challenge feeding a two foot plank that is 2" thick and 7-8" wide. It weighs a lot more than a 1/3" slice. Bandsaw observation: The 2x4 framing timber slices are a lot straighter than a fuzzy cupped hardwood plank allows. The blade seems to cut straighter if the convex side is on the table.

I have a drum sander made using plans from the guild - probably from the 1970's I use it now for 60-80 grit to get two clear smooth surfaces - my bandsaw slices need ~0.045" planed on each surface for scar and wander removal. The old motor - a 1/3 HP cap. start finally died - I was a bad daddy = poor vent closed box - did not see the ocean of saw dust that was haft way up the motor. I have replaced it with a new Granger 1/2 HP 1700 rpm TEFC GP no cap. and I cut large holes in each side for air flow. It works really well. The new 1/2HP has a 5/8" shaft instead of a 1/2". I bought a new 4: x 5/8" pulley that got here the same day as the new motor. I do not have room for an actual planer - It would be that or my car in the garage. The constant salt air - not good for a car. Now I want to tempt Fate. The drum is 3" x 11" Hard Maple - it is showing cracks - way back when 9x11 paper was it and this drum fits that exactly. I use Weldwood Contact cement to hold the medium. Even though I now use cloth backed medium, it is still a chore to replace - nothing that I have tried will dissolve the contact cement. Mineral spirits and Naptha will kill it and turn it into sticky balls, but it is work to clean. I can get an Aluminum rod - custom cut to 11" - 3" but I thick I want to get a 4" diameter. The increase in diameter will increase the area per unit time of sandpaper at a given RPM. Should be OK for the new motor I think. If I leave the pillow blocks where they are - I will lose 1/2" of stock thickness. My drum has a 6" pulley My motor has a 4" pulley This means that the drum is rotating 66% of the motor. If I get a 4" Al drum - custom cut to 11" from MetalsDepot, I found a 1/2" steel keyed rotary shaft at M-C , If I get two 6" wedges from MM - with a wedge mechanical paper hold like Jim's design - paper change will be easy. If I raise the pillow blocks to be able to sand thicker stock, I can keep my present belt if I replace the 6" drum pulley with the 4" pulley from my old motor. I will get an additional 1.75" of possible stock thickness I just need a local shop to dill a 1/2" hole down the center of the AL rod. Mill a key way into the inside hole to connect the shaft to the drum - partway at one or either end should do the trick? Mill a wedge slot and tap for 4 holes. I figure that trimming 1/4" from each end of the two 6" wedges should be no problem? Now the question: Will increasing the drum circumference from 9.4" to 12.5" and increasing the RPM of the drum from 1100 RPM to 1700 RPM - thus increasing the area of sanding medium per unit time cause a problem? If it does, I guess I can get a larger diameter drum pulley and try to find a new belt that fits. I am of a hope that I will find out Tuesday if I can find a local shop to mill the Aluminum and if the cost is acceptable. I really would like to surface my rough 8x4 by 2 foot Maple and Cherry to play nicer with my bandsaw,

A license and inspection is not needed for home built furniture, but if you use a simple plate glass and some sort of accident happens and the glass breaks into obsidian sharp spear points you might wish that you had been required to use a tempered glass that shatters into harmless balls.

It is not necessarily an either-or situation. Do a final shaping on the outside of the solid hull. Fix it to a base upside down and use it as a mould for planking. Study the planking run using serious sources. I don't think the serious up curve at each end is what it appears to be. It is carving in large chunks of wood I think - not my area.

No miscommunication. I just took the opportunity for a riff. After we got our hands waked for venturing out our area.... Your interpretation looks accurate to me. And you certainly have enough experience to essay as much of the structural fine points as you can tolerate. You know what is involved. It is a cost-benefit situation. I am thinking that by sticking to only the necessary, two and maybe three ships could be built for the time and effort required by a fully detailed model. But what do I know? I am still stuck in my framing rut. It has been a while, but I was channeling the occasional tyro who bangs in with too much enthusiasm and a mistaken certainty that a fully detailed first rate from scratch is not really a problem and manageable.

Allan, Touching base, but I have nothing to offer on this point. I do have one "wonder" about this sort of detail on a design plan. I have the impression that prior to Anson's control of shipbuilding, that the individual masters at each yard were very protective of their "prerogatives". Allin's exercise of this lead to a disastrous result for Victory 1737. Would they pay any attention to construction detail like scarphs ? Since we do not have a seminar room for scratch builders, jumping on any opportunity for general discourse seems worthwhile. I am a bit of heretic on this sort of detail. I am purely superficial about otherwise hidden detail. I prefer fully planked decks, so I opt for simple one piece beams - since they are hidden. This saves on carlings, ledges, and all sort of knees. I know that many of the contemporary English shipyard models feature minimally planked decks. No definitive information would be added by speculating on the reasons behind it, but after years of observation, my determination is that once I have seen one, I have seen enough. Too busy and unfinished looking for my eye. I do not intend to be negative about this, I am suggesting that rather than mechanically following a formula for an acceptable look, take a wide angle view and determine what sort of final look will fit your esthetic. I wonder just how many derelict scratch build logs would have reached finished status if the author had not become overwhelmed by the complex internal detail? A shallow and superficial epidermis only works just as well for everyone but the cognoscenti. To offer a comment about decks that I did not see commented on, since I am suggesting fully planking the decks: A recent photo of the deck of Tennessee showed the deck. Tennessee was a later era and another country, but I saw no evidence of any trunnels - plus I saw no butts on any of the strakes. To my eye, the deck was clear of any of the faddish detail distractions so popular now. Dean

Lee Valley sells small packages of 3 shades of shellac flakes The dark amber looks pretty garnet-like to me - I plan to try it on Maple. https://www.leevalley.com/en-us/shop/tools/supplies/finishing/finishes/76311-shellacs?item=56Z4028

Tung oil will go over a shellac base, so you have burned no bridges. If you do not wish to wait for pure Tung oil to polymerize naturally Sutherland Wells offers a variety of already partially polymerized Tung oil - and now they have 4 oz sample sizes that will not break the bank. https://www.sutherlandwelles.com/original.html

The raw dark shellac has a wax component. The wax increases solubility in ethanol. The more refined the shellac, the more wax is removed. There is a shellac that is one step more refined than super blonde, super blonde is pretty refined. I think amber is close to saturated at 4 lb cut I think super blonde is about saturated at 2 lb cut, 1 lb cut is a good concentration if you have the patience. If you round 1 gal = ~ 4000ml 1 lb = ~ 500g 500/4000 = 12.5% 10% is easy to make if you get a 100 ml graduated cylinder and Amazon has electronic scales for~$15 so small batches are easy to make. I like round numbers 10% 20% .....

LED version of fluorescent 4' light - evenly spaced. Cover the bottom and sides of the box with aluminum foil - heavy duty probably plays nicer - 3M spray adhesive might work to bond it Suspended above the LED's = Kyped from Home Depot $16 each: OPTIX 23.75 in. x 47.75 in. White Acrylic Light Panel Acrylic lighting panels offer good light transmission Prismatic surface helps diffuse light from a fluorescent bulb Lightweight structure makes it easy to place and move Acrylic lighting panels are an economical, lightweight and easy to use solution for all your fluorescent lighting cover needs. Standard sizes fit most drop-in ceiling systems as well as many standard fluorescent lighting fixtures. They can be cut fairly easily using standard handheld plastic sheet cutters to fit custom lighting fixtures. Available in multiple finishes and colors, these panels are ready for use in a variety of both commercial and residential locations including kitchen and bath fixtures, basements, office buildings, schools, garages and recreation rooms. Soften any fluorescent light fixture to create a professional looking presentation today with these acrylic light panel covers. Made of white, non-yellowing acrylic Commercial-grade suspended-ceiling light panel Approximately 8 sq. ft. coverage area per piece Prismatic surface disperses light evenly Working surface should probably be tempered glass Glass Tops Direct. 48" x 96" Rectangle Glass Top 1/2" Thick - 1" Bevel Edge With 1" Radius Corners Save 50% Original price $1,689.90 Current price $844.95

An excellent job so far - on one of the more difficult ships to model.

In Deane's Doctrine the main wale is defined by itself. It has no relation to the sheer of the main deck. There was an effort/ hope that the gunports do not totally cut thru the wale - which negates its purpose. The Doctrine is between the time of the 18th century models and the actual galleons. The Doctrine still has aspects of a system of formulas - adjusted over time - but reflective earlier design methods. Models of Santa Maria are based modern design creations. Just some naval architect from our time exercising his imagination of what he thought the ship probably looked like. It is all a fantasy. However you did it, there is no documented proof that it was not that way. Next time for hull planking - the main wale goes first - all of the outer skin is a reflection of it. Next is the garboard. Its upper edge wants to look like it comes from a diagonal. A wavy edge - not good for the rest of the planking run.

Galapagos finches?

The Continental shipbuilders were English shipbuilders until they decided not to be. They used the same books and same Establishments. The properties of wood is a constant. The ratio of the size of the timbering to the size of the ship is not a national value. The species of wood used can be. There are tables that have different sizes for timbers depending of the species of wood used. Try not to obsess about being exact. Close enough is good enough. It was wood. They did not have sophisticated electronic rulers. I use Yedlinsky . Find the ship's class and look up the scantlings. I find that the Admiralty plans for captured ships are often fairly useless for determining R&S. The stations are often arbitrary in location and distance. Some of them are at variable locations. With as designed plans, The tables give floor thickness. The lettering and numbering of the stations reflect the number of frames between each station. The difference is the width of the space. As for the moulded dimension, tables from this era give minimal data for in and out. You have to look closely. Use what data there is and use an artist's eye to get the shape. I translate cutting down to be the thickness (deep) at the outer edge of the keel/keelson. When I used a drawing board, I used a compass to draw a half circle with the origin in the frame line. A line that hits these arcs at a tangent is the moulded dimension. Tedious at best. Painter is easier. Now I have a file with the range of frame moulded values - each value is a yellow filled circle that is the diameter - a faint black circumference helps - on its own layer. Just kiss the frame line and connect the tangents on the inside. I use as many as I need to get a line that looks good. Layers are easy to duplicate. It is quick after some practice.

It is mostly used for old school doped paper covered flying models. I do not know the magic search terms needed to find their suppliers in EU. a Google search turned up and article in a 2019 Ropewalk that said that @MrBlueJacket sourced a similar product from a European supplier - perhaps he may provide you a link?

This is obviously opinion and not from any book of laws: This is for any visitors attracted to your title. It is not really what you are after. "There is a problem - an unavoidable barrier - with any kit supplied sails. The numbers are huge against any materiel that a kit manufacturer can afford to supply being anywhere close to the canvas being in scale. If this is important to you, but you wish to display sails - a fabric like paper - SilkSpan for example - will get you much closer to realistic. This is a scratch project - but one requiring almost no additional expenditure on tools. Being paper, you can practice and discard as much as is needed. Instructions abound here and in a SeaWatch publication." You started with linen - actual flax? As I understand it - the hierarchy is fibers -> yarn -> thread -> rope Linen yarn at its smallest is about where cotton thread is at its smallest. Cotton - made with expensive long fiber starting will be the finest and may be as close to scale draping behavior as any actual cloth gets - it has a special name that I have lost. Even this may be too translucent for your specifications. Thought experiment: How about using SilkSpan - the thickest of the three choices (This is flying aircraft models centric materials so their vendors may be a place to look.) Bookbinders pH neutral PVA will bond paper and dry clear. You can glue up layers of paper to get the patched effect that you want. If it is too translucant, high quality smallest grain oil paint - Rembrandt, Grumbacher, or something similar - oil because water base will affect the paper - thin ( turp or minieral spirits. Do not know if linseed oil needs to be a part but having it will probably speed drying/polymerization) start with a white base and tint with whatever color gets to aging effect desired. Add layers of paint until it is opaque enough.

Look up Enterprise in whatever tables of masting and rigging are closest to its year and list them by spar and line. Look up Surprise and do the same. If they are the same: Mic the spars in the kit and tightly coil each type the rigging line around a dowel and count the number of coils in a 1 inch distance. The number of coils divided into 1 yields the diameter. The tables are probably line circumference, so the table numbers divided by pi are your values for comparison. If the kit numbers match the chart you made up for Enterprise then -- well the spar and line stock has to come from somewhere, so why not. But the research of Enterprise masting and rigging scatlings needs to be done first. I forgot the blocks - do the same with them. Block size is determined by the size of its line. On an actual ship there is a variety of line diameter. In scale a lot of that diameter is too close to differentiate. It simplifies things a bit. Unless a ship is one of the rare ones with individual masting and rigging data, A kit mfg would or should have done the same lookup. It is then a matter of you being able to accept the compromises made for the material in the kit.

Were this Japan, Jim would qualify as a national treasure. His skill, craftsmanship, precision, and material selection has no competition. His determination to do it right harkens back to a lost era and was rare even then. Would that he had trained up a group of apprentices. His passing will leave an immense hole.

Re. the picture in post #43: I don't see it as Hahn style so much as I see it as derisive parody of POF. It could be trying to be a kitsch decorator simulacrum of a ship model or a cynical attempt to destroy the reputation of all POF. Whatever it is, that is not POF.

There is a problem - an unavoidable barrier - with any kit supplied sails. The numbers are huge against any materiel that a kit manufacturer can afford to supply being anywhere close to the canvas being in scale. If this is important to you, but you wish to display sails - a fabric like paper - SilkSpan for example - will get you much closer to realistic. This is a scratch project - but one requiring almost no additional expenditure on tools. Being paper, you can practice and discard as much as is needed. Instructions abound here and in a SeaWatch publication. This means that the presence or absence of sails should be a non-factor in your choice of kit. A cost is that each sail comes with its own additional set of lines to mount and run. It makes rigging significantly more in factors of time and complexity. Galleons - race galleons - were a lot more popular in the early days of ship modeling. The second hand books with these 1920's 30's 40's adventures could be fun to explore for things to do with the kit. and this book: THE GALLEON PETER KIRSCH US NAVAL INSTITUTE PRESS ANNAPOLIS, MD 1990 is excellent - if you can find it.

My first given was incorrect. There are red lines. I missed that. Struck out! Drift: I can't think of any use that I would have for the shear line?

Given that there is not all of the interior drawn in red, that the line shows no reference to the outside rails and mouldings, that it is all on the same level, and that it is at the correct distance above the gunports - I believe that it is the underside of the deck at the side.

Karl, I agree about the size of the Proxxon. I agree with your evaluation of the machine. I am always on the watch for something better and am fortunate to be able to afford the search. Your presentation did refocus my attention. I did another search for an a grinder with an angle between 0 degrees and 90 degrees. If only Foredom Flex had that attachment! All I found was a series of air driven tools for automotive use. There was one on sale at Harbor Freight - electric - acute angle - not enough acute and pretty fat. I thought about it, but after sleeping on it - I have decided to give it a pass. Remembering fighting with the chuck and the length of the 1",2",3" Chinese disks on the Kaleas angle grinder ( MM is their agent in the US - rebranded ) I reevaluated my preconception about how large the cutting surface on the disk should be. I think I can use the larger disk that comes with it and use fine touch and finesse to get almost everywhere inside the hull. The machine does a trick (works well) on shaping the outside - quickly. I have an advantage over your method as far as shaping without damaging the edges of the frames. I have Pine fillers where the spaces are. They have an easily reversible bond - to punch them out when the hull is final. (I am still working on finding the perfect glue to temporarily hold them and let go and disappear.) Centurion is on the stocks because the disappear part using Scotch double sided tape did not work out all that well. I got frustrated with that fiddly bit. It is tight in there between the frames! I wonder if years down the road, you will wish you had chosen the complete hull 1:60 option - my HMS Centurion 60 1732 is 1:60 and I like the size. 50% of the volume of the 1:48.

I did and still have hold over using a very similar method. A problem with it is gravity. The sticks bend. Flat is better. For my framing stock I use this: They used to be 24" long - my preferred stock length - easier to handle than the 8' length it is in the lumber yard. ~ $2 each. I use old school chalk to mark each stick with its thickness. Blue chalk is persistent. These can be handy for 12" or less - the long dividers are fixed, but the cross dividers are temporary.

Just some random comments: If you think the 64 gun hull is large, you should try the 118 gun Commerce de Marseille? Even at 1:60 it is a contest for who will get the work room! You are very fortunate in being able to source Sorbus torminalis. The wood looks excellent, I have tried many tools in a search for a way to shape the inside of the framing. The angle grinder that you show is one that works fairly well for me. I wish I could find a slim electric grinder that is 45/120 degrees as it would make getting inside easier - but I only find compressed air tools with that feature.. The one that I find to be more useful is this one: https://www.kaleas.de/en/modeling-tinker/minitool/140/minitool-right-angle-grinder The disk that comes with it is a bit wide. There is a chuck accessory that allows for disks with smaller diameters. The problem is that it extends the cutting surface out from the motor. The motor itself is about the size of my hand, so if I can get my hand inside, I can get the grinder inside. I do not know the metric equivalents but I am quite pleased to have a drum sander to shape the frames. A quality 1/3 HP TEFC motor with a 1/2 inch shaft and ~1700 rpm is key . To mount it so that the shaft is vertical, all that is needed is a firm base with big rubber sound/vibration absorbing feet and a sort of Erector Set type steel angle pieces with holes for threaded bolts. A box or table is not needed. Almost nothing on a frame is 90 degrees, so a table just gets in the way. I have two problems with commercial oscillating spindle sanders: 1) The drum mounts are usually proprietary - you can only use their drums 2) The mounts are not a simple 1/2 inch rod. With a simple 1/2 inch rod, other things can be mounted - a chuck that can hold burrs and cutters - any other cutting tool that has a 1/2 inch mount, buffing pads, grinding wheels. It is easy to get drums with a variety of diameters that will fit directly on a 1/2 inch shaft. I prefer sleeveless drums, It is easy to replace the cutting material using sandpaper sheets. I worry about the tightening to secure a sanding sleeve to a rubber drum getting the drum out of round. I also have a drum that is 3 inches diameter and 6 inches tall. The extra height is useful for large frames. TEFC - the drums generate much sawdust. An enclosed motor with its own cooling fan protects the motor. I also have a large piece of cardboard with a 1/2" hole in its center sitting on the motor where the shaft comes out - It directs the sawdust away from the motor. It is important to have a lot of air flow around the motor. If used for very long, it gets hot. My motor is CW/CCW. I wired a drum switch so that the rotation can be reversed at will. I had to have a tech person at the motor manufacturer email me the wiring diagram - It is a lot more complicated than connecting 3 wires.