Jaager

I did a search for shellac flakes in UK  and it came up on Amazon UK.  There is probably pre-mixed also.
The solvent is ethanol 95% (It has a strong bond with water. If you started with 100% ethanol, it will pull water vapour from the atmosphere until it is back to 95%.) old time = 100% methanol,  or 99% isopropanol.
For flakes, the lighter the flakes, the less soluble.  I read and had accepted that dewaxing removed a solubilizer, but I wonder if dewaxing actually just reduces the weight?  The part that is shellac may be just as soluble and the fraction that is something else just reduces the overall weight as it is removed?
Half saturated shellac is a near universal primer.  Wipes on, soaks in, dries fast and just about any follow on material - polymerizing oil, paint - acrylic or organic solvent based, varnish - water or mineral spirit,  will bond to it.
Add a bit of catalyzed linseed oil to the pad with the shellac and it is French polish.

Which is the product that you are naming "oil"?
For the deck furniture that is wood, PVA to bond.
For metal - two part epoxy.
For plastic - no idea.
PVA requires a porous or rough surface for its hyphae to get a grip. rough bare wood.
Epoxy will bond to which ever material it meets - except maybe plastics or if your "oil" is actual oil - like mineral oil or castor oil that stays liquid - no bond.
If it is a polymerizing oil  - Tung, Linseed, or various nut oils - the epoxy will bond to it and the strength of the oil bond to wood will be the strength of the fitting's bond.
 
Old style oil based vanish was often Linseed with a heavy metal catalyst to speed polymerization.
Polyurethane is straight up plastic.  If this is what you mean by varnish, I am with you in finding it unacceptable.
 
In any case, any fitting should bond to the bare wood.  Protect the footprint of the fitting with tape before you apply any clear finish.
You seem determined about the oil,  so suggesting half saturated shellac as a primer or solo and rhen full strength shellac if a clear layer is desired.
If you are serious about assuring that the fittings stay bonded, add a mechanical component.
This is tricky to do.  For metal or plastic,  a solid brass pin - fit into a hole in the middle of the fitting's footprint and into a hole in the deck. -epoxy both ends.
For a wood fixture - a bamboo "dowel" "trunnel" instead of brass.  PVA.  - This is really "old school".

Up date:
 
For my rough 8x4 - I now have a Craftsman benchtop planer.  It said to use a jointer, but it smoothed out the minor cupping -  I took 1/32" passes - several of them -  Still did not fix the horrible 2" faces, but the 6-8" faces are as clear as I wish - I am happy with it.  I have room to park it on my Ryobi BT3000 table.   I think that I can place it in the middle and plane stock where it is.  It is no fun to move.
I tried a 2" straight bit on an under the table Wen router, but the guide setup was beyond me so that was a mess. 
I plan to try mounting a 3" drum and doing multiple passes.  I have a speed control box - a rheostat I think - the question is - will the motor have any torque at the 1700 rpm range that the sanding drum requires?
 
One of the 2' Maple 8x4 stock had a branch root or something irregular and my bandsaw blade did a bit of wandering with the change in grain direction.  It will be touch and go to get 100% return to produce 0.25"  220grit stock from my initial thickness.
 
Now, moving on to my original thickness sander upgrade project.   I have new pillow blocks and shaft collars.  I have an 18" x 1/2" shaft with a key way.  And  the 4" x 11" Al cylinder is here.  Boy am I surprised at how heavy it is.   It worries me a bit about the work on the motor to move that thing.  But, it has to turn it, not lift it - there will be a lot more momentum.   I was just notified that the 6" wedges will be here on Monday, so everything needed is almost here.
The local fabrication shop says they will treat me fairly.  I think I will wait out the season before I do my visit.
 
Cutting a big hole on each side of the box was a really good idea.  The motor does not get too hot.  Now I wear out before the motor.  The old one had a thermal switch and it stopped after an hour or so.
 

I did a search for shellac flakes in UK  and it came up on Amazon UK.  There is probably pre-mixed also.
The solvent is ethanol 95% (It has a strong bond with water. If you started with 100% ethanol, it will pull water vapour from the atmosphere until it is back to 95%.) old time = 100% methanol,  or 99% isopropanol.
For flakes, the lighter the flakes, the less soluble.  I read and had accepted that dewaxing removed a solubilizer, but I wonder if dewaxing actually just reduces the weight?  The part that is shellac may be just as soluble and the fraction that is something else just reduces the overall weight as it is removed?
Half saturated shellac is a near universal primer.  Wipes on, soaks in, dries fast and just about any follow on material - polymerizing oil, paint - acrylic or organic solvent based, varnish - water or mineral spirit,  will bond to it.
Add a bit of catalyzed linseed oil to the pad with the shellac and it is French polish.

Which is the product that you are naming "oil"?
For the deck furniture that is wood, PVA to bond.
For metal - two part epoxy.
For plastic - no idea.
PVA requires a porous or rough surface for its hyphae to get a grip. rough bare wood.
Epoxy will bond to which ever material it meets - except maybe plastics or if your "oil" is actual oil - like mineral oil or castor oil that stays liquid - no bond.
If it is a polymerizing oil  - Tung, Linseed, or various nut oils - the epoxy will bond to it and the strength of the oil bond to wood will be the strength of the fitting's bond.
 
Old style oil based vanish was often Linseed with a heavy metal catalyst to speed polymerization.
Polyurethane is straight up plastic.  If this is what you mean by varnish, I am with you in finding it unacceptable.
 
In any case, any fitting should bond to the bare wood.  Protect the footprint of the fitting with tape before you apply any clear finish.
You seem determined about the oil,  so suggesting half saturated shellac as a primer or solo and rhen full strength shellac if a clear layer is desired.
If you are serious about assuring that the fittings stay bonded, add a mechanical component.
This is tricky to do.  For metal or plastic,  a solid brass pin - fit into a hole in the middle of the fitting's footprint and into a hole in the deck. -epoxy both ends.
For a wood fixture - a bamboo "dowel" "trunnel" instead of brass.  PVA.  - This is really "old school".

Which is the product that you are naming "oil"?
For the deck furniture that is wood, PVA to bond.
For metal - two part epoxy.
For plastic - no idea.
PVA requires a porous or rough surface for its hyphae to get a grip. rough bare wood.
Epoxy will bond to which ever material it meets - except maybe plastics or if your "oil" is actual oil - like mineral oil or castor oil that stays liquid - no bond.
If it is a polymerizing oil  - Tung, Linseed, or various nut oils - the epoxy will bond to it and the strength of the oil bond to wood will be the strength of the fitting's bond.
 
Old style oil based vanish was often Linseed with a heavy metal catalyst to speed polymerization.
Polyurethane is straight up plastic.  If this is what you mean by varnish, I am with you in finding it unacceptable.
 
In any case, any fitting should bond to the bare wood.  Protect the footprint of the fitting with tape before you apply any clear finish.
You seem determined about the oil,  so suggesting half saturated shellac as a primer or solo and rhen full strength shellac if a clear layer is desired.
If you are serious about assuring that the fittings stay bonded, add a mechanical component.
This is tricky to do.  For metal or plastic,  a solid brass pin - fit into a hole in the middle of the fitting's footprint and into a hole in the deck. -epoxy both ends.
For a wood fixture - a bamboo "dowel" "trunnel" instead of brass.  PVA.  - This is really "old school".

I live in Norfolk,  I think I remember being shown a small building on the main here base that had woodworking tools that the living on base team members could use for hobby projects.  If your duty stations also have this,  get the specifics for the machines there and buy your own blades.  If they have a router with a table, you could also have your own bits to have trade mark molding profiles on your cases.
See what picture frame jigs are there.  Maybe base maintenance has a woodworking shop - if they have not outsourced even that?
 
Another possibility:  for each base, do whatever passes these days for wanted pages with base personnel, and get with someone who already owns the machines that you will need.  Get their data and buy your own blades and bits to fit their machines.  I would be much more likely to lone out use of my machines, if the borrower brought his own gear that will dull, or break.
 
You really do not want to haul full size machines from base to base - or at least I would not care to do it.

I live in Norfolk,  I think I remember being shown a small building on the main here base that had woodworking tools that the living on base team members could use for hobby projects.  If your duty stations also have this,  get the specifics for the machines there and buy your own blades.  If they have a router with a table, you could also have your own bits to have trade mark molding profiles on your cases.
See what picture frame jigs are there.  Maybe base maintenance has a woodworking shop - if they have not outsourced even that?
 
Another possibility:  for each base, do whatever passes these days for wanted pages with base personnel, and get with someone who already owns the machines that you will need.  Get their data and buy your own blades and bits to fit their machines.  I would be much more likely to lone out use of my machines, if the borrower brought his own gear that will dull, or break.
 
You really do not want to haul full size machines from base to base - or at least I would not care to do it.

I live in Norfolk,  I think I remember being shown a small building on the main here base that had woodworking tools that the living on base team members could use for hobby projects.  If your duty stations also have this,  get the specifics for the machines there and buy your own blades.  If they have a router with a table, you could also have your own bits to have trade mark molding profiles on your cases.
See what picture frame jigs are there.  Maybe base maintenance has a woodworking shop - if they have not outsourced even that?
 
Another possibility:  for each base, do whatever passes these days for wanted pages with base personnel, and get with someone who already owns the machines that you will need.  Get their data and buy your own blades and bits to fit their machines.  I would be much more likely to lone out use of my machines, if the borrower brought his own gear that will dull, or break.
 
You really do not want to haul full size machines from base to base - or at least I would not care to do it.

Real world - a finished kit model would probably sell for about what the original kit costs.  For this one that is ~$300.
If you are building this for income instead of pure enjoyment, you would make much more money per hour doing a job that requires wearing a paper hat.
 
For the model in question, you should either stub the masts and repair the deck/hull yourself or give it a Viking funeral.
If you were to consider repairing it yourself, your time would be better spent building a different ship.  You have checked Endeavour off your list.
 
If I were to place a bet on the situation, my money is on you having to write the whole thing off and concede the victory to your Ex.
The only one likely to profit from pursuing this is your lawyer.
 

Real world - a finished kit model would probably sell for about what the original kit costs.  For this one that is ~$300.
If you are building this for income instead of pure enjoyment, you would make much more money per hour doing a job that requires wearing a paper hat.
 
For the model in question, you should either stub the masts and repair the deck/hull yourself or give it a Viking funeral.
If you were to consider repairing it yourself, your time would be better spent building a different ship.  You have checked Endeavour off your list.
 
If I were to place a bet on the situation, my money is on you having to write the whole thing off and concede the victory to your Ex.
The only one likely to profit from pursuing this is your lawyer.
 

Real world - a finished kit model would probably sell for about what the original kit costs.  For this one that is ~$300.
If you are building this for income instead of pure enjoyment, you would make much more money per hour doing a job that requires wearing a paper hat.
 
For the model in question, you should either stub the masts and repair the deck/hull yourself or give it a Viking funeral.
If you were to consider repairing it yourself, your time would be better spent building a different ship.  You have checked Endeavour off your list.
 
If I were to place a bet on the situation, my money is on you having to write the whole thing off and concede the victory to your Ex.
The only one likely to profit from pursuing this is your lawyer.
 

Real world - a finished kit model would probably sell for about what the original kit costs.  For this one that is ~$300.
If you are building this for income instead of pure enjoyment, you would make much more money per hour doing a job that requires wearing a paper hat.
 
For the model in question, you should either stub the masts and repair the deck/hull yourself or give it a Viking funeral.
If you were to consider repairing it yourself, your time would be better spent building a different ship.  You have checked Endeavour off your list.
 
If I were to place a bet on the situation, my money is on you having to write the whole thing off and concede the victory to your Ex.
The only one likely to profit from pursuing this is your lawyer.
 

Real world - a finished kit model would probably sell for about what the original kit costs.  For this one that is ~$300.
If you are building this for income instead of pure enjoyment, you would make much more money per hour doing a job that requires wearing a paper hat.
 
For the model in question, you should either stub the masts and repair the deck/hull yourself or give it a Viking funeral.
If you were to consider repairing it yourself, your time would be better spent building a different ship.  You have checked Endeavour off your list.
 
If I were to place a bet on the situation, my money is on you having to write the whole thing off and concede the victory to your Ex.
The only one likely to profit from pursuing this is your lawyer.
 

I have no doubt that this is a frequent occurrence with the older POB kits from some companies.
I do question the explanation.  Wood is fairly to significantly old before it is even harvested.
Once felled, the wood will then have its original water content reduced to ambient humidity (seasoning).
How long this takes involves a number of factors - thickness being a major one.  From then on wood will
change its concentration of water to be in balance with the humidity of its surrounding air.
 
I propose that the major problem with these older kits lies with the choice of wood species selected for inclusion in the kit.
From day one with these kits it is GIGO as far as how the wood behaves.  Using glue, finishing agents, paint, etc.  will alter how it responds over time.
 
However you factor this out,  our dominant investment by far is: TIME.
We never get it back. 
We will never be compensated at any hourly rate commensurate with that of professionals doing similar skill level jobs.
Quality wood does not fight you at ever step.  Its presentation is more appropriate.
 
Your time would be better spent building quality kits.  The intangible feeling is more pleasurable.
If you are determined to proceed with this,  your experience will be more rewarding if you were to replace every wooden part with a quality wood.  Use the original wood as patterns where this is worth doing.  If the cost of the second hand kit does not make this economical to do, you would be spending too much.

I have in mind the concept that spars were not exactly a straight line taper.   Is it not a curve with a slope that increases - with most of the increase in the outer quarter?  A very shallow ellipse?
 
Now that I visualize it. A jig with parallel sides and a shim that slides under the spar.  The shim would allow for an elliptical profile.
I think the process would be significantly faster than a lathe.  Planing along the grain would mimic the action of an adz and not leave a surface that is a series of concentric rings - which is what a lathe does. 

I have no doubt that this is a frequent occurrence with the older POB kits from some companies.
I do question the explanation.  Wood is fairly to significantly old before it is even harvested.
Once felled, the wood will then have its original water content reduced to ambient humidity (seasoning).
How long this takes involves a number of factors - thickness being a major one.  From then on wood will
change its concentration of water to be in balance with the humidity of its surrounding air.
 
I propose that the major problem with these older kits lies with the choice of wood species selected for inclusion in the kit.
From day one with these kits it is GIGO as far as how the wood behaves.  Using glue, finishing agents, paint, etc.  will alter how it responds over time.
 
However you factor this out,  our dominant investment by far is: TIME.
We never get it back. 
We will never be compensated at any hourly rate commensurate with that of professionals doing similar skill level jobs.
Quality wood does not fight you at ever step.  Its presentation is more appropriate.
 
Your time would be better spent building quality kits.  The intangible feeling is more pleasurable.
If you are determined to proceed with this,  your experience will be more rewarding if you were to replace every wooden part with a quality wood.  Use the original wood as patterns where this is worth doing.  If the cost of the second hand kit does not make this economical to do, you would be spending too much.

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 got a Bridge City mini block plane with depth skids (HP-8).  It looks scrupled; the best part is that the sides can be adjusted to set the height of the plane.  The plane is about 4” (100 mm) long, with a working width of 1.25” (33 mm).
 

Recently, I was running out of 1 mm thick material for steps.  I had 1.5 mm material so I set the mini plane to 1 mm height (using some 1 mm material) and planed the 1.5 mm material –  it works fine.  And it looks cool.
 

 

I have done the thought experiment of how to place a strake - that looks like a strake - made up of two different species of wood and have them butt at the waterline and have all of the other strakes that cross the waterline - when seen together - have that waterline appear to be a straight line.  There are at least two variables in play with this.   I think juggling one ball at a time is enough for me.   Just running the bottom planking as is normal starting below the wale as a single species - seems to be the best way to keep sane.
 
The early ANCRE volumes came with a sheet of color chips.
I have a vague recollection that EAR Jr.  had early 19th century color chips in the journal - As long as they were based on mineral paints, they should be valid as likely shades possible  - for thousands, if not millions of years.

I have no doubt that this is a frequent occurrence with the older POB kits from some companies.
I do question the explanation.  Wood is fairly to significantly old before it is even harvested.
Once felled, the wood will then have its original water content reduced to ambient humidity (seasoning).
How long this takes involves a number of factors - thickness being a major one.  From then on wood will
change its concentration of water to be in balance with the humidity of its surrounding air.
 
I propose that the major problem with these older kits lies with the choice of wood species selected for inclusion in the kit.
From day one with these kits it is GIGO as far as how the wood behaves.  Using glue, finishing agents, paint, etc.  will alter how it responds over time.
 
However you factor this out,  our dominant investment by far is: TIME.
We never get it back. 
We will never be compensated at any hourly rate commensurate with that of professionals doing similar skill level jobs.
Quality wood does not fight you at ever step.  Its presentation is more appropriate.
 
Your time would be better spent building quality kits.  The intangible feeling is more pleasurable.
If you are determined to proceed with this,  your experience will be more rewarding if you were to replace every wooden part with a quality wood.  Use the original wood as patterns where this is worth doing.  If the cost of the second hand kit does not make this economical to do, you would be spending too much.

I have no doubt that this is a frequent occurrence with the older POB kits from some companies.
I do question the explanation.  Wood is fairly to significantly old before it is even harvested.
Once felled, the wood will then have its original water content reduced to ambient humidity (seasoning).
How long this takes involves a number of factors - thickness being a major one.  From then on wood will
change its concentration of water to be in balance with the humidity of its surrounding air.
 
I propose that the major problem with these older kits lies with the choice of wood species selected for inclusion in the kit.
From day one with these kits it is GIGO as far as how the wood behaves.  Using glue, finishing agents, paint, etc.  will alter how it responds over time.
 
However you factor this out,  our dominant investment by far is: TIME.
We never get it back. 
We will never be compensated at any hourly rate commensurate with that of professionals doing similar skill level jobs.
Quality wood does not fight you at ever step.  Its presentation is more appropriate.
 
Your time would be better spent building quality kits.  The intangible feeling is more pleasurable.
If you are determined to proceed with this,  your experience will be more rewarding if you were to replace every wooden part with a quality wood.  Use the original wood as patterns where this is worth doing.  If the cost of the second hand kit does not make this economical to do, you would be spending too much.

You might get a more informed response at Renderosity or DAZ.
I think that Poser and DAZ Studio have better tools than Blender for dealing with biologicals - humans and animals.
I have been out of that world for about 10 years.

I have no doubt that this is a frequent occurrence with the older POB kits from some companies.
I do question the explanation.  Wood is fairly to significantly old before it is even harvested.
Once felled, the wood will then have its original water content reduced to ambient humidity (seasoning).
How long this takes involves a number of factors - thickness being a major one.  From then on wood will
change its concentration of water to be in balance with the humidity of its surrounding air.
 
I propose that the major problem with these older kits lies with the choice of wood species selected for inclusion in the kit.
From day one with these kits it is GIGO as far as how the wood behaves.  Using glue, finishing agents, paint, etc.  will alter how it responds over time.
 
However you factor this out,  our dominant investment by far is: TIME.
We never get it back. 
We will never be compensated at any hourly rate commensurate with that of professionals doing similar skill level jobs.
Quality wood does not fight you at ever step.  Its presentation is more appropriate.
 
Your time would be better spent building quality kits.  The intangible feeling is more pleasurable.
If you are determined to proceed with this,  your experience will be more rewarding if you were to replace every wooden part with a quality wood.  Use the original wood as patterns where this is worth doing.  If the cost of the second hand kit does not make this economical to do, you would be spending too much.

I have no doubt that this is a frequent occurrence with the older POB kits from some companies.
I do question the explanation.  Wood is fairly to significantly old before it is even harvested.
Once felled, the wood will then have its original water content reduced to ambient humidity (seasoning).
How long this takes involves a number of factors - thickness being a major one.  From then on wood will
change its concentration of water to be in balance with the humidity of its surrounding air.
 
I propose that the major problem with these older kits lies with the choice of wood species selected for inclusion in the kit.
From day one with these kits it is GIGO as far as how the wood behaves.  Using glue, finishing agents, paint, etc.  will alter how it responds over time.
 
However you factor this out,  our dominant investment by far is: TIME.
We never get it back. 
We will never be compensated at any hourly rate commensurate with that of professionals doing similar skill level jobs.
Quality wood does not fight you at ever step.  Its presentation is more appropriate.
 
Your time would be better spent building quality kits.  The intangible feeling is more pleasurable.
If you are determined to proceed with this,  your experience will be more rewarding if you were to replace every wooden part with a quality wood.  Use the original wood as patterns where this is worth doing.  If the cost of the second hand kit does not make this economical to do, you would be spending too much.