Jaager

I use super blonde flakes.  A fresh batch dissolves fairly quickly.   Old flakes have a residue (a translucent gel) that never dissolves for me. 
 
Ethanol has a special affinity for water.  It is 95%:5% ethanol to water.  The bond is not covalent,  but it requires much more energy and effort to break than is possible with distillation.  One way is to distill from benzene.  Doing this in a closed atmosphere WILL yield 100% ethanol.  BUT, as soon as it is exposed to our atmosphere, it will pull water vapor in until it becomes 95:5 again.  I have not read anything to indicate that it will continue to pull in water beyond that concentration.  The ethanol will go to its gas phase if left in an open container.
 

The openings at port and starboard aft are to the quarter galleries.  They were small and mostly were officers' latrines. 
Where the captain's cabin was the width of a whole deck, I wonder why he would need two privies? 
 

That was my first thought, but a comment here has me questioning that.  If shellac in flake form is subject to oxidation, then a shellac finish that is 200 years old should also be subject to it?
I would think adsorbing water into the flakes could be it, but then there is still the situation of why a shellac finish does not also adsorb water.  Or perhaps it does but the concentration of atmospheric water is too low to affect a flat surface.  Maybe the flakes have a higher surface to volume ratio?  Maybe the flakes can absorb water?
 
As for ethanol : water   the description of azeotrope for that mixture should explain why it is a very specific situation.

The openings at port and starboard aft are to the quarter galleries.  They were small and mostly were officers' latrines. 
Where the captain's cabin was the width of a whole deck, I wonder why he would need two privies? 
 

The openings at port and starboard aft are to the quarter galleries.  They were small and mostly were officers' latrines. 
Where the captain's cabin was the width of a whole deck, I wonder why he would need two privies? 
 

That was my first thought, but a comment here has me questioning that.  If shellac in flake form is subject to oxidation, then a shellac finish that is 200 years old should also be subject to it?
I would think adsorbing water into the flakes could be it, but then there is still the situation of why a shellac finish does not also adsorb water.  Or perhaps it does but the concentration of atmospheric water is too low to affect a flat surface.  Maybe the flakes have a higher surface to volume ratio?  Maybe the flakes can absorb water?
 
As for ethanol : water   the description of azeotrope for that mixture should explain why it is a very specific situation.

The old time experts used to argue that visually, thinner than scale line was better than scale or thicker than scale.

We had one in the bathroom in the 1950's.  The heat source for the house was an on oil burning furnace under a grating in the hall.  More than one kid at the time 1"x1" or so grid pattern burns from falling on a red hot grate. 
That was a step up from a coal burning furnace that required blackgang work from an inhabitant.

It is a table saw.  It works the same way as an 8" or 10" saw.  For functional use and safety skills, an instruction manual for table saws in general is pretty important to read.   In general, with the smaller modeler's scale saws, the damage that it can do to human parts going where they should not is less, but you still do not want it.
 
As for the saw itself,  I do not know if the company itself is in business.  Even if you can get an illustrated parts list (IPL) it may not be of value if there is no manufacturer to supply them by a parts number.   I would guess that any parts subject to wear can be had from tool parts vendors.

It is a table saw.  It works the same way as an 8" or 10" saw.  For functional use and safety skills, an instruction manual for table saws in general is pretty important to read.   In general, with the smaller modeler's scale saws, the damage that it can do to human parts going where they should not is less, but you still do not want it.
 
As for the saw itself,  I do not know if the company itself is in business.  Even if you can get an illustrated parts list (IPL) it may not be of value if there is no manufacturer to supply them by a parts number.   I would guess that any parts subject to wear can be had from tool parts vendors.

I think of sanding sealer as being a thick product.  Useful on open pore wood like Black Walnut, Oak, and A finish plywood to fill the pores and give a smooth even finish.  Intended more for full size furiture.
 
Shellac is an excellent traditional finish.  It can be as thick or thin as you wish.  It is not good for applications where it can come in contact with water.  It hydrates and turns white.  It can be easily repaired, but do not use it to finish a coffee table. 
A shellac finish can be removed with alcohol.
The material can be preextracted and purified and comes as Orange (probably straight from the beetle) to Super Blonde - almost water clear.  The solvent is alcohol (methyl, ethyl, 2-propanol, probably propanol if you can find it).  You can buy it in flakes and make up your own solution as needed.  The more purified are the flakes, the lower the maximium concentration you can make.  The impurities increase solubilitiy in alcohol.  The more volatile is the alcohol (Me>Ethyl>Prop) the less working time if you are using a cloth for application.  Dilute shellac is a good first coat for most any other finish.  It is very compatible with other finishes.  French polish seems to be multiple layers of shellac applied with a cloth that has a bit of Linseed oil in the cloth.  I would guess that Tung oil or Walnut oil might work as well.

We had one in the bathroom in the 1950's.  The heat source for the house was an on oil burning furnace under a grating in the hall.  More than one kid at the time 1"x1" or so grid pattern burns from falling on a red hot grate. 
That was a step up from a coal burning furnace that required blackgang work from an inhabitant.

An old wood finishing book had instructions for French polish.  The instructions were to use a cloth pad that had a small quantity of Linseed oil in the middle which was then soaked with shellac.   The pad was to be rubbed on the wood surface with constant movement and a jet takeoff removal.  Otherwise the cloth will leave its weave pattern on the finish - which was to be only a wet layer.
 
I took this to mean that French polish is primarily shellac with a small admixture of polymerizing oil.   It seems to me that Tung oil could be used instead of Linseed oil. 

Dave,
 
Unless you intend to build for an academic audience and for a contest where the reward is the model becoming a museum exhibit,  except for maybe some very specific details,  you should consider the AOTS series to be close enough.   For long lived ships,  a specific version is selected.  It may not be the version that you wish to model, so keep that in mind.
 
Some of the vessels are complete reconstructions.  Nothing definitive is known about their actual lines.  For those vessels, as with kits purporting  to be their models, what those AOTS volumes represent are models of the reconstruction.  e.g.  Susan Constant, Mary Rose, the Columbus trio,  ...    not AOTS but would probably sell if they were: Revenge, Mayflower, Half Moon, Magellan's five   We even have models of ships that are only creations of the mind of a fiction writer. 
 
There is a range here of what is acceptable -  from pure fantasy to completely documented using contemporary sources.  I see nothing wrong with making educated guesses that are not anachronisms,  but you would probably do the future a favor by inserting a bond paper -india ink script- document listing your guesses (- along with your name and the date) inside the hull.  It is just a matter of defining your personal limits and being aware of that.

An old wood finishing book had instructions for French polish.  The instructions were to use a cloth pad that had a small quantity of Linseed oil in the middle which was then soaked with shellac.   The pad was to be rubbed on the wood surface with constant movement and a jet takeoff removal.  Otherwise the cloth will leave its weave pattern on the finish - which was to be only a wet layer.
 
I took this to mean that French polish is primarily shellac with a small admixture of polymerizing oil.   It seems to me that Tung oil could be used instead of Linseed oil. 

Hakan,
 
I got that the Balsa comment was meant in jest.  I apologize if my response came across as an insult.   I took it as an opportunity to broadcast another shot at that terrible species of wood out to the world.
 
In my mind,  I imagine that inside shaping frames that are widely spaced apart is a totally unfun procedure. 
I fill all of the spaces with Pine that is temporarily bonded.  The solid hull keeps the edges of the frames crisp and it is more difficult to remove too much while shaping and faring.   As I said in another thread,  I am still looking for an easy to remove temporary bonding agent that can stand up to the sheer forces of shaping and does not leave a tedious to remove residue, when I kill the bond after the fillers have done their job and I punch them out.
 
I will offer another shot.  Using Balsa as a filler for POB is probably one of those things that appear to be a useful idea, but later prove to be a bad one.   It is probably just as likely to crush as it is to cut, plane, or rasp.  The feel of working it is a bit creepy.   Construction Pine is probably much more efficient to work and less expensive. 
Pine is a joy to plane. 
 
The worst dust producer for me is the rounded end of a 4x36 bench belt sander (80 grit) removing the inside of a sandwich of 6 or 8 frames at the stern or bow.   The bevel is significant so there is a lot of wood to remove.   That angle grinder disk can produce a cloud that no vac can totally collect.  

Balsa is about the absolute worst species of wood for our uses.
Apple is about the best.  Almost impossible to find in quantity here. 
 
The moulded dimension is what is seen on the cross section view (Body plan).  Thickest at the keelson and thinnest at the rail.
All of the removal - but the shouting - should be done on the individual frame before adding it to the hull.
(Unless you are into self torture and frustration, you want all of frames to be as bends.  Bend = a pair of frames with timbers that overlap each butt joint of its partner. -  A raw end grain to end grain joint is a very weak bond. As in:  no bond at all.)
 
Sanding - grit matters.  Fast = course.  But then it must be walked down to smooth using ever finer grits.
 
A machine is faster.   For inside a hull - about the best machine that I have found is this:
https://www.kaleas.de//kaleas.cgi?action=show&sessionID=53362980167228376253362980&lang=en&page=shop-produktliste.html&cat=32&subcat=3230&catname=grinding, planing&arcode=x
 
But choose the Right Angle grinder.  Use very light force,  someone here had a part in the drive chain wear out.
There is a chuck attachment for the right angle unit for bits and burrs.
 
The belt sander ( comes up with the link) will REALLY eat wood fast - too fast if you are not careful - and it will quickly throw the belt - I hold it with a piece of flat scrap wood extending over the top part of the belt to keep it on.
 
https://www.kaleas.de//kaleas.cgi?action=show&sessionID=53362980167228376253362980&lang=en&page=shop-produktliste.html&cat=32&subcat=3280&catname=power supply&arcode=x
 
The DC power supply works with a variety of tools, but I am not sure very many are worth it when up against their single purpose competitors. 
 
 
 
 

Callery Pear - a group of ornamental Pear trees whose wood is also excellent for our use.  The color is darker.   The Web says that Pyrus calleryana is a native of China and Vietnam.
 
Masa,  looks like you have found a wonderful timber.  My impulse would be to be greedy and hoard as much as I could.

Dave,
 
Unless you intend to build for an academic audience and for a contest where the reward is the model becoming a museum exhibit,  except for maybe some very specific details,  you should consider the AOTS series to be close enough.   For long lived ships,  a specific version is selected.  It may not be the version that you wish to model, so keep that in mind.
 
Some of the vessels are complete reconstructions.  Nothing definitive is known about their actual lines.  For those vessels, as with kits purporting  to be their models, what those AOTS volumes represent are models of the reconstruction.  e.g.  Susan Constant, Mary Rose, the Columbus trio,  ...    not AOTS but would probably sell if they were: Revenge, Mayflower, Half Moon, Magellan's five   We even have models of ships that are only creations of the mind of a fiction writer. 
 
There is a range here of what is acceptable -  from pure fantasy to completely documented using contemporary sources.  I see nothing wrong with making educated guesses that are not anachronisms,  but you would probably do the future a favor by inserting a bond paper -india ink script- document listing your guesses (- along with your name and the date) inside the hull.  It is just a matter of defining your personal limits and being aware of that.

For jobs where the surface being worked is 90 degrees - like the easy way to do deck beams or a stem - a table is good to have.   For sanding a group of 6-8 frames between any two stations - a table just gets in the way.
 
Where wanting to go slower than 1700 RPM may be an impulse, I find using a finer grit works better.

Hakan,
 
I got that the Balsa comment was meant in jest.  I apologize if my response came across as an insult.   I took it as an opportunity to broadcast another shot at that terrible species of wood out to the world.
 
In my mind,  I imagine that inside shaping frames that are widely spaced apart is a totally unfun procedure. 
I fill all of the spaces with Pine that is temporarily bonded.  The solid hull keeps the edges of the frames crisp and it is more difficult to remove too much while shaping and faring.   As I said in another thread,  I am still looking for an easy to remove temporary bonding agent that can stand up to the sheer forces of shaping and does not leave a tedious to remove residue, when I kill the bond after the fillers have done their job and I punch them out.
 
I will offer another shot.  Using Balsa as a filler for POB is probably one of those things that appear to be a useful idea, but later prove to be a bad one.   It is probably just as likely to crush as it is to cut, plane, or rasp.  The feel of working it is a bit creepy.   Construction Pine is probably much more efficient to work and less expensive. 
Pine is a joy to plane. 
 
The worst dust producer for me is the rounded end of a 4x36 bench belt sander (80 grit) removing the inside of a sandwich of 6 or 8 frames at the stern or bow.   The bevel is significant so there is a lot of wood to remove.   That angle grinder disk can produce a cloud that no vac can totally collect.  

We had one in the bathroom in the 1950's.  The heat source for the house was an on oil burning furnace under a grating in the hall.  More than one kid at the time 1"x1" or so grid pattern burns from falling on a red hot grate. 
That was a step up from a coal burning furnace that required blackgang work from an inhabitant.

Hakan,
 
I got that the Balsa comment was meant in jest.  I apologize if my response came across as an insult.   I took it as an opportunity to broadcast another shot at that terrible species of wood out to the world.
 
In my mind,  I imagine that inside shaping frames that are widely spaced apart is a totally unfun procedure. 
I fill all of the spaces with Pine that is temporarily bonded.  The solid hull keeps the edges of the frames crisp and it is more difficult to remove too much while shaping and faring.   As I said in another thread,  I am still looking for an easy to remove temporary bonding agent that can stand up to the sheer forces of shaping and does not leave a tedious to remove residue, when I kill the bond after the fillers have done their job and I punch them out.
 
I will offer another shot.  Using Balsa as a filler for POB is probably one of those things that appear to be a useful idea, but later prove to be a bad one.   It is probably just as likely to crush as it is to cut, plane, or rasp.  The feel of working it is a bit creepy.   Construction Pine is probably much more efficient to work and less expensive. 
Pine is a joy to plane. 
 
The worst dust producer for me is the rounded end of a 4x36 bench belt sander (80 grit) removing the inside of a sandwich of 6 or 8 frames at the stern or bow.   The bevel is significant so there is a lot of wood to remove.   That angle grinder disk can produce a cloud that no vac can totally collect.  

Callery Pear - a group of ornamental Pear trees whose wood is also excellent for our use.  The color is darker.   The Web says that Pyrus calleryana is a native of China and Vietnam.
 
Masa,  looks like you have found a wonderful timber.  My impulse would be to be greedy and hoard as much as I could.

Dave,
 
Unless you intend to build for an academic audience and for a contest where the reward is the model becoming a museum exhibit,  except for maybe some very specific details,  you should consider the AOTS series to be close enough.   For long lived ships,  a specific version is selected.  It may not be the version that you wish to model, so keep that in mind.
 
Some of the vessels are complete reconstructions.  Nothing definitive is known about their actual lines.  For those vessels, as with kits purporting  to be their models, what those AOTS volumes represent are models of the reconstruction.  e.g.  Susan Constant, Mary Rose, the Columbus trio,  ...    not AOTS but would probably sell if they were: Revenge, Mayflower, Half Moon, Magellan's five   We even have models of ships that are only creations of the mind of a fiction writer. 
 
There is a range here of what is acceptable -  from pure fantasy to completely documented using contemporary sources.  I see nothing wrong with making educated guesses that are not anachronisms,  but you would probably do the future a favor by inserting a bond paper -india ink script- document listing your guesses (- along with your name and the date) inside the hull.  It is just a matter of defining your personal limits and being aware of that.