Doreltomin

This is called a safe-edge in the trade and many files can be bought ex-factory like this.

Thanks for the 'likes' !
 
*************************
 
... these day I really became angry – some time ago the nice Sherline-motor (https://www.sherlinedirect.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&Product_ID=405]) for my Wolf, Jahn & Co. milling machine (http://www.maritima-et-mechanika.org/tools/horologicalmillers.html) that I had imported from the USA some 15 years ago began to make strange noises.
 

Sherline-motor, as used on my lathe and milling machine
 
Upon investigating, I disovered the the brushes were completely run down, in fact the motor was running on the copper contact-plates. I contacted the Sherline and they quoted my 25$ plus shipping for a new pair of carbon brushes – the German/Austrian distributor near Vienna just shrugged the shoulders. I trailed the well-known bight up and down and finally found some of about the right size in China. Three weeks of milling-break.
Once arrived, I ground the carbon the the right size and inserted them. The motor was running again, but somewhat noisily. I suspected problems with the ball-bearings. A week later, suddenly during the work loud noises and bang – rien ne va plus. I opened the holder for the brushes and found that they had already worked down by half and the contact-wire ripped off. I dismantled the motor-holder and idle-shaft in order to be able to take the motor out for further investigations. With a doctor’s eye-mirror I tried to look down at the commutator, but couldn’t see much. The only solution was to dismantle the motor. Of course all the nuts and bolts are imperial and had no suitable spanner. Had to go into town and get for some good money a 3/8” spanner for the nut, the screw-head had a 5/16” head, which is almost equal to 8 mm – learned some interesting this way: in the USA screw-heads and matching nuts don’t have the same size, as is the case in the metric system.
The motor turned out to be completely filled with carbon-dust, which then spread around my workshop. After having cleaned the rotor a bit (whereby a good deal of the carbon settled on me) the problem became apparent: several lamellae of the commutator had been ripped out and the end of it was that some of the connectors to the coils had been cut – a total write-off ...
 

Ripped commutator of the Sherline-motor
 
In my ‘scrap’-collection I found an old capacitor-motor that originally came with one of my milling machine. I did not use it, because controlling the speed is difficult and one looses torque (unless one buys an expensive inverter). However, as I had acquired a good idle-shaft since, controlling speed on the motor-side is not so important anymore, as the belts can be shifted to various-sized pulleys. I now had to adapt the motor-mount to the new motor and I was back in business. The good thing about this kind of motor is that it is much quieter than a mechanically commutated motor.
 

Motor running-capacitator (bottom)
 
So, milling began again – but not for very long. After two hours rien ne va plus encore. The motor only hummed with the 50 Hz, but didn’t want to turn. Touched the motor and and shrieked back, it was really hot. Perhaps not enough ventilation in the motor housing of wood to protect the open motor from flying swarf. The heat killed the capacitor that must have been several decades old already. Measured the motor through, but the coils were ok. Back to the bight and trying to find a new 7µF-capacitator. Found one, this time in Ireland, which meant only a few days, rather than weeks break ... got it yesterday and I am back in business again ...

The maker of the miniature Bridgeport is the British model engineer Barry Jordan: http://www.craftsmanshipmuseum.com/jordan.htm
 
@hof00: Proxxon (and all the other makers of small milling machines) don't make a machine of the Aciera/Sixis/SIP type as I discussed above. They all are conventional 3-axis-machines, to which perhaps a fourth axis can be added by deploying a rotary table or a dividing head. Even the smallest Proxxon, the MF70, still is somewhat bigger than what I am building here.
 
Updates will follow over the weekend, didn't have time to take and process the pictures yet.

I'd like one of these, a fully functional miniature Bridgeport!
 

Hey everyone, thanks for following my Scotland build! I have been reorganizing the house lately and also my shipyard room flooded this summer, so I haven't gotten my build as much as I wanted. Good thing is that only the floor got damaged, none of my ship stuff. But, I had to fix the floor because of mold and stuff.
 
Anyway, I have gotten some questions about the bulkheads at step 3.
 
Here are some pics of those, hopefully this helps how I installed them.

The keel, stem, stern knee, stern post went together well. All these parts are laser cut from walnut.
 

 

 
The only thing that I needed to do was scrape and file the laser char off the glue joints.
 
The bulkheads are laser cut from plywood. Fit was near perfect.
 
.
 

 
The bulkheads are held in the proper position with wooden dowels. Each bulkhead has two or four holes, and the dowel is inserted.
 

 
These dowels help hold the bulkheads all level with each other and keeps them square. If a bulkhead is not seated correctly, the dowels will not slip through the hole.
 

I have been eyeing this kit for a while now. I am glad to see a build log for it.   Looks good.
 
Skip

Hello everyone and best wishes.  Thank you Mark, Igor, Carl, Julie Mo and Patrick for your very kind words and of course a heartfelt thanks to all who clicked the like button.
 
This will most likely be the last post of my effort to make a micro mini diorama.  It's not a Dutch shipyard as Amateur Jan would have liked but I opted for something we could expect somewhere in New England.
 
Is it perfect?  No, not by a long shot but the main thing is that I learned a lot and had a lot of fun doing it.  There is still that Dutch jacht or fishing boat in a lamp awaiting to do - - - - someday.
 
Thank you all for visiting and your helpful hints and encouragement along the way.  My next "little" project will be started in the kit building section but I'll also continue with my VOC ship Surabaya.  Gwen would like to see it finished so I can start with her father's ship, the Musi.
 
Here are a few pics I picked out for you to look at.  
 

Here I have numbered the various details to annotate what they are.  #1 is the 35 foot supply sloop.  #2 is the wooden dock the sloop is tied to. #3 are two of the ship's frames. #4 are two of the canted frames.  #5 are stacks f hull planks. $6 is a stack of deck planks.  #7 is a 95 foot schooner on the ways in the early stage of being build.  #8 are logs.  #9 is the steam power shed to run the saw with its smokestack.  #10 is the sawmill.  #11 is a stack of freshly cut planks.  #12 is the machine shop. #13 topsail schooner in the stocks close to being launched. She has most of the standing rigging installed.  #14 is the 15 foot ship's boat moored to a pole on shore.
 

As a reminder, the sails on the supply sloop is from VERY thin cloth packing material of a package with sail cloth Igor uses for his bottle ships he send me.  Thanks again Igor, much appreciated and as you see even the packing cloth came to good use.  Te actual sail cloth will be used for the future build for my planned boat in a lamp, see my signature.
 

 

 

 
]
Here I did a "Patrick" by putting the diorama on the palm of my hand.  This shows how small it actually is.  The width of my palm is 50 mm and the diameter of the diorama is 35 mm.
 

 

 

 
Cheers,

Thanks everyone for joining in on the fun with this very trying little project. 
 
Yeah, Jan, it's a topsail schooner that's not for sale   Dyslexia of the finger and I'm going to stick with that excuse.  I'll try to fix it - - whenever.  True, that Durgerdam diorama is very attractive and as my signature shows, there is a ship in a lamp listed.  I put "Staten Jacht" there but I  chnaged my mind and do a Botter or Kotter or some other Zuiderzee fishing boat.
Actually I have more affiliation with Amsterdam then Rotterdam though. Just because I lived for one year in Vlaardingen but my whole family is from Amsterdam.
 
I would love to delete the other post if I only knew how.  Anyone can give me some help? A moderator perhaps?
 
You know Texxn5 John, this diorama will fit on the O19 display board with room to spare.
 
Good to have you join the crowd here.
 
I did spend some time on this little project this morning.  Tried to shave some wood off the - - ummm, sorry can't say it yet.  That's a part further down into the build.   Why?
 
As I was progressing and kit looked like it was doable I made some changes and additions to the layout.  I like to show this project from the start and walk through it as it was developing with the tries and failures.    Hope yuns don't mind.
 
I mentioned to Remco in a PM that most of us "older" folks tend to gravitate to large® scales and here I am at 82 going the opposite direction.  Yes, I do use an optivisor but I do that also for the Surabaya model and the O19 model.  This may sound strange but it's also a physiological challenge, to force the eyes and muscles to do what the brain commands.  So far it seems to work.  Oh yeah, there are times when I miss the heart rhythm and my hand with the scalpel makes an unauthorized move.  We then you'll hear an expletive such as "oh shoot."  And I cant spell either, as Jan already noticed   and have to make the part again.      
 
Did some shopping at the art and craft store this pm and found some stuff that could work for grass and shrubs or trees.  Hmmmmk, I need reeds at the water's edge - - - - -     
 
See y'all on the rebound and cheers,
 
 
 
  

Whether this helps or not,but British royal yachts of the latter part of the 17th century,rather than furling or brailing the topsail,the sail and its top yard would be lowered to the deck;the lower yard was then left 'a'cockbilled'.Donald McNarry wrote about the subject in an edition of the Model Shipwright magazine.

Ships also sometimes cockbilled their yards when they were made fast alongside a wharf to give more clearance for buildings and other obstructions on the wharf.
 
Regards,

Hello all,
 
This is the last update of this build log as I decided the project is completed - I'm working on it for 9 years now so it was just about time to declare it finished. For all who followed my build these long years and are interested to see her in "completed" state here is the link to my personal web site where you can see the last set of pictures made just before putting her in the case: http://www.alexshipmodels.com/2016/07/09/hms-victory-gallery/
 
Thank you very much for your support and see you again soon when I start working on my next project.
 
Regards,
Alexandru

Greetings Doreltomin;
 
Thank you for your thoughts.  I agree with you that the model is genuinely old,  and I have done so since I first saw it.  And I think that is the opinion of the others here,  as no-one has stated otherwise.  It was also identified as contemporary by the staff at the auctioneers who deal regularly with models of many different ages,  and having handled the model,  would have been in a good position to spot any anomalies. 
 
I have also seen other contemporary models (Warrior,  74;  and Endymion,   44,  both in the Science Museum) with painted figures,  using a very similar set of colours,  and other members will surely know of others.  I think Druxey's comment on the quality of the carving was merely a comment,  and not an argument against the model being contemporary (put me right here,  Druxey,  if I'm wrong) 
 
I have no doubt that the model depicts a contemporary practice,  although one normally limited in scope to vessels of a certain type. 
 
I will now keep an eye out for any other further evidence of this,  especially related to Royal Caroline or her contemporaries.
 
Again,  many thanks to all contributors,  for all the ideas posted.  I have certainly added to my knowledge from reading the responses to this topic,  and if anyone has any further thoughts,  or pictures,  please add them for all to read/see.
 
All the best,
 
Mark P

Greetings Druxey;
 
I have to disagree with some of your comments.  If you follow the link,  and look at the photo which shows the best view of the deck,  the one included in Frankie's post,  it is quite clear that the paintwork to the rails and stanchions around the hancing abreast the quarterdeck rail is marked and chipped,  to both Port and Starboard.  This kind of thing can be seen in some of the other pictures,  but not so clearly.  There are certainly areas where it looks undamaged,  though.
 
Concerning the chequer-board pattern,  if you look at the areas each side of the main mast as it crosses the deck,  the lines are not straight at all,  there are misalignments and bends in the patterning.  This can also be seen in a couple of other areas,  and many of the 'tiles' do not have straight edges or sharp corners.  There are also lines which could be tears from expansion/contraction of the wood below,  near the top of the steps to the quarterdeck,  and in front of the quarterdeck breastwork.
 
The edge of the chequerboard at the top of the quarterdeck steps also appears to be scuffed,  although this could be the wood of the underlying step.
 
Concerning the stern carvings,  these are somewhat difficult to assess too accurately,  as the paint obscures some of the detail.  To my mind,  the quality of the quarter badge carving is no less crudely executed than the stern carvings and counter ends.  Most tellingly the 'scallop-shell' top finial to the badge is merely incised lines,  with no hollow curves or three-dimensional definition attempted.
 
The last point is why would anyone want to go to the trouble of making and pasting a chequer-board pattern onto a model,  which has obviously been carefully fitted,  at a date later than the model's construction.  I think the most telling point here is that the auction house expert,  who has presumably handled many models of differing age,  as there are quite a few in the auction catalogues,  has made no comment on the deck or railings.  He would have handled and inspected this at a much closer level than any of us can manage through the photographs available here.
 
I feel that the balance of probability is heavily on the side that the deck-covering is genuine and contemporary with the model's manufacture.
 
I hope that this has laid some of your doubts to rest.  If not,  I will try and trace the buyer,  and see if it is possible to inspect/photograph the model (I might well do this anyway)
 
All the best,
 
Mark P

She was in the Welland Canal at the mouth of Lake Ontario a few weeks ago, travelling up to Lake Erie. Pics show her moored for the night at Port Weller East.

The following is offered for what it's worth, without getting into a discussion about exactly constitutes scale. I went through a variety of materials in my stash and measured thicknesses with a set of digital calipers. Results are approximate for a number of reasons including the amount of pressure on the calipers. I tried ro keep it light.
 
No. 10 duck canvas left over from a canoe restoration job. .032in. At 1:32 scale that I am building to, this would require a material of .001in.
 
Unidentified tightly woven unbleached muslin type material from a fabric shop. .005in
 
Drafting linen (or cotton) with the starch washed out. Some actually liberated from the old US Navy Bureau of Ships trash. This has a nice even weave with no "pics".
.002in
 
Oriental rice paper .001in
 
Lightweight silk span from a 30+ year old model airplane kit. .001in.
 
I am building a 1:32 navy longboat that I plan to display with furled sails. I will probably use drafting linen for the main sail and stay sail and rice paper for the flying jib.
 
Roger Pellett

Although the original question was about novelty fabrics to be used in very small scales, it may be worthwhile to explore the aid materials for book-binders and restorers. In these trades very fine cloth (and paper) often is used to double up fragile original materials without detracting much from their appearance. I seem to have seen various around the WWW, but did not follow through, as I didn't have any needs.
 
Incidentally, many mid-19th to mid-20th century ship's drawings have been done on drafting linen, particularly when they were meant for reproduction.

Fascinating subject!
 
Thank you Mark for starting it and everybody else for their valuable information added to the thread!

Fascinating subject!
 
Thank you Mark for starting it and everybody else for their valuable information added to the thread!

Hello everybody,
 
I completely agree with you that the stub mast and bowsprit are modern additions - it shows from the colour of the wood.
 
However, the rest of the model looks genuine - at least to my eyes. Whether it is real or just a modern conception done with the aim to deceive, mimicking an old model, cannot tell just from seeing a picture. However all the details look authentic even if the deck covering is intriguing. As for the "fire buckets", I also thought they were just a bit odd decorations, nothing more.
 
Generally speaking, when someone tries to mimic an old model, besides great care taken to make the materials look old they carefully avoid strange, unnatural details not seen elsewhere. Now if you analyze this model, it shows as if its builder didn't care whether the details he uses were seen elsewhere in real period models, be them in museums or private collections - he seems just concerned with showing the details of the real ship as best as he could.
 
Again, cannot tell, it may be a recent model built by a exceptionally skilled modeller, or a genuine Georgian model. Now if you ask me, I would go for the later. 

Hello Andrew,
 
Thanks for your input. Actually I do not know how this material my have been called properly in English, but it seems to be the same material I was talking about.
 
Using your hint I have found a wikipedia reference on it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drafting_linen
 
It is a very fine textile, however even this one can only be used for large scale models ranging from 1:10 up to 1:50 or something. Beyond this I believe Wefalck's suggestion on using paper instead is the only correct alternative!

Hello everybody,
 
I completely agree with you that the stub mast and bowsprit are modern additions - it shows from the colour of the wood.
 
However, the rest of the model looks genuine - at least to my eyes. Whether it is real or just a modern conception done with the aim to deceive, mimicking an old model, cannot tell just from seeing a picture. However all the details look authentic even if the deck covering is intriguing. As for the "fire buckets", I also thought they were just a bit odd decorations, nothing more.
 
Generally speaking, when someone tries to mimic an old model, besides great care taken to make the materials look old they carefully avoid strange, unnatural details not seen elsewhere. Now if you analyze this model, it shows as if its builder didn't care whether the details he uses were seen elsewhere in real period models, be them in museums or private collections - he seems just concerned with showing the details of the real ship as best as he could.
 
Again, cannot tell, it may be a recent model built by a exceptionally skilled modeller, or a genuine Georgian model. Now if you ask me, I would go for the later. 

Andrew, I don't think they're the same thing. You can see a brief description of drafting linen here. It is presently very hard to come by. I have a small stash myself. It has to be prepared in the manner previously described -- kind of labor intensive. The sails on my HMC Sherbourne in the gallery are made from it. 

Huh, interesting question!
 
Actually in our space age, with our computers and robots and stuff should we be able to do something like a very fine cloth. But is there any need for this, except for modelling purposes?
 
The only answer which comes to my mind is not new, but rather old: the fabric which was once used to reinforce the backside of transparent papers used to copy plans on it.It is a kind of material which I believe was discontinued in production some time before Second World War, or slightly after it, when the use of new material like plastics developed.
 
A friend of mine has a piece of such old transparent paper which he keeps jealously and uses to put pieces of it into water for a long time, until the transparent part dissolves and leaves only the fabric. It is then ready for use as sailcloth for ship models!
 
Another answer for fine fibers may come to mind from the books which we all read as kids. Do you remember Captain Nemo and the clothes of his crew? Jules Verne talks about fine tissue done with fibers taken from mollusks, which he calls byssus. While the Nautilus itself was only a fantasy story (but what a story!) the byssus thing is not. See it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_silk
 
However, insofar I know today there are just a couple of people in the islands of Southern Italy which know how to make such tissues, and I am not sure if it's good enough for our modelling purpose.  

"I guess on the whole I'm just surprised that while you can cover a model in PE detail and someone has even come out with a credible 3D 1:350 crew, that someone like ModelExo hasn't come forward with "the thinnest, finest woven fabric on earth" or something to cater to the sail ship hobby. :)"
 
Purely for technical reasons ... you cannot weave scale cloth, neither in 1:100 or let alone in 1:350 scale. The thinnest (usable) natural fibres are the yarns taken off the cocoon of the silk worm and have 0.005 to 0.01 mm in diameter. Indidividual hemp cells have a similar diameter, but would need to be spun into a yarn to be useful. Man-made nanofibres could go down to 0.0001 mm or less in diameter, but still are prohibitively expensive.
 
In any case, the individual fibres need to be spun into yarn, the thickness of which is much greater than that of the fibres. So, I think for the moment we are stuck with the finest silk cloth. However, natural silk should be avoided in modelling, as the protein of the fibre is prone to relatively fast degradation.
 
Realistically, I think that non-woven fibrous materials, i.e. paper-like materials, are the only solution for small-scale sails. Paper can be produced from relatively short individual fibres and does not involve the mechanics of weaving, for which a long yarns are needed. Therefore, paper can be much thinner than the thinnest cloth.