JacquesCousteau

I checked on the plans how far apart the frames are supposed to be, and used scrap wood to make a small piece of the same width. After getting the first frame in place, I just placed the spacer to make sure each subsequent frame was even.

Good fix from the ammonia problem! When I was making the Peapod, which has the same construction method, I found it useful to use a spacer block to help keep the frames even.

A bit more progress. Now that the fishing equipment is in place, I attached the mast and finally glued the rancho in place. The mast isn't glued, but (besides being firmly held to the mast step with a wooden peg) is firmly lashed to the crossbeam with 0.7mm rope. After knotting it, I was able to slowly tug on lines to move the knot under the crossbeam and mostly out of sight. I also added the halyard with 0.7mm rope, using a knot as this seems like it would be easiest to remove, and placed the backstay. Neither is tied into position yet, but I wanted to see what things would look like. I've also started on the parrel, which is proving to be very tricky. On the Cargo Canoa, based on some very blurry photos, I made the parrel as basically a single line with a loop at each end, one to fit around the mast and one to fit around the yard. I've now found clearer photos that possibly show a very different parrel, as seen below: Source: https://memoricamexico.gob.mx/swb/memorica/Cedula?oId=vvts2osBVs6S4R6nk8il I see two ways of interpreting this. One, based on the way the parrel lines come closer to each other as they approach the yard, is that my original idea was basically right, but the parrel loop around the mast is simply quite wide. The other possibility I see is that the parrel is a single line with a loop at each end, but each loop goes around the yard, with the "body" of the parrel passing around the mast. Both options comport with other photos that show the parrel only loops around the mast once. It's also worth noting that the parrel is not very tight to the mast. At the moment, I'm torn about the best way to approach the parrel, both in terms of which option given above makes the most sense and in terms of which knots to use. As both options involve at least one loop around the yard, I initially began with a simplified splice in 0.6mm rope. But, I began to wonder whether a simple knot would make more sense. From what I've seen in photos, the yards were regularly removed from the mast, and this would be much easier to do with a knot than with a spliced and served loop (the latter of which would require the long yard to be awkwardly slid out of the loop). So, I started redoing the parrel with knots. I began with a clove hitch, but this seems very bulky, especially if there will be a second parrel loop around the yard. So, if anyone has any suggestions about how to handle the parrel, I'm all ears.

Congratulations on a great build! This was an interesting topic to model, and it's been a fascinating journey to follow along.

Thanks! I was able to do that with the ropes tying the oars to the oarlocks, but I had a hard time getting enough pressure into the bottom of the hull around the crossbeams and other parts and so went with glue for some ropes.

Thanks, I'll definitely give that a try! Thanks! I've also glued the fishing equipment into place, pretty much where I originally positioned it. I just moved one of the nets a bit forward so it would be more visible. This has been a straightforward process. The trickiest part has been that some ropes and other parts needed to be glued down so they weren't sticking up unrealistically. One particular challenge was that the chinchorro net's floats couldn't really be pressed down any further and appeared to be floating a bit, as can be seen (not very well, admittedly) below, just next to the mast step: So, I looped up some scrap rope and rolled up some scrap netting to add under it, so it looks more like the floats are just on top of a wadded-up net. I'm still deciding whether to do the rope and the net (first picture), or just the rope (second): In any case, this is the longest I've had the rancho off since I added the rudder, oars, anchor, and other parts, and I don't think it looks half bad. Still definitely going to keep the rancho, though!

A bit of slow, halting progress on at least some parts of the build. Some people have made quite nice sails from tissue paper, so I thought I'd give it a try, as it's very cheap (I picked up several sheets for a few cents). I felt that my first test sail had been a little too cream-colored, so I tried to make it a bit more gray. A tiny drop of black paint goes a long way! I felt the color was a little dark, but I continued anyway as I could at least use it to test the tissue paper. As can be seen below, it seemed very smooth on the tile, but removing it from the tile (which required a bit of water) left it very wrinkled. I decided against adding separate panels or drawing on the panel lines, because I think they will be entirely invisible in the furled sail. I did, though, decide to try adding the reinforcing strips around the edges. Unfortunately, it was quite difficult to add these, or more accurately, to remove the sail once they were added. The attempt led to several rips and tears, and the reinforcements came off in several places. I realized that part of the issue is that the tile backing needs to be thoroughly cleaned after each use. Things stick too well if there's any residue. Having learned that lesson, I decided to keep using the gray sail as a test, while making a new sail in a better color with greater care: I'll see how this goes. I have to say that the tissue paper is much flimsier than the coffee filter (which is an obvious point I suppose).

Very cool, I missed most of your Bellona build so I'm looking forward to following along with this one. I quite like the look of Mediterranean vessels, and this seems like a fascinating kit.

Very nice job!

Fantastic job, I really like how you personalized the model. Your additions really paid off, it looks sharp. The whole flotilla looks great too.

Good question! I've mainly just used basswood strips, 1/32-inch thick, cut from sheets or scrap, but I've also used 1/16‐inch thick strips as well. Usually I go with something fairly thin, maybe 1/8-3/16-inch wide, and at least 5 inches long or longer. I've also used coffee stir sticks, some of which are 1/32-inch thick birch. In general you just want the batten to be thin enough to flex around the curves. I broke a few battens trying to fair the bow of my half-hull, perhaps soaking them would have helped but in hindsight it was a sign that a bit more fairing was needed.

Thanks! At the moment, I'm finishing up a Mexican fishing/cargo lake boat, the Canoa de Rancho, and I just started a build of a Chilean coasting sloop, the Lancha Chilota. I'm hoping to build some more small oar-powered vessels soon, as well.

Thanks, I'm looking forward to seeing how you build it with the sail!

Thank you all for your helpful comments! One tricky aspect of the plans is that they don't say or show anything about the planking thickness or the rabbet (they also don't include a lines plan, just drawings of each bulkhead). They do say that the bulwark should be made of a 2x8mm strip at 1:20 scale, which is a bit under 1/16 of an inch thick at 1:32 scale, but it's not clear if the planking should be the same thickness. So, taking advantage of this build being a generic type model rather than representing a specific vessel, I will plan on adjusting the rabbet for a single layer of 1/32-inch thick planking. This may lead to slightly differently proportions than those given on the plans, but the finished hull should still be a good representation of the type. In any case, I've been using a curved sanding block to finalize the shape of the bulkheads. As I go, I'm marking out a center line on each and using a small square to measure on each side. So far, the frames have been very symmetrical. I've also marked where I'll need to trim back the bow of the backbone to fit the stem.

I didn't see your post until I had already written mine, but I think that we're saying the same thing. My one suggestion is that, instead of adding wood filler to build the corner of Frame H back up, it might be easier to shape some scrap basswood. Very nice job of problem solving!

I think the counter is the most complex part of this model, and it doesn't help that the instructions are not very clear. I found it helpful to look at images of completed builds to try to reconstruct what the counter looked like. My sense is that the instruction to not sand the aft edge of frame H until the counter is added later in the build is a little bit of a simplification, because it's impossible to fair the hull without touching H, especially for the complex curves of the tuck stern. I think the main point is that the counter will form a horizontal line across rhe back of frame H, and the outermost edge (where the wale intersects) needs to not be sanded down. But I think it's ok to sand frame H closer to the sternpost in order to fair the stern curves. It might be useful to draw a line to mark where the counter will be placed, in order to not sand past it. Come to think of it, I don't really remember why the counter is supposed to be added later.

Now that the log is caught up, there are a few issues I should note and some questions I wanted to ask, as this is my first full-hull POB build. The tl;dr version is that: 1) I screwed up but saved the transom, 2) I need to reshape the backbone a bit, 3) I'm debating single- vs. double-planking with 1/32‐inch thick basswood and would love to hear your thoughts, and 4) I'm considering whether adding a couple stringers would help with fairing the bulkheads, or just make it more complicated. First, I made a mess of the transom. The plans give a hollowed-out transom (like the other bulkheads that, interestingly, doesn't slot into the backbone from above, but from the aft side. I decided to simplify this, making the transom notch like that of the other bulkheads. However, after cutting it to its current position, I realized that I was setting myself up for a very weak transom, as it would have fairly long, narrow sides running along the bottom. I decided that, instead of notching both the backbone and the transom, I would just leave the transom un-notched and do an extra-long notch in the backbone. Unfortunately, before extending the backbone notch (which I still have to do), I forgot about my plans and started cutting a notch in the transom. I remembered midway through cutting. Thankfully, the transom will be planked, so I decided to just fill the saw gap with glue and continue. Hopefully this doesn't make fairing more difficult. If necessary, I can simply cut a new transom. Second, more importantly, I messed up a bit on the backbone. As can be seen, for whatever reason I forgot to remove the amount equal to the separate stem piece from the fore end, so it's too long and I'll need to recut it. Not the end of the world, but a bit embarrassing and a good reminder to double-check before cutting. The photo above also shows another issue. I cut out the backbone a little wide as I was anticipating doing a fair bit of sanding, but I didn't end up sanding nearly as much as I thought I would. So, I need to trim down the bottom of the backbone to bring it to the proper size. (I also need to add a mast step to it). Which brings me to another important issue: how much space I should leave for the rabbet. I originally planned this out for a double-planked hull, as that seemed like the most common way to do POB builds and I was very worried about getting a smooth hull. However, since then, I planked the NRG Half-Hull (yes, this build has been languishing for a while), which is single-planked and unpainted. Although my build has plenty of errors, I was overall happy with how it turned out. So, I'm reconsidering whether it really would make sense to double-plank the lancha hull (especially as 1/32‐inch-thick basswood is not available here, so I'd be using up nearly my entire supply). While I'm sure that I'll make some mistakes, it will be painted black and so I can readily fill in any gaps or flat spots. Looking at other threads, it seems there's been some debate over single- vs double-planking, with many saying that double-planking is often used in kits because it allows you to get away with fewer, widely spaced bulkheads. In this build, the bulkheads are mostly spaced 3/4 of an inch apart, which is pretty close. All of which is to say, I'm currently leaning toward single-planking. However, this will require a much thinner rabbet than I currently have set. I'm curious as to whether it will be possible to change midway through to double-planking if it seems like my hull is turning out too uneven, or if that will be impossible if the rabbet is already full. I also wanted to ask if 1/32‐inch thick planks are going to be too thin. I feel like 1/16 would be hard to shape to these curves, and I don't have 3/64 thick wood. Then again, I used 1/32-thick wood on the Half-Hull. Finally, I'm a bit concerned about getting everything lined up. I was thinking that it might be useful to try adding a stringer connecting the bulkheads, specifically in the corner (I'd just have to carve out a little notch in each corner). I was thinking of a 1/16-inch square strip. My thought is that it would make it easier to see how the hull is lined up. Then again, if I add it before I've faired the bulkheads, it's probably going to be off and will itself need to be faired. And if I add it after the bulkheads have been faired, it seems kinda pointless and like I may as well just add the false deck and start planking. So I'm leaning toward no stringers, but thought I'd see if others had thoughts on the matter. (Another possibility may be to add stringers under the deck extending out in a line from the sides of the main hold, which would in theory be much less difficult to fair.) So, to reiterate, my main questions are about single- or double-planking, whether 1/32-inch thick planking is asking for trouble, and whether adding stringers would actually be helpful or will just make things more complicated. In any case, here's a size comparison so far of the Lancha Chilota to the Canoa de Rancho (which is one foot long). Both are in the same scale. The lancha is shorter, deeper, and much wider. It will also have a significantly taller mast and rig.

The Build After all of that, I’m finally ready to get to the build itself. (Thank you for your patience!) This has been my first POB build, and as will be seen, I’ve already made a lot of mistakes, some of them frankly embarrassing. I include them here so that maybe someone will learn from my errors, as I certainly hope to in future builds. As mentioned in an earlier post, I started work on this several months ago, so this post is about covering what I did then. I began by resizing the plans, which are in 1:20 scale, to my preferred scale of 1:32. I then decided on several modifications. The plan provides for a single piece “backbone” that includes the external keel and stem structure. Rather than keep everything a single piece, I decided to split things into three pieces. An internal backbone—referred to in some logs as a “false keel,” although I’m not calling it that to avoid confusion with an actual false keel—holds together the bulkheads, while a separate keel and a stem piece are scarfed together. Doing it in this way avoids leaving end grain all down the front of the stem, gives me practice with fabricating a keel/stem structure and scarfing pieces together, and also simplifies the construction of the rabbet, which can be placed at the intersection of the keel/stem and the internal backbone. The plans also provide for a very short internal backbone that overlaps very little with the bulkheads. In order to create a stronger joint, I decided to raise up the interior of the backbone a bit, to the maximum height that would allow me to use my razor saw to cut out the bulkhead slots. Later, I realized that it would have been much smarter to have followed the example of other POB builds and make the internal backbone run all the way to the level of the deck, which would help with alignment by making it easy to check the bulkheads’ height. Unfortunately, this will have to wait for my next POB scratchbuild, whenever that is. In order to have a higher backbone and a better connection with the bulkheads, I also somewhat raised the level at which the bulkheads rest on the backbone. In hindsight this was a bit of a mistake because this forced me to also lengthen the slot of the bulkheads, and getting everything properly lined up was challenging. Below, you can see how I drew a few options for this out on the plans. I made the backbone out of 1/8-inch thick basswood, which was readily available in Chicago, and made the keel and stem out of 3/16-inch thick basswood to match the thickness on the plan drawing. Using a thinner backbone leaves a bit of a ledge at the intersection with the keel/stem that will help create the rabbet. I also used a combination of a mini-plane and files to angle the front end of the stem up to near the top, where it becomes squared off again, following what I could see from photos of actual lanchas chilotas. As can be seen, my scarf joint between the keel and stem could be tighter. Given that this model will be painted, I decided that I would just fill any gap and be more careful next time with filing the joint edges flat. (There's also a bit extra on the bottom of the stem that will be sanded smooth with the keel once it's glued in place.) I also modified the plan design for the bulkheads. The plan provides for hollowed out bulkheads that approximate frames with deck beams attached, presumably so that the model’s interior can be shown off through the hatch. However, there are only 10 bulkheads (plus a transom), which is far fewer frames than there would be on a lancha chilota, and each bulkhead would be much thicker than would be accurate to scale. So, I decided to just shut the hatches completely and leave the bulkheads solid, simplifying things a bit and leaving the bulkheads stronger. Lacking power tools, I decided to use a coping saw to cut out the bulkheads from the 1/8-inch sheet of basswood. "How hard could it be," I thought. Well, if you don't actually know how to properly use a coping saw, or have a proper work table, it can be pretty difficult! When I started cutting them out back in Chicago in the spring, I did not have any sort of real work table, and I couldn't clamp the wood to any of my work spaces. I just used my left hand to hold the basswood sheet against the table top or the floor and sawed with my right hand. As a result, my sawing was all over the place (not to mention very tiring). It wasn't a disaster because I was able to finalize each bulkhead with an exacto knife and sanding, but each one required a lot of shaping. Below, you can see two bulkheads on the left made this way--that is, after aggressively shaping them--while the bulkheads at the right show the terrible job I did with just the saw. I ended up leaving about half the bulkheads in rough shape, although I was able to get the others properly shaped. I made the mistake of removing the plan drawings, which I should have kept on for now, as the lines on them would help with proper alignment. When I got to Mexico City, I still didn't have a proper work table. However, as mentioned in my Half-Hull log, I started a carpentry class, and the first thing I learned was how to properly use a fretsaw. There's both a proper sawing technique, and you need a sort of work stand solidly clamped and projecting off of the work table. So, after getting a lot of practice, I took in the rough-cut frames and sawed off the excess with the fretsaw. The results are a million times better (although I probably could have cut slightly wider of the line to leave more leeway for fairing). Lesson learned: you have to use a tool the right way for best results. Obvious, I know, but clearly something I needed to internalize by screwing up first. So, here's the build so far with the bulkheads (and not yet the transom) loose fit. The hull form is apparent. I'm not as precise as a laser cutter, so some are looser than others, but that should allow me to make sure everything is lined up properly. As can be seen, there are a few unwanted dips that will need to be sanded out during fairing. Based on my experience with the NRG Half-Hull, which was a much more complex hull shape, I'm feeling confident that I'll be able to make things work--worst case scenario, some bulkheads may need a little shimming, which isn't the end of the world. This post is already a bit long, so I'll get into some questions and ideas I have for where to go from here in the next post.

Thanks, all! The lobster trap was a lot of fun, making it open was a nice change of pace from the others I've done. Poor lobster indeed, Glen! And poor fishermen, rowing all that way for one measly lobster. Hope he's got some other traps set.

Thanks! The mini-plane has definitely been one of the most useful tools I've bought, even if I still sometimes have trouble figuring out which way to cut with vs. against the wood grain. If I were to redo my oars, I would probably try to taper the sides (and not just the top and bottom) of the oar shaft a bit to where they meet the blades, as I think that would look a bit more elegant than what I did. I might also round off the blade edges a bit more.

Fantastic job! I know from my experience with the Midwest Peapod kit that the strip planking can be a little tricky to get smooth, you're doing an exemplary job of it.

Looking good! You may want to check further ahead to see if having the bulwarks too low aft will cause problems later in the build. If not, I think the main issue is that the bulwark is sticking out a ways. Before cutting that part off you could try soaking it and seeing if you can bend it (maybe with a pin) to bring it back in contact with the bulkheads.

And here's the completed build: Although it took a while to build this when measured from start date to end date, that's mostly because I was quite busy with work/other builds/an international move while making it. Overall, I thought this was an excellent kit. It was a lot of fun to put together, and I think it turned out pretty well. The instructions are generally very good, although they could be clearer on the planking. I found the strip planking system to be pretty easy to do, but it was a challenge smoothing out the interior of the hull. The wood was generally good, while the castings were decent (although I still think a wooden buoy would have worked out better). I do think the suggested lobster trap is very oversimplified and oddly-proportioned, but it's not all that hard to scratch-build something better with the parts. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend this kit.

Thanks, all. This build is finished! (For some reason it gave me trouble when I tried to upload all the pictures, so I'm splitting this post in two.) First up, I finished the lobster trap. The open door was a fun addition. I used the leftover broken hoops to make the curved frame parts. I then glued the door in the open position. I also added some extra framing parts for the hinges, and three small pivoting "buttons" used to secure the door. Finally, I made the front net funnel using the same method as the previous one. As for the buoy, I followed @Desertanimal's suggestion and rounded off part of the wood to fit in the round hole. I decided to simply fill in the front, and drill two joles later for the rope loop. The buoy looks better painted, although the molded-on grain is still a bit excessive (and made it a little tricky to tape off and paint the red stripe). In any case, the buoy will be partly hidden under a thwart, so it's not a problem. I then glued the lobster in place. While it struck me as pretty cheesy when I first got the kit, I have to admit that I warmed up to it. Finally, I attached the ropes to connect the trap to the buoy, using the kit-provided thread.

Very cool! Nice job on the completed builds, and I'm looking forward to seeing following along on the new one. It's fascinating to see the variety of workboats from the Chesapeake, although I have to admit that I don't really know the difference between them all (box stern vs round stern, for example).