MisterMeester

Started Sheet 5 ...... .....as per instructions, noting that some of the forward most plates are not symmetrical to each side.... ....and it didn't take long to discover that these asymmetrical plates are labelled incorrectly. Not a big deal, and I suppose it's irrelevant, if one is paying attention and cuts, then applies, each plate as one goes. Further, it appears that this sheet does not have as many plates as the previous four. Should be able to get this sheet done in less than a week. Thanks for looking. Cheers, Mark

Sheet 4 done. One sheet left. It takes me about 1 hour and 20 minutes to do one row of eight plates. ~ 16 hours for an entire sheet. Hoping to have Sheet 5 done in a week. Thanks for looking. Cheers, Mark

Minor imperfection on Sheet 4. Port plate #146 not entirely cut through. Not a big deal. Cheers, Mark

Sheet 2 done, a few months ago. Golf season over, Scale Modeling season commenced. Sheet 3 completed today. Two more sheets to go before applying to the hull. Thanks for looking and cheers, Mark

Sheet 1 done. Starting Sheet #2 soon. One recently learned disadvantage to being on a blood thinner as a result of an angioplasty is that back issues are not immune to easily being rectified by a chiropractor. As it is, I have suffered a back ailment (not the first time), that, because of my recent stent implants, cannot be rectified in a traditional "back crack" chiropractor way until said implants have "healed" (6-12 months). A disappointing aspect of this (the back ailment) is I can't swing a golf club without resultant pain and can't get "fixed" by my chiropractor without "back cracking" until said stent healing is complete. I've been worse off before, but not in this scenario, and hoping that this setback can be rectified with modified chiro appointments as well as self care (read: annoying exercises) at home. Point being, I will initially, and maybe beyond, have more time on my hands than expected to continue work on this project this summer. Hoping not, though. Thanks for looking. Suggestions are welcome. Cheers, Mark

Working the underhull plating kit from Woody's Modelworks (aka Maritime Models) has begun. The idea here is to build the plating in five sections, setting aside each section as it's completed, and then glue the sections to the hull en masse. The seller states (in an email reply) that the thickness of the styrene is 0.20mm. I don't dispute that as it appears, in a side by side comparison to the .005" (0.13mm) styrene I used for the stern plating, to be slightly thicker. As with the stern plates worked, there is a "lip" on each of these plates that I deem necessary to sand down. And so it begins. I think this will be fairly easy, just tedious and time consuming. It's going to take awhile. Thanks for looking. Suggestions are welcome. Cheers, Mark

Phil, Very good points. Thanks. Never considered a ruler might be inaccurate. I do not have calipers. The ruler I used is a cheapo bought at a drug store. Anyway, it all worked out. If I'm ever in need of this kind of accuracy again, which I suppose is likely, I will definitely take your points into consideration. Me thinks a Staedtler ruler would be accurate. Cheers, Mark

Stern plating completed. As mentioned earlier, I decided to go with .005" thick styrene. So, essentially, I paid $70 CDN for a template and instructions, as, in the end, I did not actually use Midwest Model Shop's .010" styrene kit. . .005" x 200 = 1". According to “Titanic: The Ship Magnificent” (Vol 1, pg 145), the ship's shell plating was various sizes, but 1" thick at the most. .010" is not to scale. Here's a pic of the layout guide scribed onto the hull.... Here's the .005" styrene traced out using the .010" aftermarket kit's sheet.... I used the negative spaces of the original kit sheet. Most of the traced plates on the .005" sheet were smaller than needed. A lot of measuring was required, for most plates, to cut them a tad larger than traced and get them close to right. I added 1mm to the width of each of plates 1 thru 6, indicated in this picture, to bring the whole sequence 6mm further forward and thus a more accurate representation, as indicated within the blue circles. Applied to the Stbd side as well. Some pics of the final result. Immaculate? No. "Museum Quality"? No. But I'm pretty happy with it. The .010" styrene was just too thick and resulted in many gaps and protrusions along the rub rails. The .005" styrene, although maybe still not perfect, results in a cleaner finish, in my opinion. Very happy that the aftermarket kit plate seams now line up with the Trumpeter kit plate seams, as indicated here..... So far so good, right? Not quite. An unavoidable inaccuracy exists with this application. I mentioned a reference to it earlier in this build log and it didn't go away despite applying the correct scale layout guide. To repeat....the top row of portholes on Trumpeter's representation are not high enough. This results in a conflict with the location of portholes on a couple of the aftermarket kit's plates. Here's a pic, before trying to explain it in words..... Contrary to Trumpeter's representation, the line of portholes indicated here on the Olympic, within the green rectangle, are actually in the upper 1/3rd of the row of shell plating they are respective with. Continuing this line with the aftermarket kit in place creates a problem. The aftermost 5 portholes would end up being on the wrong (lower) plate (blue arrow) and too close to the upper adjacent plate seam there. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't with this. The only way to REALLY correct this , that I can see, would be to fill the entire upper row of Trumpeter's porthole locations, bow to stern, and re-drill them higher. A task I'm not willing to do. The lesser of two evils for me was to offset the line of this row of portholes so that the aftermost five are represented accurately as per the shell plates they are associated with (red arrow). A further aspect that had to be corrected, in my mind, was four portholes, (two each side), that needed to be relocated as a result of extending the upper plates by 6mm. The following is a more accurate representation, in my mind.... And finally, in all this, I had inadvertently sanded off a Trumpeter kit seam line on one side. So I purposely sanded the respective seam on the other side off and added styrene strips to rectify. Super stoked that I've completed this step with relatively satisfactory results. I'm confident it will look good once painted. Next up will be Woody's Model Works underhull plating aftermarket kit. Thanks for looking and suggestions are welcome. Cheers, Mark

Sorry I haven't replied sooner. I'm supposed to get an email notification advising me of replies to this log. Not sure how I missed that. Pictures from that other site? Which pictures? The MiniBrass kit? There's a good video or two on YouTube on that one. I have an elderly aunt in Winnipeg. Hate to say it, but I might be out that way in a year or two for a funeral. She's 93. Cheers, Mark

Eureka! Modeler error discovered! Or perhaps oversight is a more appropriate word. Regardless, quite embarrassing, actually. I attribute this to my lack of experience as well as just plain stupidity. Simple as that. But instead of hiding it, it should be mentioned here for a couple of reasons. 1). To help explain how my stern plating application will be immaculate henceforth (ya, we'll see about that), and 2). hopefully prevent the next person using this aftermarket kit from making the same mistake, although I can't imagine anyone else being as dumb as me in this regard. The oversight: Midwest Model Shop's stern plating kit has instructions. They are available on their website in pdf format. Part of those instructions is a layout guide. The instructions say to print that layout guide at 100%, cut out the image, and lay it out on the hull to better understand where each plate will be located. Done. This was prior to my first attempt at applying plates: As one can see, the guide does not line up with the kit seams (red arrow), and why is there a huge gap between the guide edge and the adjacent rub rail? Although not mentioned in the instructions, a further advantage to doing this is from a tip I learned from a YouTube video. Take a hobby knife and cut through the paper at each plate seam line, thus leaving score marks on the hull and thus transposing the layout guide onto the hull itself. But alas, due to the fit issue of the layout guide, I abandoned the use of that altogether and began laying the plates as described previously in this build log. So, why did I do that? Why did I not use the layout guide? This is where the dumb part comes in. After stripping all the plating of my first attempt off, I had another look at the layout guide. Here it is prior to cutting out the image: As one can see, it says "Measure after printout to confirm the page printed out at 100%". First of all, measure what? Ohhhhhhhhh!!! Measure the SCALE!! I did not clue into this my first go around. How dumb is that? On a scale (no pun intended) of 1 to 10, I'd say 10. Secondly, I had my printer set at 100%, so therefore, in my mind, how could my print job not be 100%? It appeared to me that there was something wrong with the instructions, rather than my misunderstandings. Thirdly, I'm not a techy and it hadn't occurred to me that one could print something MORE than 100%. 100% is 100%. Period. Once I realized what I'm supposed to "measure", and actually measured it (clearly in the above picture, this 100% print job falls short of 5cm on the scale), it then dawned on me that perhaps printing at 100+% is possible. Turns out it is. Who knew? Further to "I'm not a techy".....I suppose all printers are not created equal? (insert shrugs shoulders emoji here). A 100% print job on one printer might be 95% on another? More specific instructions on this would have been beneficial for an idiot like me, but I don't not want to pass blame, and I digress. So, I tried printing the page at 105% and that measured still too small by about 0.5mm. So, I tried 106%. Pretty much bang on. Maybe 0.1mm too large. Maybe. Close enough. And voila! Pics of the layout guide in place. That's better. Next step will be scoring the plate seams through the guide and onto the hull. Not mentioned in the instructions, but learned from online...these lines will not be the gospel as to where the plates lay exactly. They are just a guide. But better than guessing free hand. Regardless of all the above, I still disagree with the .010" thickness of the aftermarket kit provided styrene. I've obtained .005" and will be going with that, using the negative spaces of the kit sheet for tracing. Until next time, thanks for looking and suggestions are welcome. Cheers, Mark

Stern plating update. Not going so well. I managed to address the alignment with the centerline issue, but that is about the only positive. It's moot anyway as, for a number of reasons, I've decided to strip off what I've already done and start over. The overlaps here shown in the red circles seems way too much. I'm not sure if this is modeler error or manufactured error or a combination of both. I don't see how piece #18 could have been put on any other way. I had issues with forward plates, lining up with longitudinal plate seams on the kit. This is perhaps why. I've observed a photo on Facebook of a Mini Brass application and this particular piece does not overlap as much as here. Again, not sure if it's me. The blue circles indicate gaps and protrusions I'm not happy with. This plating is .010" (.25mm) thick styrene. Again on Facebook, I read a comment from a modeler who used .005" (.13mm) styrene as they thought it is closer to scale. I'm inclined to agree with that. My next attempt will be with .005" thick styrene. This photo shows the plate seams of the aftermarket kit not lining up with the plate seams on the Trumpeter hull (red arrows). Green arrows show a huge gap between a plate edge and the rub rail. I cut another #33 plate to replace this one. More of the same. Plates just not lining up for me. Upon studying historical photos in trying to determine solutions to the above, I discovered another issue. The kit's portholes (aka sidelights) do not agree with how they actually were on this area of the ship. Granted, the photograph is of the Olympic, but this photograph is basically accepted as the best representation of what the Titanic's stern area looked like, given that they were sister ships. No photograph of the Titanic's stern exists that is better than this one. So, back to the issue....the portholes on the Olympic (and one can assume, the Titanic as well) are higher up and closer to the adjacent rub rail (blue arrows) than the Trumpeter kit portholes. I image when I get to this point again, with my 2nd attempt, I will not take the plates this far forward and just go with the Trumpeter's portholes locations. I just don't see how those can be adjusted upwards without messing with the alignment all the other portholes forward of there. Another issue.... I wasn't happy with my decision to add a 7th plate either side of the center plate of the transom area. It's just not accurate. So I removed them. That brings up the question again....why are these kit plate seams (circled in red) left exposed and what to do to rectify that? Researching this indicates to me that these six plates do not go forward enough. Using the porthole circled in green as a reference supports this. The plates in the photograph appear to end further forward than the aftermarket kit's plates. By measurement I've concluded that if these six plates were just 1mm wider, each, that would leave a more accurate representation. Therefore, I'll be cutting these plates 1mm wider for my 2nd attempt. As well, some of these plates are not high enough, it would appear (blue circle). Hopefully, I won't forget about that aspect as well, when cutting the new plates. While studying the historical photographs for solutions to the above , I discovered another apparent anomaly. The kit has three plate seams along the area indicated, whereas the photograph indicates there were five along here. I rectified this with .010' x .020" styrene strip. And here as well. Plate seams in the photograph, but not on the kit. Rectified. That's it for now. I just had an angiogram on Thursday and had two stents implanted. Can't golf for 5 more days, so I'd like to get to my hobby store tomorrow and get some .005" styrene sheet and get started with my 2nd attempt at the stern plating. I'll be using the negative spaces of the aftermarket kit sheet as a template. Thanks for looking. Cheers, Mark

Progress report on the stern plating kit application.... Port side, adjacent plate #12, a portion of a molded plate seam remained exposed. I suppose I didn't quite lay each subsequent plate far enough along. So I made and applied an extra plate (#12a) to cover it. This also covered the next raised molded plate seam. The only downside is that I've created an inaccuracy. There were only three such plates forward of that hawser lead hole. Same thing, starboard side. Plate #13 (yes, I know it looks like a 12, but it is a 13...pencil lead rubbed off) did not extend far enough. It's hard to say if this is the result of my application of the previous plates sequence or some other explanation. I added an extra plate here as well (#13a). This plate would not completely cover the next raised molded plate seam, so I sanded that off (green circle). A photo in the instructions suggests that Ben did the same regarding sanding down the raised seams. Now on to the lower section. The placement of plate #14 is critical, so I decided to tape plates #14 - #18 together and do a dry fit. I also cut out plate #21, which is the plate that extends from plate #18, to ensure that plate would lay right up to the rub rail. Satisfied with my positioning, I glued these 5 plates in place. I'm using Tamiya Extra Thin cement for this. Tiny gap where plate #14 meets plate #18. I haven't decided yet if I'll fill this with putty. I suspect once painted black it will barely be noticeable. Slight alignment issue. Plate #18 is off to Port by 1mm. This should work out okay, however, as plate #21 will cover that point and I should be able to lay that plate in a manner that this misalignment will not be apparent. And just a mention of cutting the plates from the template...I have gotten better at that and find cutting the plates out from this perspective.... ....is easier than this perspective.... Until next time, thanks for looking. Cheers, Mark

Hello Winnie! Happy to see another CFL fan here! Re: the FB group.... agreed, the owner definitely comes across that way, and I'm not sure why. Having communicated with him behind the scenes regarding my portholes/windows kit I found him to be actually a bit of a softy. I truly think he means well, but just has a unique way of communicating. I'm curious to know what you didn't like about the Mini Brass stern kit. Looking forward to seeing your build and thanks for looking in to my build log. Cheers, Mark

Ahoy Evan! Yes, very much content with the porthole drilling and repairs complete. Regarding the stern counter plating options, if I had scratch build skills such as yourself, I likely would have gone that route as well, but alas, as essentially a beginner, I need help in some areas. Yes, I'm pleased with my decision to go with Ben's kit. A little more economically friendly than the Mini Brass kit and not as heavy as well. As well, I'm hoping my build log will help others. Just to avoid my beginner mistakes, if nothing else. Cheers, Mark

After several (about seven or eight) attempts to replicate the orange peel texture, I finally have a result that I'm satisfied with. Not necessarily orange peel, but more like kiwi fruit peel. But it's generally uniform and I'll take it. The product and tools used. The first seven attempts were made using a black foam paint brush. The final two attempts were made with a white "Cosmetics Wedge". I also discovered, through trial and error, that it was beneficial to dab the foam, once wet with the product, on sheet styrene first, to get it worked into the foam, rather than a wet blob. A couple of examples of failed attempts... First pic, what a mess. Sanded all this off and tried again. This attempt wasn't as bad, but just not uniform. Orange peel on the left lapel, kiwi fruit peel on the right lapel. The trick is knowing when to stop dabbing as the product dries. Sanded all this off and tried again. The final result. Not perfection, but I'm okay with it. This closeup shows a tad inequality, but as the previous photo shows, it is not as noticeable from further back. Next step will be to learn how to airbrush and then primer all parts. Not sure when that will happen as golf season is in full swing (haha) and my Titanic project takes up most of the rest of my spare time. Thanks for looking. Cheers, Mark

Stern plating has commenced. Plate #1, on the stern counter, in place. Curious to see how this plays out with the subsequent plates of this area of the stern. I'm envisioning the overlap of the subsequent plates to rise above the rub rails. Should this be the case, I suppose there are two options. Remove Plate #1 and disregard plating this area, thus going with it as molded....or....go ahead and plate it and build up the rub rails. Removal from the template is delicate. The template numbered, as per instructions. Thanks for looking. Cheers, Mark

Update time, and update on the Hawser Leads. At some point I determined I got the locations of the aftermost Hawser Leads wrong, so I filled and re-drilled them a tad further forward. Upon doing research on another matter, and while looking at photographs, I had another look at these locations and concluded that I had them right the first time. Ugh. So, filled and re-drilled them again. I also decided to drill all eight of the Hawser Leads to 1.8mm. I had tried this earlier using a power drill, after having drilled them out to 1.4mm, but the bit just stuck. Drilling them out manually proved successful. 1.8mm for these leads is closer to scale. Continued with the frame kit and did a dry fit with Part Q1, which is B Deck. Upon doing so, I determined that there was a fit issue. The forward Grand Staircase of Part Q1 conflicted with not only the frame kit, but also Part W1 as well. The issue with the frame kit was not surprising, but how could Trumpeter have allowed a fit issue with Q1 and W1? Anyhoo, modify I did. Turns out I was missing a few parts in the dry fit. Oops. Honestly, I had a hard time understanding the instructions. Trumpeter has the modeler building the Superstructure primarily separate, before attaching the whole block to the hull. A few YouTube vids finally made it clear. The short of it is, I didn't have to modify Part W1, or the frame kit, for Part Q1 at all, as Parts N & P and A9 and A12 all raise Q1 higher than I had it during my first dry fit. Oh well. No harm done. As mentioned, I'm not lighting my model, so I expect the Grand Staircase interior area will not be visible much. Further, the frame kit should still function accordingly. Despite the cutouts, the horizontal frame is still solid with vertical frame. Part A9, above. Hard to make out in this pic, but the staircase is now above Part W1 and the frame kit. Port porthole fix, complete. Drilled out to 3.2mm and filled with 3.2mm styrene rod. Any cavities filled with Milliput. Sanded down and re-drilled again with 3/32" bit. I'm now happy with the results. I figure it will look better once paint is applied. As above, for the final Stbd porthole I was not happy with. Again, should look better with paint on it. More mods required for the frame kit. This time to accommodate Parts N1 & N2 and P1 & P2. This should complete modifying the aftermarket frame kit. And yet another mistake admission. I inadvertently cut a stanchion off Part N1. My excuse is that I'd cut Part N2 off it's sprue a few days before I did the same to N1. Bottom line is carelessness. Red circle shows the corresponding stanchion of N2 intact. Green circle indicates the mistake. Blue circle indicates a sprue piece I used to fix. Sprue piece filed and sanded square. New stanchion in place. I'm happy with this result. I may have to sand down the height of it a smidge as I suspect it's too tall. Time will tell. That's it for now. Applying the stern plating aftermarket kit, purchased from The Midwest Model Shop, will be next. Thanks for looking. Cheers, Mark

Update time..... Part P2 "continue ridge" sanded down and complete. Corrections to Part N2. Relocate two portholes; add porthole; remove door; add window; continue ridge. Windows of the 1st Class Gangway Doors hollowed out. Two doors on each side. I purchased an aftermarket kit for the Utley sidelights from ScaleWarships. Instructions say to drill these portholes 3.0mm for the acrylic insert, but I found that to be too small. 1/8" is more like it. Here's a dry fit of said sidelight. I wasn't happy with 13 of the 2.4mm (3/32") portholes drilled so I filled them with 2.4mm styrene rod and re-drilled. I'm still not happy with this one on the port side and one on the starboard side. So, I've drilled them out at 1/8" and awaiting the arrival of some 1/8" styrene rod to fill and re-drill at 3/32". Note the damage to the rivets. I've ordered some HO scale 3D rivet decal sheets from Micro Mark that will, hopefully, address that. A tip picked up from Ben of The Midwest Model Shop. Once all the portholes were drilled out, I figured I could go ahead and work on making the frame kit I purchased fit. Not a good picture here. It's showing the third vertical modified to accommodate the porthole resin "glass" inserts. All the frames modified for the resin porthole inserts. I haven't figured out, yet, how parts N1 and 2, and P1 and 2 fit, but I expect I might have to modify the horizontals to accommodate the tabs on those parts. Wash ports. The forward Well Deck has 10 wash ports. Five each side. These come hollowed out already. The aft Well Deck has eight wash ports. Four each side. These wash ports are NOT hollowed out. I forgot to take a pic of them before adding the shutters. Wash port shutters. The wash ports had outward swinging hinged shutters. I used 0.25mm x 2.0mm styrene strip, cut to a length of 5.5mm each. Corners rounded using a sanding stick. That's it for now. Thanks for looking. Cheers, Mark

Stern portholes drilled. 1.2mm. Trumpeter did not include the aft hawser leads in the mold. Port Aft hawser leads plotted and drilled here. 1.4mm. Graham's document does not have distances off any references, I assume because his resource materials did not provide any. I'm satisfied that he likely spent many hours researching it, to no avail. I wasn't about to spend many hours myself on it. I plotted my holes by simply eyeballing them based on his document and the Titanic references I have. There's a good picture of these, albeit Olympic, in "Titanic: Icon of an Age", pg 119. Looks like I messed up a bit. I plotted the forwardmost lead a little too far aft. For the starboard aft hawser leads I measured the location of the port aft leads from adjacent plate seams, in millimeters, and transposed. Trumpeter DID include the forward hawser leads in the mold. However, the port forward mold depressions were 1.4mm, while the starboard forward depressions were molded at 2.0mm. I did not discover this until after I'd already drilled the other six leads. Regardless, I drilled these leads 2.0mm. Instead of drilling the other six leads again, at 2.0mm (which would be too large), I decided to plug these with 2.0mm styrene rod and will re-drill at 1.4mm. Still a work in progress, as I need to fill the cavities with putty. Minor hiccup here. The largest bit for the Wowstick is 2.2mm. The next portholes in line to drill were the .094" holes, which require either a 2.4mm bit (which I don't have) or a 3/32" bit. The Wowstick chuck is not big enough to take a 3/32" so I used my Deko drill. Drilling these holes on the starboard side went pretty much hiccup free. However, on the port side, after only two holes drilled, the bit decided to start skating on me resulting in the next two holes to drill out of alignment. Time to stop and regroup. Green arrow shows the first two holes working out fine. Red arrows show the misaligned holes. If the styrene rod in the hawser leads above works out, I have a mind to do the same here, to correct these two holes. New plan required pilot holes for the remaining. I chose to use a pin first, eyeballing as close to center as possible to mark the spot, and then use a push pin to enlarge the mark. Then I used a 0.8mm bit in the Wowstick for the pilot hole before finishing off with the 3/32" with the Deko. Everything went well from here. So, all portholes are now drilled except for the .109" holes. I have an "Utley" portholes aftermarket kit on order from Scale Warships that require a 3.0mm hole. Upon arrival of that kit, I will then drill one 3.0mm hole and do a dry fit with an "Utley" porthole before proceeding with the rest. Another little task required was this...... There are 12 of these deck supports on the inside of the hull that require cleanup for the porthole "glass" inserts. Somewhat surprised that Trumpeter did not position all the supports so as to not conflict with any portholes, but alas, I suppose that's part of model building. Door removals. As per Graham's research as shown, and cross referencing appears to confirm, a number of doors have been incorrectly molded in and, for accuracy sake, need to be removed. Still some cavity filling required for the above. And the door removal I worked on today, on part P2, which also requires "continue ridge". For "continuing the ridge", I used 0.25 x 0.50mm styrene strip, attached with Tamiya Extra Thin cement. A work in progress. Letting it set overnight before sanding it down. And to complete this post, it is a common opinion online among other builders of this model that, for a more accurate model, both the KA as well as the Pontos detail kits are beneficial, as each have their advantages. I recently came into a modest amount of unexpected retro pay from my previous work years so I decided to splurge on the Pontos kit. Quite excited to now have this kit as well as the KA kit. And an additional bonus is that I managed to find it in my home country so, no customs duty. More to come. Thanks for looking. Suggestions are welcome. Cheers, Mark

As expected, my local hobby store did not have Mr. Surfacer 500 in stock. Order placed with my go-to online supplier. It will arrive next week. In the meantime, I've masked the lapel off expecting that the procedure will not match the existing texture and will probably have to do the whole lapel. Thanks for looking. Cheers, Mark

I’ve received permission from Graham Boyd, member participant of the Facebook group “Trumpeter TITANIC 1/200th model ONLY building tips and tricks”, to reference his documents regarding kit inaccuracies to the hull and portholes and the associated corrections. Graham referenced the book “Titanic: The Ship Magnificent” for his detailed work. He created 37 images, for closer detail. Eighteen for the hull corrections and 19 for the porthole corrections. I intend to post only a few in this build log. This will, hopefully, explain what some of my decisions regarding the hull are based on. Porthole Corrections - Port Side, Section 1 Regarding the portholes to “remove”….these portholes never existed. By my count, there are 30 total. Twenty-nine on the Port side and one on the Starboard side. As of this point, I have these all filled (hence, removed) and sanded. Regarding the portholes to “add”….there are a few of these that Trumpeter just missed altogether, but the majority are portholes that are there…just in the wrong place, and need to be moved, so to speak. Considering the scale, I have no idea how Graham determined the precise distance to which a porthole needs to be moved, but I can’t help but think a bit of educated guesswork was involved with that. Regardless, I do not intend to do any of these. By my count there are 55 (+/-) of them. I figure the odds of me getting 55 new scratch portholes drilled perfectly in place are slim. There is bound to be at least one that would stick out like a red dot on a white cashmere sweater. Upon researching this build I’ve learned that building an accurate Titanic model is next to impossible. Apparently even the original builder’s models aren’t accurate. For that reason, I have decided to give myself some leeway in the accuracy department and moving/adding portholes is one of those sacrifices. Further, my skill level is limited. I’m just not willing to risk scarring an expensive kit with a procedure I don’t feel comfortable doing. I intend to make my 1/200 Titanic as accurate as I possibly can, within my skill set. This build is by no means intended to be a show model, or museum piece. It is very much solely for my own satisfaction. But I digress. Back to the reference material… Regarding the “hawseholes” (aka Hawser Port, Mooring Pipe or, as I know them, Fairlead) …. I will not be moving the foremost lead on either side of the bow. I’m fine with where they are. There are four more on the quarters (two either side) that Trumpeter missed. Those four need to be plotted. I do intend to do those. Regarding the single and double “safety bars”…..I will be attempting to apply these using styrene strips. Five single and five double, each side, for a total of 20. Prior to that attempt, however, I’m researching if there is any photo etch available for these portholes. That would be much easier, as the styrene pieces to cut will be quite tiny. Regarding the porthole sizes indicated…..these dimensions are the original sizes, in inches, reduced to 1/200 in millimeters. The mm sizes are not drill bit sizes. In fact, Trumpeter did not mold the portholes to 1/200 scale. They are all slightly smaller. Therefore, determining what size drill bits to use is ongoing. The distorted portholes….. Of the five distorted portholes (each side) to fill and re-drill, I’ve chosen an additional four (each side) that I think are distorted enough to warrant this fix as well. I believe the two aftermost portholes on the top row (bottom row in this pic, both sides) will be covered by the stern plating kit. I’ll hold off drilling those ones until after the plating has been applied. I’ve measured where they should go…. The four missing stern portholes….. I suppose Trumpeter didn’t even bother with these as they likely would not have shown on the mold at all, given their location. Plotted and ready for the drill. I have not decided which drill bit to go with on these yet. The first porthole drilled and first porthole “glass” dry fit. Starting with the lowest row, and consequently, the smallest. With the porthole “glass” aftermarket kit, and using my handy-dandy home made drill bit gauge I can take most of the guesswork out of which size to go with. For these portholes (0.031” aftermarket “glass”) I’ve decided on the 0.8mm Wowstick bit. Note to self: Styrene doesn't drill so well with the larger bits. That's it for now. Got me some drilling to do. Until next time, thanks for looking, and suggestions are welcome. Cheers, Mark

Guaranteed when I built this model 50+ years ago I did not fill gaps, and sand mold lines and join seams. I would have thrown it together, painted it and that's it. 100% certain, as well, that I used the novelty glow-in-the-dark parts. Not this time. I think I'm beyond that. Going with the conventional head, etc. Who knew a model such as this would have complications? As I am still very early in my scale modeling resurgence, I do not have an extensive repertoire of models worked on to compare this one to, but it would appear that, as models go, it's relatively cheap. And with that, comes lots of fit issues, gaps to fill, and mold lines and join seams to sand. A few pics of some work done so far.... Tamiya White Putty used here. Mr. Surfacer 1000 used here after sanding down the white. Done. Three big gaps were here, right shoe meeting with the right leg. My close up pic has revealed I'm not quite done sanding this down. The right hand comes in two parts. The left hand is all one. As with the torso, Tamiya White and Mr. Surfacer 1000. The Phantom's teeth were less than perfect. Unfortunately, I forgot to take a pic of them before I began chiseling bigger gaps between them. This pic is more or less mid-way through my work. Not a good pic. Out of focus and hard to get a sense of how they started out. Teeth done. I did just the top row. Looking forward to how they'll look when painted. This was inevitable. Sanding the join seam of the head also removed some hair striations. Hair striations chiseled back in. I hope I sanded the seam enough and primer/paint will hide it. My next dilemma is this..... The Phantom's cape covers most of the join seams on the shoulders, but not all. Some of the lapel is exposed toward the collar. The challenge here is, the lapel has an orange peel texture. Sanding the join seams will inevitably smooth a portion of that. Researching what I can do to restore that, I've learned that Mr. Surfacer 500 is a potential solution. Just brush it on and then dab it with the bristles of a brush (or, I'm thinking perhaps foam would work well). I figure if the resultant texture doesn't match, then I would mask the lapel off and do the whole lapel. I'll be checking my local hobby store for Mr. Surfacer 500 tomorrow, but I'm not holding my breath that they'll have it. I expect to have to order it online. Note to self: Do a test of this on a piece of styrene first. In the meantime, I guess I'll get back to sanding. Thanks for looking. Suggestions are welcome. Cheers, Mark

Time for an Update. Things are ramping up. Most items ordered have arrived. Just waiting for four more upgrade kits from two different suppliers, none of which have shipped yet. Not in a rush for those, however. Just a bit never-racking as they were all ordered quite sometime ago. Anyway, a summary on what I have received, thus far.... Bulkhead/Framing kit already mentioned above. I've not gotten any further with that yet than the dry fit. A few more items for reference... Went with the KA detail kit, (vs Pontos). Most reviews favor this kit. "More bang for your buck", I heard a few times. Some suggest both kits, as Pontos has items this kit does not (and vice versa). This kit actually cost me more than the Trumpeter model kit itself, so I think I'll leave the Pontos on the shelf. Interestingly, one review said the KA kit is for advanced modelers and the Pontos is better suited to the newbie. Another reviewer said the exact opposite. I guess I'll never know for sure without the Pontos kit. Purchased the Stern Plating kit from The Midwest Model Shop. A portholes/windows detail kit purchased through "Trumpeter Titanic 1/200th model ONLY building tips and tricks" Facebook group. The distorted portholes at the stern (both sides) identified for filling. Distortion is the result of the mold process. To be drilled out again, later, to make them correct round. Longitudinal view of the port side, with more portholes to be filled. These portholes don't exist. Source of this information is from the aforementioned FB group. I messaged the "author" of that info, for permission to post some of those images here, but never heard back. Anyway, including the distorted portholes, there are 47 to fill and sand. There are another 55 +/- portholes that are out of place and, for accuracy sake, should be filled and moved. I'm not brave enough to go that far. I figure the chances of me drilling 55 new portholes and get all 55 exactly aligned correctly are pretty slim. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the porthole and hull errors and corrections are on the port side. The side of the model I want to display. The starboard side has only a few errors. Fingers crossed that any mistakes I make are few and minor. Just a closer example image of some of the portholes filled. I used Milliput Superfine White. Image showing the distorted portholes, both sides, filled. And so begins the sanding. 240 grit stick. A finished porthole. Followed the 240 stick with a 400 grit stick. It went better than expected. I was concerned with botching up that rivet line. Anyway, 20 more portholes still to sand. Thanks for looking, Suggestions are welcome. Cheers, Mark

Haha! Yes! Hague, (The). I called it that too, for the first few years that we lived here. Just 22 minutes to the North (I'm actually in Warman also). Thanks for the offer of help. Two newbies heads are likely better than one! Cheers, Mark

I did a dry fit, last night, of an aftermarket frame kit I bought off eBay. It's about 2mm too long, longitudinally. Me thinks it will fit better once I clean it up. If not, will have to modify it a bit. Once that is done, I'll get a better idea of how the fit will be with the midship section of C Deck.