wefalck

Have you ever tried chemical tinning? At least over here in Europe we can buy such solutions from both, model supply and electronics supply houses. It kind of makes parts looked like steel, which they would be in real life.

I think the overall impression is very good and looks 'disorderly' realistic. I agree, however, that the bunch, just before the first roband from the bottom, should be hanging down more and be less folded up and follow more gravity ... Perhaps it is helpful to do what painter would do in such a situation: they would take a broomstick and a bedcloth or something like that and make a nearly full-size prop-up to study the folds and draping.

... try also a fake splice on the strop with some serving using e.g. fly-tying thread. A worthwhile exercise. I don't know anything about these commercial blocks, but milling grooves for the strops would be a rather difficult and costly operation. Leaving the blocks without gives the purchaser also the option of using them for metal-stropped or internally stropped blocks. Filing a groove with a very thin (1 mm) jewellers needle file is not difficult.

OK, this is the notorious first planking (I wonder, why kit manufacturers still go for it, while there are better methods to create a solid foundation for the 'real' planking. However, It may have been better to begin planking prototype-fashion from the garboard up. This give you a better feeling for the run of the planking in general and how it is supposed to rund against the keel and the stem. I would consider this for the 2nd round of planking. It is also a good idea to have a look how the planking is/was done on the real thing. One of the places where traditional dhows were built until quite recently is Sur in Oman. Just 'google' with 'dhow sur oman' and lots of pictures and videos will pop up. You will have to search for images with a dhow under construction, as at completion the hull below the waterline was smeared with a concoction of quick-lime, coconut-oil and what not against the attack of Terredo navalis and you cannot see the run of the planking.

It doesn't need to be a structural thing. If you look carefully, not all the planks are the same width at all. Perhaps they just used what they had or the width worked out better with cut-out for the hatch - one tries to avoid to have to caulk around a notch for the hatch, when you can run the plank straight along the edge of the hatch.

Standard sailmaking practice calls for the boltrope being sewn on top of the sail (usually the port side), rather than the edge. Was this also the practice for these sails? that would give a larger contact surface, than just the edge. Fabric glue might be good solution, but when the boltrope become unstuck, you can also re-attach after furling the sail at places, where it visibly has come off. Done that myself.

I think you painted a quite convincing picture of the history (or of the lack of knowledge about it). Relating the lancha to the botter is bizarre, as neither the shape nor the construction bears any resemblance to it. A botter doesn't have a true keel, but rather a wide bottom plank, for instance. It has been observed in other regions of the world that local boatbuilders began to adapt their types, when European tools, materials, or ways of producing half-finished goods, such as sawn lumber became available, resulting in more efficient processes, albeit at higher capital cost. Local boatbuilders may have also copied features of European craft because they were either more efficient or more 'fashionable'. Examples are the Inuit that started to use European sawn planks in their kajak construction or the Arab dhows that adopted the high square stern of the European 16th galeons once they came into contact with the Portuguese. Around the European coasts boats and small trading or fishing craft often were built be part-time builders, whose main occupation may been farming for instance. They were often built for their own use, sometimes with the advice and help of a professional boatbuilder. So it is quite conceivable that locals would put together boats basec on whatever example they may have come across.

Thank you Pat ! ***************** Cutting out the bulkheads It took some time to figure out an efficient and precise way to cut out the bulkheads form the 1 mm thick acrylic glass. Unfortunately, the router table did not prove as useful as I thought, it was difficult to achieve smooth curves, as the cutter tended to bite into the material. So, I resorted to good old hand-filing. I also observed that when sawing and grinding/filing the stuck-on paper frayed and it became difficult to see the lines. Sticking the template with the printed face onto the clear acrylic glass instead the usual way solved that problem. The printed lines were protected to the end by the acrylic glass and one could work very precisely towards it. Initially, I also used a too narrow scroll-saw blade, which tended to wander. Using a slightly coarser and therefore wider blade sorted that. The process then was: cutting strips of acrylic glass just the height of the bulkheads on the circular saw; cutting out the paper templates with about a millimetre around them and sticking them onto the acrylic glass ‘face down’; the bulkhead then was roughly cut out on the scroll-saw. In the next step the part was transferred to the disc-sander and the outside of the bulkhead was shaped on it; the final step consisted of draw-filing the inside shape of the bulkhead with the part held in a small precision-vise. The bottom edge does not need any work, as the cut with the circular saw is smooth and exactly perpendicular. Rough cutting out the bulkhead on the scroll-saw Shaping the outside of the bulkhead on the disc-sander to the line Filing the inside of the bulkhead to the line in a precision-vise This process is slow and I only managed to eke out time for one bulkhead each evening between various pre-Christmas duties and more business travel. To be continued

I use neither, only safety goggles (with or without built-in magnification), but then I rarely use the chucks for model work, only for my tool-making. For really fine work, where you have to look at the work from different angles, face shields are impractical.

Nice re-purposing and probably quite in the spirit of these ships that presumably also were built with whatever was handy at the yard.

I have a basic workshop safety-rule: I keep my face/head out of the line-of-flight of spinning objects as much as possible. When working with the lathe, I am always with my body slightly to the right from a spinning chuck. They also sell round polycarbonate shields for lathes, but they are not very convenient for precision work on small parts.

Keep in mind that the DB250 is a small wood-lathe with only 40 mm centre-height. The Sherline-chucks are designed for much heavier metal-lathes ... The spindle-thread on the DB250 should be 16x1, not sure that Sherline would offer chucks with such a thread. There may be several aftermarket options of Chinese or Indian origin for centric or independent 4-jaw chucks at moderate prices, but they typically have either 12x1 or 14x1 threads, I think. PROXXON offers a plastic independent 4-jaw-chuck, which would be quite adequate for wood-work. As long as you work from stock, the run-out of a chuck is not really important. The part in itself will be true in all its diameters. Run-out only becomes relevant, when you want to perform so-called 2nd operations, i.e. when you inverse a piece and want to work on its unmachined side. Setting up an independent 4-jaw-chuck can be a real pain and is time-consuming. You normally would need a dial-indicator to check for concentricity (there are other approximative methods). However, this can be the most precise option for 2nd operations. Not really needed for most wood-working applications.

Talking about machine tool safety: as far as I am aware the DB250 comes with a set of collets of up 10 mm. This is a much safer and more precise option for working on round stock up to that diameter. There is no risk that your fingers or your tool collides with the chuck jaws ... I use collets almost exclusively on my lathes.

Actually no. I the jaws are reversible as in almost any chuck like that. When the steps are facing inside, you can work on larger and flat items. Other chucks may be delivered with two sets of jaws instead. And: keep towels away from revolving chucks, this could result in a serious desaster otherwise. Also: never work with gloves and loose clothing on a lathe (or mill).

Personally, I think oil is better on scroll-chucks, as grease together with swarf may clog up the rather tight-fitting spirals. I have never used grease on my half dozen or so of different scroll-chucks.