wefalck

These kinds of engineering squares or V-blocks come in various nominal (imperial) sizes, e.g. 1", 2", 3" inch edge length, and normally in matching pairs (meaning two of them have been ground together in a jig). The price depends on the 'class', i.e. the guaranteed flatness and parallelism. For our normal workshop needs the lowest class will do. I got two sets, that were made in India, I believe. I wouldn't use slip gauges for this kind of setting up task, as their functioning depends on the perfection of the surface and on light film of grease that should not be removed to prevent corrosion. I have been using round or square lathe tools for the purpose. Another option are Woodruff-keys that are available in many different cross-sections and lengths and are ground to close tolerance to fit into milled slots. They are mass product and not very expensive. I have a whole collection of them to be used in my small 1" machine vice.

To be honest, I find theses life-rafts an eyesore and so out of style ... destroys the esthetic beauty of the rest ...

Looking good ! It is really important to have narrow, clean lines that are only engraved to the minimum needed to hold the paint.

HeroForge indeed has a lot of choices, but they are mainly for the war-gaming community and the figures have this kind of stocky appearance that this community seems to like, though it can be modulated somewhat.

mikegr, what kind of jpg-image is this about ? Some laser-cutters actually work with pixel-graphics. They process the image line by line and switch on the laser, when they encounter a black pixel and switch it off, when they meet a white pixel. So you may not need to do the conversion after all.

What is this Modelkasten-wire made off, gold ? Actually not: if you calculate it, volume of 1 m of wire is 0.03x0.03x3.1415x1000 = 2.82 mm^3 and 1 g of gold costs 63 USD, hence 2.82 mm^3 of gold cost 3,46 USD, which means that 1 m of gold wire with a diameter of 0.06 mm costs 3,46 USD as opposed to the 5 USD of the Modelkasten wire ! I tend to avoid buying from model supply houses. They buy normal industrial materials and tools and resell them to unsuspecting modellers. OK, sometimes it is difficult to buy small quantities from distributors or manufacturers and one has to pay a prime for this. As a smoker (which I am not) I would be more weary of flammable solvents and glues in the workshop than a wire that is not normally touched with a flame anyway - and I may not see my models age due to the health implications of smoking ....

Thanks, gentlemen ! Pat, many of the drawings were originally made to be used as etchning masks. I would have build up parts from layers of etched parts soldered together (and actually did). However, I found mobilising the etching process quite onerous and my workshop is not really suitable, as I don't have a 'wet' bench space. PE parts though would have come out much cleaner and with a smooth surface, In addition, the PE process allows 'surface' etching, which doesn't work so well with the laser. Of course you can engrave surfaces, but removing layers with the view to let e.g. rivets stand proud of the surface results in a rough finish due to the steps of the laser head. The laser-cutter has the advantage to have near zero mobilisation time and you can change designs and settings quickly, if they don't work. If a PE part doesn't work, you have to change the desing, make a new mask, cut a piece of brass sheet (and if it's not coated already, apply the photoresist), expose it, develop it and then finally etch it. Not quite an 'ad hoc' process. For commercial projects, once the design and process have been settled, they PE parts are very good, but so much for the kind of experimental project development I am undertaking. Keith, there have been literally dozens of 'patent' anchor models since the early 1840s or so. As ships became bigger, they needed more holding power per weight of anchor, otherwise the anchors would have become too big and undwieldy, as it still took decade bevore steam capstans and winches became common on ships. It seems that Trotman, Martins, and Inglefield were the more popular models before Hall (I think) came up with a really stockless anchor that could be hoisted into the hawse-hole, making anchor-cranes etc. unnecessary. Turning such thin parts obviously requires a lathe with good bearings and little run out. I turned the stock in steps, first one side, applying the taper with a fine file with rounded edges; then, supporting the end in the smallest female dead-centre that I have, I turned the other half and tapered it again with a file. Of course cuts have to be light, say 0.03 mm or so per pass. I found this only possible with steel, as I never found hard enough brass. The steel I am using are copper-clad welding electrodes. Easy to get and turn well with HSS-tools, not too soft and not too hard. Not sure about the composition of the ones I have, as there seems to be quite a range. Probably some Si and Mn.

Postscriptum: in a German Forum I received comments on the man-handling of the shells from a colleague, who observed the available historic drawings more attentively than me. These show in one case a winch located inside the deck-house and marked as ‘shell-hoisting winch’. In another, presumably somewhat older drawing, a substantial bracket is drawn above the shell hoisting hatch. Both features are not shown on the oldest drawings that were the main basis for this model reconstruction. I will install the bracket that was presumably used together with tackle, when the winch was not yet installed. Anchors The WESPE-Class was fitted out with two Inglefield bow anchors and (presumably) a standard anchor as stern or reserve anchor. The bow anchors are stowed on chutes and handled with two small cranes on each side. There is no drawing for the stern anchor, but the drawings seem to show chocks for its storage. There is also a hawse-hole in the stern and a crane above it. So it is likely that there has been a stern-anchor. What is not clear at all is, how the chain would have been handled and there are no stoppers or similar to belay the chain when in use. Neither is there a chain locker drawn in the stern. So there is de facto conflicting evidence. Inglefield-anchors a are complicated affair, but seem to have been rather popular at the time with the Imperial German Navy. In an instruction book for drawing in shipbuilding a nice detailed drawing of an Inglefield-anchor was found and used as the basis for the model reconstruction. Its size is taken from the WESPE-lithographs in the German Technical Museum in Munich. Drawing of an Inglefield-anchor from WAAP (1910) One could have perhaps sawn out the parts from a 0.5 mm brass or styrene sheet, but considering an overall length of the anchors of 12.5 mm this seemed to be a rather daunting task. For this reason the individual parts were drawn for the laser-cutter and cut from 0.12 mm Canson paper. The shaft and other parts were built up from several layers that were cemented together with fast-drying lacquer, resulting in some kind of composite material. Drawing of the components of an Inglefield-anchor for laser-cutting The parts then could be easily shaped using diamond and other files. After a certain amount of filing more lacquer was applied in order to prevent the fraying of the paper. Finally the built-up parts were assembled using lacquer. One half-completed anchor and parts ready for assembly of the second (I should stop taking these quick-and-dirty close-ups with the iPhone and take out the SLR camera again ...) Instead of the traditional way of shaping the shackles from wire, I decided to also cut them from paper. The bolts on the smaller shackels would have been too small to represent and were omitted. I think they turned out quite convincingly. On the other hand, the bolts that keep the parts of the anchor together were turned from steel and blackened before assemply. The standard anchor possibly could have been cut from brass and soldered together, but then, once it is painted, no one really will know the difference. So I also made the respective designs and employed the laser cutter again. The proportions were taken from an anchor drawing in the Danish Naval Yard archives of the same period. Drawing of parts for one standard anchor Laser-cut parts for the stern anchor The shaft and arms were build up from six layers this time and after lacquering them together the part was shaped using a diamond nail file and various needle and echappement files. As usual more lacquer was applied to keep the paper consolidated. Finally the flukes were lacquered on and the large shackle also cut from paper attached. Turning the stock for the stern anchor The stock was the biggest challenge, as it is only 0.3 mm in diameter in the middle and tapering off. It was turned from thin steel rod. As the anchor will be stowed in the stern, the ball at the end of the bent side will not be visible and therefore left off. The visible ball was formed by a tiny drop of white glue. Assembled anchors ready to be painted Painted anchors To be continued ...

Pipe cleaners should be available in craft-shops in various colours. At least they were in the past, when kids used them to make little sculptures and such from them. If you can't get them, there is also the good old method our mothers and grandmothers used to make 'pom-poms' on home-knit ski caps. You cut a round disc with a hole in the middle from cardboard or take a washer of appropriate size and wind string around it. You then have to make a loop around the threads along the the rim of the hole so that you can pull all the wound strings together and tie them up. Finally, you cut open the windings along the periphery and arrange everything in a nice 'pom-pom'. Not 100% sure I described the process correctly, but I am sure one can find it on the Internet.

It is always wise to compare different (secondary) sources and to dig up, if possible, the primary sources mentioned (if at all) in those secondary sources. While certain books are more trustworthy than others, there is always an element of interpretation and real evidence may be scarce. There were also many common features and practices that were so common that no one at the time thought it worth mentioning or documenting them. Ships were 'living' beings and only partially subject to rules and regulations (in the navies) or hardly at all (in the merchant navy). There was a considerable amount of discreetion on the side of the masters, particularly, when it comes to rigging. However, the responsibility for the performance of any deviation from the common practice at the time rests with the master, so that there is a certain element of conservatism involved, just to be on the safe side.

As I said, don't check models, which are the interpretation of another modeller, check the literature that draws on the sources. HMS VICTORY is a hugely different ship (in the true sense of the word) from HMS BOUNTY.

In spite of its miniature size, the model conveys very well that they must have been powerful sailers with their large amount of canvass.

The curly thingy also exists on arab vessels that normally do not have a bowsprit and where the foot of the sail stays inside the stem.

These turban-like protrusions are also common on arab ships and boats. Not sure, whether there has been a study on their meaning, history, and respective cross-cultural influences. In some cases they are or seem to resemble also sheep fleeces.

For rigging questions, I would consult the books by Lees and/or Marquardt. Looking at modern replicas or even modern ships might be misleading, particularly, when they are operating vessels, as they then have to comply with current safety at sea standards. As several people have shown on this forum, it is perfectly possible to make working blocks of 2 mm lenght, given the availability of the right tools, of course. Pulling a thread through the hole in order to round off the edges in order to simulate the sheave actually may be a good idea. In the cut stone industry diamond-studded wire are used to cut e.g. marble blocks in the quarries, but also microscopic variants are available for jewellers to be used in piercing saws. I checked the Internet and in an industrial context they are offered down to a thickness of 0.09 mm, but on ebay the smallest diameter is 0.25 mm. The cost is quite moderate with less than 9€ for a 10 m spool including shipping from China. This is more than a lifetime supply. One should give it a try. One could also use a 'normal' thread with pumice as cutting agent.

Not so easy on blocks just 1 mm long. Holding them is the issue. I haven‘t tried this yet, but one could make tiny half-round chisels for the purpose from injection needles ground to a suitable angle, held in a pin-vise or set into a dowel.

These eyes, that are very common around the Mediterranean also in painted form, date back to antiquity and are an apotropaic magic, meaning to ward off evil. I tend to use varnish to make kind of compound materials because of the inconvenience of using CA, but CA make indeed a much stronger material.

Many model blocks fail on one account in particular: they have just a hole drilled through them, which means that the rope comes out of them with a sharp bend. In reality, they should come out of the block sort of tangential, going around the sheave. In larger blocks one can file the edge round, but for the sizes required at 1/110 scale this is likely to be difficult or impossible. Blocks at that time would have been fastened with a strop around them, not in a second hole. Another mistake frequently made. One could take styrene strips and sand/scrape them oval in profile, after having drilled them in the upper quarter. This strip then can be cut into individual blocks. This doesn't solve the problem with the sharp bend, but at least gives the blocks the right outside shape after some sanding of the faces. Make a slight notch in the bottom to prevent the strop from slipping off. The strop should be also made with a fake splice, rather than a knot. Fake splices are easy to make: just take the short end in a needle and go twice through the long end, secure with a drop of varnish, cut off the loose end and then roll it between your fingers to smooth it.

What else, but an eulogy would this deserve ...

I think you should be happy to get it so slick. This will help to get the actual paint smooth very quickly, provided that primer and paint are compatible.

I am curious, how you will tackle the blocks (intended pun). When I started the BOUNTY in the early 1972s the blocks, among other things, stalled the project and it was never completed. In my teens I just didn't have the means and the knowledge (even though I tried all sorts of things and visited the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich) to produce the small blocks needed. I think somewhere I still have the same kind of sketches you made In the late 1980s McNarry's book on Miniature Shipmodels came out and he proposes a method using punched-out ovals of paper or card for the blocks, but uses twisted wire for rigging and pre-assembles the tackles etc. As I am writing, I am experimenting with laser-cut card-board parts for blocks about a millimeter long. With moderate success so far :(

Very egyptian !

Bought one almost 40 years ago and did not find using it a steep learning curve. Patience and patience with yourself is the keyword - as always. It may depend on what you are actually spray-painting - I am not claiming to be an expert in achieving a mirror finish on automobiles. I worked on ship-models and graphic illustrations only. The difficult part is getting the right dilution/viscosity of the paint. Here, I must admit, that I decided early on to cheat and use only pre-diluted paints. Thirty years ago the range was quite limited - but for ship-models you don't need such an extensive range (unless you get into WW2 or newer ships, where they used standardised colours). These days several manufacturers, e.g. Vallejo, offer a wide range of ready-to-go paints that require only to be shaken well. Makes life a lot less troublesome. I also only use paints that can be diluted/cleaned with water, meaning acrylics. Again saves you a lot of trouble, as the air-brush can be cleaned under the tap and you don't need to mess around with organic solvents. Cleaning the airbrush thoroughly is vital for trouble-free operation and a long service-life.

Yes, it is Molybdenum and since it is used by smart-phone repair-shops to separate broken glasses from LCD screens, it has become widely available in many different thicknesses. I bought a collection of different diameters a year or two ago to use it, when something very thin brass-like is needed. The wire is very tough and one can easily damage cutting pliers. I tend to score it with a disposable scalpel and then bend it until it breaks. It is also very springy and once you made a bend into it virtually impossible to straighten it out. Many metal wires will burn if you take a very thin one and apply enough heat. As you can see from the above experiment, the burning is not self-sustained, it extinguishes after a few milimeters of burning, once the area heated by the flame has been burnt. What makes you think that a single spark could ignite a whole spool ? Did you try it ? I don't think that a cigarette could set it on fire - I would be more worried about the health effects of smoking actually. So far I only used it to make some micro-handles and such things. As it cannot be annealed like steel, my original intention to make micro wire-rope from it is not likely to work, as it has too much 'memory' and cannot be twisted easily according to my so far limited experience. It's a pity given the small diameters that are available.

Looking cute, pictured sittting on your hand. I have seen some of them 'live' a couple of years ago in Rochefort, but this give a good idea of the scale.