wefalck

Not sure, I understand correctly what the problem is - picture would be helpful, but it sounds, as if the workpiece has not been clamped down properly. In general, lathe or mill, if the workpiece can flex or otherwise move, you will not get satisfactory results or it may even result in desaster.

Two additional comments on the above: - rotate the rotary table always against the rotational direction of the mill ! These rotary tables are not actually meant for round-milling, but for indexing. If you rotate the table the other way around, the mill can grap the workpiece and wrench it from your hand. For this reason it is also advisable to let the locking knob slightly bind, so that there is a bit of frictional resistance. That helps to steady the movement. And: do not try to do this kind of operation with metal ! Real rotary table built for round-milling have a self-locking worm-drive. - I would make the first cut a bit wider (on the outside) and narrower (on the inside) and go for second, finishing pass.

As a matter of fact, this ring of wedges would not normally be visible. It is waterproofed by a sleeve of painted/tarred canvas that is nailed to the mast and to the deck. It may also be fastened to the mast by a rope wound around it.

I had the same feeling, that there is a confusion betweent the two items. That ring of wedges really is a lathe job and not one for a milling machine.

Thanks for the hand on the last picture - I imagined the model to b much bigger ...

I think the discussion is diverging somewhat from the original topic. In this building log below (no idea, why it shows a Christmas motif ...) I go through a wide variety of milling set-ups, albeit on different small mills.

Still too big for a lot of milling jobs around models. Note that the toolmakers vice has recesses at the top of the jaws that allow you to safely clamp smaller pieces without the aid of 'parallels' underneath. The recesses are about 2 mm x 2 mm.

I do this also with metal, btw. One can solder a spigot to any part so that it can be held in a 3-jaw-chuck or collet for machining. For smaller parts I just use a big enough diameter round brass - a bit wasteful, but safe and simple.

Well, 3-jaw-chucks are made to center round objects If you want to clamp differently shaped objects, you would need an independently adjustable 4-jaw-chuck. This means each jaw can be moved independently, so that you can move a part around the chuck until you have the point you want centred (within the size limits of the chuck). The second question I don't understand. What do you mean by 'accusize vice' ? In any case you will need either clamps (of which there are wide variety of shapes and sizes) or a vice to clamp a part to your x-y-table. A vice is the more common and versatile way probably, as its faces can be carefully aligned to the axes of the table, so that the faces of parts are aligned too.

OK. The clamping is a bit complicated by the fact that you presumably will have a rectangular part, but you have 3-jaw-chuck. It would be possible, but is not so simple. I don't know, whether the 3-jaw-chuck in the dividing head can be changed for one of the independent 4-jaw-chucks PROXXON offers, if I am not mistaken. That would be a better starting point. However, I think using a simple vice would be a lot easier. If you don't have one yet, get yourself what is called a 1" 'toolmaker insert vice': Image from: https://bahrain.desertcart.com/products/58940869-accusize-tools-mini-precision-toolmakers-insert-vises-ga-41-0050 They are very good and more precise than the PROXXON vices. They should cost around 30 USD on ebay etc. You would cut a piece of wood that is a bit larger than the cap, but considerably longer, so that you have a sort of 'stem'. In the first step you would mill the four sides, while the part is clamped with the stem. For this you don't need to move the part, all movements are done with the slides. In the next step you drill down whatever holes are required - square holes can be finished with a fine file later. In the third step you turn the part in the vice on its side, so that the top of the cap protrudes sideways, which allows you to mill its profile. For this you will have to make yourself a chart for the necessary movements of the slides. Finally you saw off the cap from its stem.

A couple of questions upfront: - what do you mean by ‘rotating clamp’ ? - what material do you use for the cap - what milling cutters do you have ? A mast cap seems to be a rather complex project to start with, btw.

I gather that depends on whether you think that you'll need a rabbet there as well. Presumably yes. Also, typically, the keel is as wide or wider than the stem- or stern-post.

Allen, you should check the thickness of the stem and keel of your prototype. If the kit supplied one is too thin, you may want to double them up with thin layers of veneer. By making the inside profile smaller by the amount of the thickness of your planking, you can 'fabricate' a rabbet, rather than cutting it into the existing material.

I guess, when I was in my teens (back in the late 1960s/early 1970s) and did my first ratlines, these gizmos were not around or I was not aware of them. So I did it the 'right' way without asking questions about short-cuts

Personally, I can't see the advantage of putting the ratlines on off the ship. It is going to be messed up and pulled out of shape. Nicely install the shrouds and then with them securely and finally in place work your way up with the ratlines. Draw the pattern as it should be, shrouds and ratlines, on a piece of card that you hold/fix behind the shrouds for guidance. It shows you the correct distances and also, whether you are pulling the shrouds out of line.

The fairing will be an iterative process. The bulk of the fairing, particularly where the waterlines form a steeper angle with the bulkheads, is easier done on the bench, than when the bulkheads are installed. The final fairing, using a spline batten, should be done with the bulkheads firmly installed.

There were in practice many different ways of doing this and the numbers and names of the timbers involved seem to vary. There is normally a fairly massive piece running on the inside of the stanchions. Sometimes it has the half-round waterways cut out in the lower part. Sometimes the waterways is a smaller timber, about double the thickness of the planking and the same width that runs between the larger baulk and the planking. The space between the stanchions can be filled in, but more often there is a thin covering board that is notched out for the stanchions. This covering board may be set-in from the outside and forms a line visible from the outside, forming a sort of narrow shelf. The bulkwark may be raisde above the covering board by a couple of centimeters to allow water to drain outboard. This is often the case in smaller ships, where every second or third frame actually forms the bulwark stanchions.

You are now sufficiently practiced for the grandchildrens' doll-house The only attention our balcony required was the daily sun-downer ...

You are getting really into the specifics there ... can't give founded advice on the hounds, but wondered, whether the difference between the options would be discerneable on the model ? OK, this is our old plague, that we want to get it right, even if no one would notice the difference.

My father trained as doctor and I inherited a box full of them together with other chirurgical instruments. Was has to be cautious with the locking ones - when in the last step before release, they exert a lot of pressure and parts or threads can get crushed. Another name to look for is Castrovejo. He invented various eye-surgery instruments that can be useful.

Outside the US purchase of ammunition would be difficult ... You may also find wooden or styrene balls in architectural model or craft supply stores.

I roll short lengths of wire between two pieces of flat hardwood, which makes the laquer peel off and the wire comes out perfectly straight. I don’t know this particular boat, but thought they were only clinkered below the waterline. So the copper rivets would disappear under the coppering or the anti-fouling treatment.

A bit of targeted research and knowledge of the market ... I gather you have a copy of the commerce raider (Hilfskreuzer) STIER from Wilhelmshavener Modellbaubogen (Möve-/Jade-Verlag ? This one here: https://www.moewe-by-hd-m-verlag.com/stier-hilfskreuzer.html ? It is actually in 1:250 as all of their models. Most of their models have been designed before the 1970s I believe. As a small boy I built several of them. That would then be the standard of those days, which was quite good for the time. I found a building log on this site here, albeit in German: https://www.kartonbau.de/forum/thema/11685-hsk-stier-whv-im-maßstab-1-250/. You can try to follow with GoogleTranslator.

By 'securing' you probably mean 'holding in place until the glue has set' ? That may be only one issue. Or rather, if this is a serious issue then you may be missing the rabbet in the stem post ? Once there is a proper rabbet against which the planks can land, they may be already more or less locked into place, making clamping simpler. An additional strategy will be to water and heat the planks and then to clamp them until dry into a jig that has a similar curvature as the place where they are supposed to go. Such pre-bend planks will be easier to fit and require less force, when fitted finally.

I may be wrong, but I think Citroen used this kin of system for the rear suspension of the half-tracks that were used for the Sahara expeditions and the on-land trip from Paris to Pékin (Beijing) in late 1920s/early 1930s.