wefalck

They would be also easy to make yourself ... there are few examples on MSW.

My knowledge of 16th/17th century rigging is rather limited, but I think such 'pockets' in sails did not come into use until the second half of the 19th century on sports boats. The idea is normally to transmitt the stress from halliards, sheets etc. to the sail over a larger area through the bolt-rope. While toggle-like devices were used since antiquity, I tend to think that the ends of the mini-spar would have passed through two eyes form by the bolt-rope and the two pendants of the block would have then been put over these. I have no idea, why the method was chosen, but it seems to have been common on Dutch vessels for the foresail. Perhaps a PM to Ab Hoving, our resident specialist for Dutch vessels of the 16th and 17th century, could bring some enlightenment?

I know next to nothing about the Allies' movement after the actual landing. However you could take GoogleMaps and sort of map out the trajectories indicated on the road signs. Taking for instance the third from left in the lower row that reads Paris-Rouen-Cabourg-Deauville, this must be located at a branch road somewhat south of the coast, somewhere between Cabourg and Deauville. If it where west of Cabourg, you should have Deauville above Cabourg. So from where the sign is, you would get to the main road between Cabourg and Deauville (probably the modern D531) and then turn either left to Cabourg or right to Deauville. From Deauville you would go South and pass Rouen (on the other side of the river) in the distance and continue on the N13 (today A13, Autoroute de Normandy). You could use similar reasoning to locate approoximately the other signs.

Shouldn't we rather promote the 'good' stuff or the making of it ?

The model railway guys have the same problem and different manufacturers offer rub-on lettering and decals. Some of the above manufacturers also offer custom decals or rub-on lettering. In the model railway sector you can also find 3D-lettering in polystyrene, which can be pre-painted, assembled on some sticky tape and the cemented to the name-board using clear varnish. Once set the sticky tape can be removed and the white paint on the letters touched up if needed. Freehand-painting would be a challenge (at least for me) but can done. Draw the lettering with pencil, perhaps using one of those old-fashioned lettering-templates and then begin to construct the letters inside-out. One can always touch up with black paint and then pull everything together with varnish. There are also old-fashioned lettering pens for working with the mentioned templates that could be used with white pigmented ink or very dilute acrylic paint. If you are not so sure-handed with the brush, e.g. Faber Castell (Pitt Artist Pen Brush) makes pigmented markers with a fine brush-like tip in many colours, including white. However, the coverage of white is not so dense and may require repeated applications with the risk of messing it up.

I think this is internally the same as that Chinese-sourced that was given to me by my wife a couple of years ago. I found its RPMs rather aggressive for many applications. It also somewhat irritating that on switching on you have the highest RPM and then one steps down. The high speed seems to be due to the fact that it is mainly inted for glass-engraving with diamond bits. I suppose this tool also does not use collets, but is bored for the ubiquitous 2.34 mm-shaft tools. You can get burrs, drills, grinding stones, polishers, sanding arbors etc. from many different sources, though the quality may vary ...

The most radical solution would be to stop buying kits 😉 Otherwise, it might be possible to turn the 'threads' supplied by kit manufacturers into 'rope' using a (home-made) ropewalk ...

My understanding is that this paper summarises the 2020 knowledge on the subject: Vale, B. (2020): Pitch, Paint, Varnish and the Changing Colour Schemes of Royal Navy Warship, 1775-1815: A Summary of Existing Knowlege.- The Mariner’s Mirror, 106(1): 30-42. Analysis of VICTORY's multiple layers of paint shows that during a certain period she must have been pinkish, which is probably due to the fact that ships had to use up their pigment allocations before receiving more pigments and that there was an overstock of red-ochre at some time. As at that time only natural red or yellow ochre was used (no synthetic ochre yet available), there may have been a variation in the hue due to the natural variability of the raw material and were it was mined. In addition, it would have been 'stretched' with chalk, which was cheap in comparison. I don't know where the RN sourced its ochre at the time. Traditionally, the main source was the Roussillon region in Southern France, but I would venture the guess that during the hostilities with France, this was not so easily accessible by the RN. Perhaps it came from Sweden.

On more modern Dutch boats, this developed into a single large block with a straight lower edge and two hooks on each side. The hooks hooked into two eyelets at each corner of the short square head of the fore-sail. Have to look into my literature, whether there were any specific names for this. This answer at least your question, how it was attached to the sail.

Well, again, real life with travels around Europe, mostly private have got in the way, plus of course, holiday preparations. Some small visible progress only, though preparations for installing the ship’s boats are under way. Completion of the staying of the funnel According to the principle of working ‘inside-out’, installation of the outer pairs of funnel stays had been left to a moment, when other work would not interfere with them anymore. The remaining funnel stays installed The stays are chain and they were simulated in the same way as the chains for the rails etc. Luckily the lithograph represents these chain-stays by dotted lines, so that the points where they have to be made fast are known. Miniature eyebolts were fashioned from wire and glued into holes drilled for the purpose. They also received laser-cut washers of 0.5 mm diameter. The stays are set taught with lanyards made from thread as used in the old days for mending ladies’ ‘nylons’. Not sure, whether I showed pictures before of how I am making fake chains using twisted wire. The material is oxidised Konstantan (a Cu/Ni alloy), sofar the best material I found for the purpose due to its tensile strength. Twisting two 0.06 mm wires together so that the length of each ‘twist’ is the desired length of the chain link. Laying in half of the twisted wire and twisting it together in the opposite direction. The finished ‘chain’. Depending on the envisaged use, one could also pull the ‘chain’ through the fingers with some graphite to make the links more visible. Micro-marlin-spike In between I also spent some time on the lathe and made marlin-spike for the upcoming ropework. So far, I just used a hypodermic needle, but found holding it between the fingers not very satisfactory. I knew that hollow marlinspikes are being used for work with wire-rigging, but somehow it had not occurred to me to use it in the model-realm. Thanks to ‘archjofo’ who described his marlin-spike made from a sharpened piece of brass tube. Hypodermic needle as marlin-spike As I have quite a collection of hypodermic needles in my scrap-box, I selected a suitable size. The nice (real) ebony handle also has been in the scrap-box for a long time, waiting for a suitable use. I gather it came from my father’s estate, who had trained as a medical doctor during the war. At that time a lot of better-quality (biological, medical, dissecting) instruments that did not need to be sterile were made with ebony or ivory handles – looking rather elegant today. The handle was almost ready to use and needed just a bit of turning down, where the ferrule will be fitted. The ferrule was turned from 6 mm brass rod and drilled out for the handle. A deep hole for the 0.8 mm hypodermic needle was drilled. The ferrule is a tight fit on the handle, but was secured with a drop of PVA glue, while the needle was just driven into the slightly undersized bore. Micro-marlin-spike Hypodermic needles, of course, are meant to cut through the skin and in consequence have very sharp edges – not so good, when working with fine threads. The cutting edges, hence, were dulled with an Arkansa-stone. Micro-marlin-spike Using such marlin-spike, it is possible to make fake eyesplices with ropes as thin as 0.18 mm … The next post will concern the installation of the ship’s boats, perhaps the most dreaded operations of all due to the exceeding flimsiness of some parts. To be continued ....

kgstakes, it just occurred to me that the small PROXXON wood-lathe may be just the thing for your miniature furniture making and some ship-model work too: https://www.proxxon.com/en/micromot/27020.php I think on demand they can supply extra beds for very long work-pieces. I think I also saw once a dulicator, but I don't remember, whether this was a third-party product. As you can see from Twokidsnosleep's post, once you have a metal lathe, you can make all sorts of tools and fixtures to make more tools to ... one can easily diverted, once one has got the hang of it (see e.g.: https://www.maritima-et-mechanika.org/tools/toolsmain.html).

I only had a quick look at their Web-site, but wondered how the machine handles fumes? They say that once can cut acrylic glass several millimetres thick, which would generate quite a bit of not-so-healthy fumes. The same would apply for cutting polystyrene.

If the interior of the ship cannot be seen, you could have used 'fake' butts by putting a small piece of wood behind the strake, where there is no frame to land on.

Two comments on the video linked above: - never ever manipulate parts that are held in a 3-jaw-chuck when the lathe is spinning; your fingers are too valuable! When the mandrel is held in a collet, you may do this (though this still is not ideal), but never with a 3-jaw-chuck, this is unsafe work-practice. - when using abrasives, such as sandpaper always cover the bed of the lathe, any spindles and move the cross-slide out of the way; detached abrasives are poison for the lathe. If you are a very beginner in machining, there are various hobbyist's textbook on that matter on the market. Another good source of learning are machinists' schoolbooks from the pre-1960s era, when manual lathe and mill skills were taught. You can find them on fleabay etc. or even on Google. Pre-WWI books can be even better, because they teach practices that are perfect for modellers, but were obsolete or even discouraged after WW2. Again, you can find such books on Google etc.

Nice work and interesting strategy. It's a bit counterintuitive, but may be a good idea. On the other hand, fairleads and such things for pieces of running rigging would need to be tied to the shrounds, which can be only done once the shrouds are set. Looking forward to see how you are getting on !

One of the best metallic paints I have come across so far was the range by AGAMA from Czechia: https://obchod.agama-model.cz/43-me-bronze-1/. They are available in Germany, but I bought a set from a hobby shop in Prague quite a few years ago. They are meant to be rubbed on, but also can be painted with sufficient solvent (alcohol). Otherwise, I think nothing looks quite like metal but ... real metal 😁

Yep, I had to do this on the wooden stairs in the house after school once a week …

PS. as our posts overlapped: - drill-chucks are made for drilling and do not like to take side-loads as occur in turning; they would be imprecise at least and can outright dangerous, when the loads are too high. Do not entertain this idea. - in hobby-turning one would not use any cutting-oil; brass and aluminium are always turned dry and for steel nether the turning speeds nor the cutting depths would lead to so much heat generation, that cooling of the tool-tip is needed - which is the purpose of cutting fluids here, not lubrification. Cutting fluids are for production lathes. On milling machines the situation is somewhat different, here you will need lubrification for steel, but not for brass normally. As to chucks: I believe there are hollow (China-made) MT2 to ERxx adapters available on ebay et al. This arrangement would be perfectly ok for working with bar-stock that passes through the whole length of the collet. If the material is shorter than say half the collet length, then there is a risk that it is being pushed out and the collet is damaged due to overtightening. If my memory serves my right, such adapters go at around 20US$ and collets, depending on size at 2 to 3 US$ a piece - I have bought such collets for use in lieu of a drill-chuck on my watchmakers lathe and as cheapo as they are, they are perfectly adequate for our needs. 4-jaw-chucks are very precise for centring material that has been already machined, but a pain to set up. You will also need a dial-indicator and stand for this. I wouldn't bother with a 4-jaw-chuck and unmachined round stock. Remember also that unless you need to re-chuck a piece (say to work on both ends), when working from bar stock, the quality of the chuck/collet is pretty unimportant. All machined surfaces will be concentric to each other.

There are two elements to engage the backgear: - there is a pin or other type of lock that engages the small gear on the spindle, which has the pulleys permanently coupled to it, with the large gear on the spindle; in this situation the lathe spindle is driven directly. - if the rear gear/pulley is not locked to the large gear, it idles on the spindle; the ball-handle lever on the backgear spindle works on excentric bearings, which allow the backgears to swing into mesh with the gears on the lathe-spindle. If you lock the gears on the main spindle and swing the back backgear into mesh, the whole system is locked. When you then start the motor, either the belt will slip on the pulleys or it may sheer-off the locking pin. If you suspect the latter is the case, you have to dissamble the whole headstock and drill out the remains of the pin. I have taken anything with Babbitt-bearings apart, so I wouldn't know, how to deal with them. I am sure you can find some advice for this on the Web. Normally, there would be a nut on the back of the spindle and a corresponding lock-nut, most likely to be worked with a C-spanner. These serve to adjust the end-play. If you take out the nuts, you can pull out the spindle to the front. There would also be a grub screw to loosen that locks the large gear onto the spindle.

On smaller boats the peak would have an eye in the boltrope that then is slipped over the end of the sprit. Indeed, that is the advantage of a spritsail, that is collapses quickly, once you lift the throat out of the sling at the mast, a kind of safety feature on small boats. The boat in the middle of van de Velde's painting seem to have a sort of standing sprit and the sail is hoisted with a peak- and throat-halliard running through blocks attached to the spar and the mast respectively. The sail still can be collapsed by lifting the sprit out from the sling at the mast, as is shown on the boat to the right in front of the larger vessel. However, all the boat shown seem to have tackles to manage the lower end of the sprit. This arrangement allows to move the sprit to a more horizontal position, which presumably balances the sail area better relative to the boat when running before the wind.

Talking about photography: when I am photographing objects with a high contrast ratio and when the surrounding illumination is likely to drown-out the shadows in other parts, I do not overexpose, but I rather manipulate the contrast range in Adobe Photoshop. Here I can 'lighten' the shadows and darken 'lights' (if needed), and then reset the contrast. From an artistic photography point of view these wouldn't be 'good' pictures, but here we are doing sort of 'technical' photography and want to show certain features of the object. This process does not disturb the overall exposure and contrast balance of the image too much and therefore is more pleasing to look at.

I quite agree that up to the early decades of the 19th century not too many turned parts appear on ships and hence there is not much need to replicate such production processes. However, it also depends on the scale you are working in. If you are working in 1:48 or larger, the pieces are big enough to work on with hand-tools, but at smaller scales it becomes more difficult to achieve the needed precision without machine tools. I know, of course, that there are known miniaturists, who just use a simple lathe if at all. Does the Craftsman really have Babbitt-bearings? That sounds strange for such a small machine tool. Such cheap lathes wouldn't have had ground 'glass-hard' steel- or ball-bearings, but normally had bronze-bearings. Coming back to the original question: not everyone is very dexterous with the chisel or graver on a T-rest, particularly the occasional user. Therefore, at least one bench-lathe manufacturer offered a special kind of 'hand-rest' that would be easily replicated in the appropriate size on a lathe (as pictured on http://www.lathes.co.uk/lorch/page3.html: (incidentally, these are my fingers on Tony Griffith's Web-site ...) You would just need to clamp a metal plate or even a piece of melamin-covered chipboard to the lathe bed as a surface to move around the tool-holder freely.

kgstakes, what is actually wrong in your opinion with your lathe ? When pondering lathes it is important to draw up a list of the things and their enveloppe sizes that you are expecting to make. An old rule of thumb is to by a lathe that has twice the capacity you think you need 😉 Apart from that the other end of the size range also needs to be considered. If you are expecting to make (lots) of small parts, a chuck is not such a good option for a couple of reasons: it is less precise than collets and the spinning jaws are always a risk for valuable body parts, such as fingers. As you already have a lathe, you may want to look into a collet-chuck for it (I don't think the Craftsman has an internal spindel taper for collets). They are easy to obtain though ES-collets are more for tool-holding and not so good for work-holding. A 5C collet-chuck would be better. On the other hand, as you have thread-cutting capability on your lathe, you could make a collet-adapter four your own lathe quite easily yourself. You could then make one for WW-horological collets to work with really small parts. An engineer's lathe is not ideal for woodturning, as dust can easily clog the drive spindle. A plain lathe would be better. When you turn wood, you should remove the saddle and apron as much as possible without going so far to disassemble the lathe and cover well the spindle in front of the bed. Dito for the backgear etc. I would tape it up. Otherwise you would need a thorough cleaning session as wood dust together with oil makes a nasty combination that can clog vital parts of the lathe easily. To fashion a T-rest (or several sizes for convenience) should be quite simple. You would need to make a bed adapter that clamps to the lathe bed and to which a stem is screwed that carries the actual tool-rest. On the Internet there should be pictures of the (way overpriced) T-rest Sherline used to sell for their lathes, which should give you design ideas. I think that could be done without needing a milling machine, just using stock materials and simple tools.

Perhaps it would be worthwhile to consult LEATHER, J. (1979): Spritsails and Lugsails.- 392 p., London (Granada Publishing). though he focuses more on the later 19th and early 20th century.

Oh yes, those reinforced concrete signs used to be something very typical French, but they have largely disappeared together with the concrete 'mile-stones', the rounded top which was painted red (for the 'nationals') or yellow (for the 'departmentals'). The selection of signs is interesting: the one in the lower left corner points to the N13, which is now the A13 and runs past within sight from the house, where I am living currently. The N446 (now down-rated to D446) on the top right corner passes through a pretty area south of Paris, lots of woodland, but it become more open in the area, where sign is located, which must be in Monthlèry, given the distance from Orsay and Versailles. The others in the top row are mostly in the north of Paris, today not so famous areas and quite densly populated, but 70+ years ago would have been more rural.