Bob Cleek

Double ditto to Jaager's recommendation. There are a wealth of small craft designs available. Many plans are available in book form, such as Howard I. Chapelle's American Sailing Craft and Small American Sailing Craft and Basil Greenhill and Julian Mannering's Inshore Craft: Traditional Working Vessels of the British Isles. These small vessels are generally in the under-50' range, some even in the 10' or 15' range. They can be built to larger scales, 1/2" or even 1" to the foot are not uncommon for small craft models. They do not have a lot of complex small-scale rigging details. As they tend to be somewhat primitive types, their fittings and rigging blocks are easily fabricated. Assuming you get yourself one of Jim Byrnes' mini table saws, a Syren Ship Models "Rope Rocket," and perhaps a scroll saw, you'd be set up for the rest of your days to mill your own modeling wood from that really great Alaska Yellow Cedar you've got growing up there, spin your own scale rigging line, and be entirely free to build anything you wanted at virtually no cost. Working in larger scales can be very satisfying. Smaller boats have fewer and less complex details and when modeled at larger scales little detail need be sacrificed as is otherwise the case with larger vessels at smaller scales. Another advantage of small craft modeling is that the models are generally smaller and easier to display, and you can build more of them in a shorter period of time, which avoids the inevitable boredom in the middle of a large model project that may take years to complete with a lot of repetitive tasks along the way. With no malice intended to plastic ship modelers (of which in my misspent youth I was one,) assembling plastic sailing ship models can be every bit as tedious as building wooden models (and yield a finished model of far less archival value.) There is relatively little difference in difficulty between rigging a plastic square-rigger and a wooden one. It would not appear that you would be gaining much in terms of compensating for your physical challenges by building in plastic rather than wood. I do admire your dedication in staying at modeling despite the "ravages of age." You certainly are among good company in this forum! I'm guessing a large majority of this forum's members have reached retirement age and by the time we get there, most have "old war wounds" with which to contend. My particular modeling challenge is the loss of feeling in a number of my fingertips due to peripheral neuropathy. Others, I believe, are wheelchair users and, of course, most of us have progressive deteriorating close-up visual acuity. Nevertheless, "We few, we happy few, we band of brothers," soldier on. Additionally, small craft models are sadly overlooked by many. While I risk stepping on a toe or two here, I will say that in my opinion there is much well-deserved accomplishment to be had by any ship modeler in doing a good job assembling yet another Victory or Constitution kit, but, at the end of the day, beyond that the result of all that work is no more than addition of another kit model added to the hundreds, if not thousands of models of these same ships built before. On the other hand, scratch building small craft offers the opportunity to create a unique model of a vessel which will have been rarely, if ever, modeled by anyone before and, if well researched and documented, it can be appreciated not only as a satisfying accomplishment of the modeler's skill, but also as a valuable addition to the historical record. Up in your neck of the woods, the Pacific Northwest canoes of the Tlingit, Haida, and Tsimshian tribes raised dugout canoe building to perhaps its highest level of development. They carved thin-hulled canoes out of cedar and Douglas fir logs and then filled them with water and hot rocks to steam the wood which was then spread to increase the beam and thereby yield a graceful and seaworthy hull. These canoes were then colorfully painted in shamanistic themes. The construction method of these canoes perhaps explains the fact that they don't seem to be frequently modeled. That said, a clever modeler could perhaps take on the challenge and, if successful, really produce a fascinating and academically valuable set of models of these indigenous watercrafts. BELOW: NOOTKA CARVED CEDAR DUGOUT CANOE MODEL Late 19th/Early 20th Century Bow and stern with vertical incised carving. Length 30". Auction catalog estimate $400 - $500.

I'm sorry I don't have any more specific information on this, but I recall once reading somewhere that of the several species of bamboo, some are better suited structurally for use as trunnels because they draw to size more cooperatively than others. Somebody reading this may know more and share with us the right species of bamboo to use and where it might be sourced.

Most will. Many will even replace parts you've botched up yourself! It would be good to do a search on this forum to see the policy of any particular kit manufacturer regarding parts availability. The second consideration after you confirm that they do have a part replacement policy is to confirm that they are able to provide parts for the model kit you have. Sometimes, a run of kits are manufactured and stocked by the manufacturer but spare parts are no longer available. Sometimes parts are generic and used for several different models in the manufacturer's line. (Which is why you will find out-of-scale or out of period fittings on the models sold by some manufacturers. E.g., an 19th Century anchor in a 18th Century model kit!) or some parts for a specific model kit are left over after the kit production run. Other times, Spare parts have been sold or are otherwise no longer in stock and you will probably be out of luck even it the company would have been happy to send you a replacement part if they still had any in stock. Regarding purchasing kits in current production, I think that most experienced modelers would strongly advise you to start your wooden model building learning curve with the Model Shipways Shipwright Series of kits. See: Model Shipways Shipwright Series (modelexpo-online.com) Few kit manufacturers are as forthright as Model Shipways is in telling beginning wooden ship modelers the realities of the hobby's learning curve and the fact that there is no point in wasting a large amount of money and effort trying to build a square-rigged ship-of-the line bristling with cannon as your first attempted kit build!

If one is intending to accurately depict the prototype in miniature, I believe Jaager's answer is the only correct one. it's not a matter of personal opinion if the object of the exercise is to build a model that looks like the real thing. If metal fastenings were used, as was the case in later times, these would be countersunk and plugged as Jaager describes in order to minimize rusting of the iron fastenings. Depicting fastening locations in an unpainted fully framed model ("Admiralty Board style") can be nicely done by gluing black fishing line of the proper scale diameter into drilled holes, but such fastening "locaters" would never be visible in an actual full-scale vessel. However, if the black fishing line holes are not drilled precisely where the fastenings on the prototype vessel would have to have been placed, the job will result in a worse effect than if the fastenings were left unindicated. I mention this because the original poster asked, "I have fishing line at 0.23, 0.32 and 0.5mm, color black. Is it appropriate color for hull and Deck treenails or is it too dark? what size best (1/64 scale)?" I suppose we just have different definitions of the word "appropriate" in this context. Obviously, a model builder is always free to paint their model any color they wish.

I would caution you to steer clear of older second-hand wooden kits unless you are thoroughly familiar with a given kit. There have been tremendous advances in kit "technology" in recent years, notably, CNC laser cutting has made the newer kits less challenging to assemble. You will find that many of the kits sold forty, or perhaps even thirty years ago, especially solid hull kits, will demand as much scratch-building as an actual scratch build you do yourself, exclusive of the plans development and that what plans there are will often be simply a lines drawing, a spar schedule, and a rigging outline. Make sure you are familiar with any used kit you contemplate buying. Checking the building log section for kit reviews will alert you to any potential problems with any given kit. As you probably know, there is a huge difference between assembling a plastic kit and building a wooden kit that will require a considerable amount of cutting, shaping, turning and even carving.

I'm not aware of any negative effects of adding thinners or conditioners to paint which is thereafter stored long term. That said, "long term" is a relative concept. Anything less than an air-tight seal and the absence of any oxygen in the paint container (e.g., a partially-filled can) will permit polymerization to occur, causing skimming and eventually the hardening of the paint. (An oil paint can may be purged of oxygen by slowly filling it with propane from an unlit plumber's torch until the heavier propane displaces the oxygen, after which the can is securely sealed.) The more air, the faster this will occur. Additionally, long term storage will permit the pigment to settle in the bottom of the container and it may eventually become so compacted that it will be near impossible to stir and redistribute evenly in the liquid medium without mulling it again. It's my guess that as much as ninety percent of the small bottles of model paint, fingernail polish, and touch-up appliance and auto paint, and the like end up hard as a rock by the second time a consumer attempts to open the bottle and ends up tossed into the trash. Buying pre-mixed paint in tiny amounts is the most expensive way paint can be purchased and buying "ready to use pre-thinned "airbrush paint" is the most expensive way to buy paint thinner! This is one reason why some modelers have switched over to mixing their own paint using tubed artists oils and acrylics which have long shelf-lives and tend not to harden in the tube because there's no room for exposure to air nor any dryers added to the tubed paste. (The end user thins and conditions tubed paints themselves.)

"He who dies with the most tools wins!" That said, if you think you can never have too many books, just give it time! You'll get to that point soon enough. Speaking of which... I'd encourage anybody who is building a reference library to buy real books instead of e-books. There's nothing like reading a real book and you'll find you will want to have a reference book at your elbow at your drawing board or workbench and a computer screen just doesn't work as well. As for Harold Underhill, buy anything he ever wrote and you won't go wrong. His two volume work Plank on Frame Models and Scale Masting and Rigging is an incredible basic text on scratch-building. I'm surprised it's going for $125 (or $75 used) these days, but that's a good example of the value of building a good reference library. I got my set fifty years ago from the old Dolphin Book Club (anybody remember them) for something like fifteen bucks if memory serves. That said, eBay has an entire section of nothing but Underhill books and you can find a copy of the Plank on Frame Models set for fifty bucks there. https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=harold underhill&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-34002-13078-0&mkcid=2&mkscid=102&keyword=harold underhill&crlp=_&MT_ID=&geo_id=&rlsatarget=kwd-76965989210900:loc-190&adpos=&device=c&mktype=&loc=43893&poi=136333&abcId=&cmpgn=395402853&sitelnk=&adgroupid=1231453229593206&network=o&matchtype=e&msclkid=fac4ea45a5a5170f4c298ebcdf27ca39 Stick with the "classics" for openers and stay away from anything with "made simple," "simplified" or "from kits" in the title. There are a lot of books out there that are basically compendiums of previously published works. They may be helpful, but they don't stand the test of time. I'd put Zu Mondfeld's Historic Ship Models in the same category. As many copies as are out there, they are dirt cheap, so you won't be wasting your money if you get a used copy for less than ten bucks. It does have a very broad scope of information. I think he claims to cover somewhere from 3,000 BC to the present, but, hey, putting than information between two covers can only provide a very cursory overview. If you find books with good coverage of modeling techniques, grab them. (e.g., The Techniques of Ship Modeling by Gerald Wingrove.) The same goes for books that have good ship plans in them. Any book by Howard I Chapelle will be worth having in this regard. Sadly, the days of spending hours picking over the offerings in dusty used book stores to find a treasure or two are long gone. Buy used books for the best value online if you must, but don't get carried away. It's easy to end up with well over a thousand volumes. Don't ask me how I know this.

I"d suggest you get a longer polypus than the $15 short one. Also, sometimes the cheapest isn't always the best, particularly with anything from the Chinese People's Patriotic Export Tool Manufacturing Collective! Nice collection of tools there. It looks like you've got the situation well in hand. The side-locking tweezers are very handy. So is the Castorviejo iris scissors, assuming it's from a quality manufacturer. (Knock-offs of the real deal are everywhere it seems.) If one has to cut corners on tools of these types, it is always best to economize on the forceps and needle holders (fine-pointed forceps) than on anything with a cutting edge. You want the best metal cutting edge tools you can find for cutting. They are a waste of money if they won't hold an edge. Unfortunately, good scissors are expensive. (My "Dearly Beloved" dropped about three hundred bucks apiece on a trimmng scissors and a thinning scissors for grooming her show dogs without blinking an eye. ... Ahem.)

What the other guys said. Don't waste your money on those "rigging tools." I can't imagine what they could be useful for either. Particularly given your unsteady hands (a challenge many older modelers must overcome), you would do well to study, practice, master, and use surgeons' suture instrument knot tying techniques. YouTube has many instructional videos on the subject, most published by medical schools and surgical instrument companies for the medical profession. The use of surgical instruments and surgical technique will make model ship rigging much easier. If you can tie knots like a micro-surgeon, tying knots in rigging on a ship model becomes a piece of cake compared to trying to stich up aortic valves inside of a chest cavity! As for instruments essential to knot tying, the basics are: A number of fairly good pairs of tweezers. There are a lot of cheap ones out there. Spend the money for at least a couple of not-so-cheap ones. Don't limit your selection to those short, stubby tweezers used by watchmakers and ladies plucking their eyebrows. For rigging tasks, long tweezers are far more useful and often essential for reaching hard-to-reach places. Get a few tweezers in the 6" to 12" long range. A selection of surgical forceps, hemostats, and needle holders, all of which are more or less the same thing for modeling purposes. As with tweezers, make sure you have some long-handled ones so you can reach "into" the rigging as you work. One or more "ear polypuses," buy the longer ones first and then expand your collection. The "ear polypus" is a unique forceps which permits you to reach into very confined spaces to grab line and tie knots. Surgeons use it to remove foreign objects inside patients' ear canals. Ear polypus: Just the jaws on the tip open and close when the finger holes move: There has recently come on the market a polypus that has a cutting scissor jaw on the end instread of a forceps jaw. I don't know how well these work, but they may be useful for cutting excess line in tight places after tying. I've never had any problem cutting rigging line in tight spaces with a sharp scalpel, though. Dental and surgical instruments are some of the most valuable model-making tools, particularly for rigging. Some of these tools are offered for sale online by modeling and hobby supply houses such as MicroMark. Beware! The "hobby market" prices for inferior quality versions of these tools are generally far higher than medical instrument supply houses ask for the "medical quality" versions the medical professionals actually use. You will find an extensive range of dental and surgical instruments for sale on Amazon and, particularly, on eBay. The latter has a lot of listings for Indian and Pakistani-made instruments which aren't the highest quality but are certainly serviceable for modeling. There are also many online retailers selling used surgical and dental instruments at perhaps the lowest price points for these often very well-made instruments. Many will correctly say that "you can't have too many clamps," and the hobby tool marketers offer a wide range of clamps for that reason, but keep in mind that you can often buy used hemostats and needle holders in lots on eBay for close to the same price as fancy clamps and have a much more versatile clamping and holding tool that is better suited for the shaky hands of old pharts like us!

Believe it or not, all the way down here in Petaluma, CA, (Sonoma Wine Country north of San Francisco,) we've had "spare the air" days and the elementary schools kept the kids indoors at recess time a few times last week because of all the smoke from the fires up along the California/Oregon border. We're no strangers to wild fires down here. (We lost over 3,000 tract homes in one in nearby Santa Rosa in the 2017 Tubbs Fire, California's most destructive in history... so far.) I can only imagine how bad it is up there for you guys. Your fires have been burning for a long time now! Keep safe!

Chartpak graphic tape is still readily available. Good stuff, but not specificially designed for masking. https://www.staples.com/chartpak-graphic-chart-tape-glossy-black-1-16-x-648-bg6201/product_909815?cid=PS:MS:SBD:PLA:OS&msclkid=31dd847c9edb12ca8a61e08eaf6a5f95&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=%23PLA%2F_(1)_BNG_(2)_US_(7)_GEN_(9)_Office Supplies|&utm_term=4581252648129840&utm_content=All Products&dclid=CMmJpfiJioEDFWXArQAdoK0E5A I've found Tamiya a bit pricey and often wider than needed, which makes taping curved edges somewhat more difficult. My "go to" for masking fine lines is 3M (Scotch) Fine Line masking tape sold primarily for auto painting jobs. It comes in varying widths: 1/8", 1/4", 3/8", and 1/2". Not cheap, either, but a roll will last practically forever for modeling purposes. Most auto body and fender supply shops have it on hand. https://www.amazon.com/3M-06302-Fine-Line-Masking/dp/B00HSCMCL8/ref=sr_1_10?adgrpid=1337006711851222&hvadid=83563242241651&hvbmt=be&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=43893&hvnetw=o&hvqmt=e&hvtargid=kwd-83563282543041%3Aloc-190&hydadcr=2082_13504107&keywords=3m+fine+line+masking+tape&qid=1693594490&sr=8-10 There's also another brand similar to 3M's that looks the same and may be less costly, although I haven't tried it. It's called "Lime Line." https://www.amazon.com/s?k=3m+fine+line+masking+tape&adgrpid=1337006711851222&hvadid=83563242241651&hvbmt=be&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=43893&hvnetw=o&hvqmt=e&hvtargid=kwd-83563282543041%3Aloc-190&hydadcr=2082_13504107&tag=mh0b-20&ref=pd_sl_1c1kh9zkry_e I'll add the reminder that all masking tapes, and particularly the expensive fine line stuff, should be kept in a ziplock plastic bag at all times when not being used to prevent the adhesive from drying out. Also, tape rolls should never be laid down flat so that their sides can pick up dust and grit. If the side of the roll is contaminated with dirt, the edge of the tape will carry that dirt and grit to the work and you'll end up with ragged edges and dirt in your paint job. Always keep your tape in a zipped up plastic bag and don't lay it down anywhere except in the bag!

I believe the main reason is because, as I was taught, at least, you never take a measurement off your drawings and transfer it to your material. Not ever. I suppose one might get away with doing that when modeling, and I've certainly done it on more than one occasion, but it is decidedly bad practice, or so we were taught. This is because the drawing can never be trusted and the stated measurement taken up; from a scale rule is always the more accurate measure. This principle is more critical in large-scale high-tolerance engineering drawings and much less so in small-scale architectural or cartographic drawings, but none the less, "best practices" dictate it in all circumstances. It is also easier and faster when drafting or building to use a rule scaled to the scale you are working with than to mathematically calculate the scale equivalent from a full-scale rule. This is particularly so when one is not picking up lines from a drawing, but rather working from the stated measurements on the drawings. When working from stated measurements on the drawings, picking them up at the drawing's scale, or any other scale, is most simply and efficiently done by picking the stated distance up from the proper scaled rule. The fewer transitions of the physical measurement, the less opportunity for error. Of course, in many instances, the need for a rule in any scale other than 1:1 can be eliminated by the use of a good decimally scaled set of proportional dividers.

Sealing bare wood before painting is decidedly a good idea, particularly considering the open-grained species provided by many kit manufacturers. For a number of very good reasons, my own preference for sealing is clear ("white") shellac which can be purchased pre-mixed at most any paint or hardware store. (Zinsser 1-qt. Clear Shellac Traditional Finish and Sealer (Case of 4) 00304H - The Home Depot) Shellac is compatible with all common coatings, whether oil or water based. There is no need to apply anything over shellac before painting nor anything over the paint after painting. The less applied to the model, the better, so as to avoid the loss of crisp detail from thick coating applications.

Sarcasm? Not quite sure. Could it be that Floquil paint is again available? I checked eBay where there has long been old bottles of Floquil offered for sale, but now I see a lot more and a new style label for "Floquil Marine Colors." I don't recall Floquil ever having a line of marine colors. "Railroad colors," yes, but "marine," no. Could it possibly be true that Floquil is being made again? "I love the smell of Dio-sol in the morning... Smells like... like modeling!" I sure did love Floquil paints, as did everybody. Just like doing anything your mother used to yell at you about because "it might put your eye out" guaranteed it would really be fun, Floquil seems to have proven the point that whatever they say might cause the loss of brain cells and destroy the environment as we know it guaranteed to be the best stuff for the job!

Let me say at the outset that Kurt Van Dahm (kurtvd19 - Model Ship World™) is the expert on all things airbrush around here. You should shoot him a message and I'm sure he will be happy to give you the best answer you will get from anybody. He is also some sort of a rep for Badger Airbrush Co., I believe. Anyway, he can recommend the best airbrush and compressor to acquire in your price range and probably know where to get the best deal on it. As for your question about thinning acrylic paint for airbrushing, the answer is yes, it is entirely possible to thin regular acrylic paint to the consistency required for airbrushing. (In fact, most airbrushers condition all their paint for airbrushing regardless of what some manufacturer says on their tiny overpriced bottles. Pre-thinned paint "for airbrushing" is just paying good money for more cheap thinner and less expensive pigment!) That said, you should be very careful to use the particular paint's manufacturer's recommended thinner. Some acrylics are thinned with water and some with alcohol and some with a proprietary thinner which is probably alcohol and Windex or something, but who knows for sure. YouTube is full of videos teaching how to make your own acrylic paint thinners to save money. Such homebrews should always be tested before use on a finished piece, of course. Many hobby paint manufacturers sell clear flat coatings for spraying over finishes that are too glossy. Flattening solutions can also be added to the paint and many manufacturers sell their paint not only in many colors, but also in a variety of finishes between flat and high gloss. I only use flat finishes on ship models. Gloss finishes are for automobile models, I expect. While I have had good results with alcohol-thinned acrylic paints, water-thinned acrylic paints have proven something of a challenge. Airbrushing is designed to spray atomized paint on a surface where it dries very quickly. Unlike alcohol, water doesn't dry quickly at all and it's easy to spray "wet on wet" and make a mess of it. For this reason, I am not a fan of water-thinned acrylic paint, or any other acrylic paint (for a variety of reasons,) but that is just my own personal preference. I have gone increasingly to using tubed artists' oil paints, which can be thinned with any number of solvents with different drying characteristics and can be conditioned with retarding or accelerating agents and flattening additives to achieve a wide range of effects. In the long run, quality artists' oil paint is far less expensive than small bottles of paint sold by the hobby companies, of better quality in many cases, and much easier to mix your own colors from a small pallete of basic colors. Other folks' mileage may differ, I'm sure.

I've only skimmed my copy of the latest issue of WoodenBoat magazine, but I see where there is an article in it on a gozzo (the lateen-rigged Ligurian fishing boat you've mentioned) that has been designed for yacht use with a low doghouse. I don't know about the doghouse, but the plans in the magazine look to be sufficient to build a model from. There's wide range of details on those fishing boats and you can probably learn something from any plans you can lay hands on. One of the catches with indigenous working watercraft is that so often they are built by tradition and by eye with perhaps a mould pattern or three handed down from father to son boatbuilders and drawn plans are hard to come by.

See: Pine tar is a very dark brown, close to black. "Coca Cola color" is really the best description I've heard. The degree of brown depends upon how much tar is put on the cordage. Standing rigging was heavily tarred (as much as it would soak up) to preserve it and so was so brown it was nearly black. At scale viewing distances, standing rigging would appear black. Pine tar applied to a baseball bat to afford a "sticky' grip for the batter's hands: Coal tar, essentially creosote, is entirely jet black: In the Age of Sail, pine tar was a "naval store," and an " essential strategic material." The finest pine tar came from the forests of Sweden and was generically called "Stockholm tar." Obviously, every European navy required pine tar and they all had to be in Sweden's good graces if they wanted to have access to Swedish "Stockholm tar." As with strategic materials even today, nations would try to influence third party producer nations not to sell such materials to their enemies. Britain was forever fighting with her neighbors and a reliable supply of pine tar was virtually essential to her survival. One of the more important reasons England was so possessive of her American colonies was because they ensured that England had her own supply of pine tar and was immune to the vagaries of the European pine tar market. Coal tar is a by-product of the production of coke and coal gas from coal. When the Industrial Revolution powered by coal commenced, coal-rich Britain found itself with plenty of coal tar and less need for pine tar. It would stand to reason that ships built and maintained in the Colonies would have used pine tar, which was readily available in America, for longer than would the British maritime industry that had coal tar more readily available. It would also be presumed that as America joined in the Industrial Revolution, with her rich coal resources, she also would have gone over to the less expensive and more readily available coal tar, as well.

For sure. The drafting machine scales are actually nothing other than regular scales with a couple of threaded holes to attach the clip for attaching them to the drafting machine arm. They were made in every scale imaginable. The common scales are still widely available on eBay. Some of the odd-ball scales may be a bit more difficult to find. They run around five or ten bucks a piece. Before they were plastic, they were made of metal, and before that, of boxwood and celluloid or ivory. The boxwood ones were the same scales that came in the fitted velvet-lined cases with eight, ten, or twelve scales in the box, each having one, or sometimes two scale markings on them. I've picked up quite a few such scales over the years. I have plastic and metal ones for my drafting machine and a fair number of the old K&E Paragon boxwood ones, although not a complete set of those. Sad to say, for quite some time when the beautiful old boxwood rules were plentiful, modelers encouraged probably by some article in a modeling magazine, snapped up as many as they could as a source of cheap boxwood and "recycled" them! I'd love to find a boxed set, but they are very pricey when they turn up on occasion. Only based on my own experience, I'd guess one person in ten, or less, knows that accurate professional scales are supposed to be used by picking up the distances with a pair of dividers (preferably a hairspring divider to make the most minute adjustments) and comparing them to the scale with the dividers. Most think they are like school rulers that double as straight edges and stand-alone measuring tools.

Perhaps a tedious step, but not challenging, especially if the planks aren't sprung. To begin with, the studs are welded using a template that ensures all are equally spaced and if they've done that correctly, you're starting out in pretty good shape. To replace a plank, patterns are made from cardstock or doorskin. Squares a bit smaller than plank width are cut and holes matching the stud diameter are drilled in the center of the squares. The squares are laid over the studs with the stud running through the hole in the square. Longer strips of cardstock or doorskin a smidgen less wide than the distance between the adjacent plank(s) and the studs are laid against the adjacent plank edge and on top of the squares laid over the studs. The squares on the studs are attached to the strip of cardstock or doorsking with a hot melt glue gun. The strip and the squares are then lifted off the studs in one piece and form the template for drilling the holes in the plank to accommodate the threaded studs. If they did a good job of setting the studs, This template can be used repeatedly. If a stud is out of place, the square with the hole at that stud is simply peeled off the template strip, placed over the offending stud, and hot melt glued to the template strip again, thereby eliminating the need to make an entire new template.

A 1:32 scale or a 3/8" to the foot scale? Or a 1/32" to the foot scale? Truth be told, I didn't go looking for the specific scale you were asking about and just posted the sites that had printable scales. My bad! I neglected to mention that In addition to the internal copying errors issues encountered in printers themselves, printed scales also pose the risk of changing size along with relative humidity. It's not about being exceptionally anal-retentive about measurements, (that being a relative thing among modelers,) but rather, it's just that your measurements are never going to be any more accurate than your rule and errors are so often cumulative. 1:32 or 3/8" to the foot scale is a standard architectural drawing scale and it should be found on any standard architect's triangular scale. (Not to be confused with an engineer's triangular scale which is scaled decimally.) Any modeler would be well-served by owning one. Buy one with decent scale engraving, not a pressed plastic job. You want an accurate scale. They aren't expensive and very commonly available. Get a decent pair of dividers to pick up your measurements from your rule while you're at it if you don't already have a pair.

Google is your friend, or Bing, as the case may be in this instance: printable scale rulers - Search (bing.com) See: Printable scale rulers - Printable Ruler (printable-ruler.net) Printable Ruler - Free Accurate Ruler Inches, CM, MM - World of Printables 9 Sets of Free, Printable Rulers When You Need One Fast (thesprucecrafts.com) The catch with printable rulers is the ability of the particular printer to print the rule accurately. In the first instance, most copiers and printers these days have a built-in "counterfeiting prevention feature" that prints a slightly off-size copy to prevent people from printing money. Others have less than sufficiently exact sizing scales. At best, if copying a scale, you have to fiddle a lot to adjust the sizing on the machine to get an exactly accurate copy. These printable scales, being in digital format and not going through a copier, may well have overcome those limitations.

Personal message sent via forum message feature. I just noticed the original post was dated almost three years ago! One of the dangers of checking the "new posts since last visit" feature, I suppose!

Like a lot of "Old Pharts," I'm familiar with Marine Models Company kits from years gone by. They were high quality kits for their time, equivalent to the old Model Shipways "yellow box" kits. What you see above is what you get. Their plans were generally well done, but don't expect an "idiot-proof" step-by-step instruction manual and laser-cut wooden parts. Kit manufacturers fifty years ago in an age when most gentlemen had a certain degree of manual arts skills acquired from the osmosis of life, if nothing else, expected more of their customers that they would be entitled to expect from today's generation of "keyboard jockeys." Regrettably, some of MMCo.'s metal castings seem to have contained a fair amount of lead and may be subject to deterioration from oxidation. They should be able to be replicated in cast resin, using the lead originals as patterns. What these kits provided were a set of plans, a rough, machine-carved solid basswood hull, a few metal fittings, some dowel spars, and string. It would be an excellent "transitional" model, for one interested in the clipper ships and looking to make "the leap into hyperspace" to scratch building. (Or "go over to the dark side" as some may believe!) This is a 1:192 (1/16" to the foot) model which will limit the detail one will be able to provide and it will otherwise pose a challenge in terms of its relatively small scale but it is still capable of producing a nice model if built with care and attention. Red Jacket was the first ship of the White Star Line and had a long live in many trades. She appears to be very well documented and there is a lot of information and plans for her online. A forumite build a very nice example of the very similar Bluejacket Shipcrafters' Red Jacket 1:96 scale solid hull model and posted a piece on the completion of that build. (See:

I believe the current technology you would want to explore for this task (as would most modelers requiring scale lettering and symbols) is the Cricut Everything Maker. (https://cricut.com/en-us/cutting-machines/cricut-maker/everything-maker) Without getting ahead of my skis describing what this machine does, and it does a lot, I'll just say that it is a small CNC cutting machine which, among other things like fabric, leather, thin wood, and cardstock, can apparently cut frisket film to a high degree of accuracy and detail. (Frisket film, if you are not familiar with it, is a adhesive-backed plastic masking film used by artists to mask areas for airbrushing. https://www.dickblick.com/categories/painting/airbrushing/frisket-film/) The Cricut machine connects with a home computer or smartphone and graphics can be fed from these into the machine. There are a wide range of mediums that can be used in the machine. In addition to frisket film, the machine will produce adhesive-backed transfers for hard surfaces or iron-on transfers (for fabric,) such as tee shirt printing. Beyond that, all I know is that Cricut Machines are all the rage with lady "crafters" these days. My daughter is the district administrator for all the art and music programs for a local school district and happens to have a Cricut machine of her own. There are a range of Cricut Machines ranging in price from around $500 to $1,000. (Ouch!) You may want to find someone you know who has one and could either cut you some frisket masks or some iron-on transfers. All they'd need would be the artwork on a digital file. There is also at least one outfit that will make iron-on transfers for you for a couple of bucks a piece. See: https://ninjatransfers.com/?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Cricut&utm_term=cricut heat}&tw_source=bing&tw_adid=80058377713213}&tw_campaign=Cricut&msclkid=46a9d50453211902fe31b1edd7361892&utm_content=Ad group 1 As it happens, the Cricut Machine is a small-scale version of the larger machines which produce the same larger adhesive-backed lettering used by full-scale sailmakers for putting sail numbers and other printing on sails. This machine appears to offer lots of promise for use by ship modelers, especially cardstock modelers! (With apologies to everyones' pocketbooks, my motto: "He who dies with the most tools wins!") YouTube is full of Cricut Machine videos. For an overview: See also:

As for the arrangement drawn above, not all that far back. The drawing shows the standard USN arrangement for laying wood decking "veneer" on top of a welded steel deck. Welded ship construction became common during WWII. Two inches of wood on top of the steel deck was specified for a light cruiser, apparently. That's not a whole lot of wood. I've not previously encountered the practice of laminating an inch of teak on top of an inch of Doug fir. The mention of using this laminated decking on "new work," suggests this was a wartime economizing practice. Even with supply lines open, there was not enough teak to supply the naval building program. Only cruisers and battleships rated teak decks. All the Iowa class BB's had teak-sheathed weather decks, but they were built "finestkind" regardless of wartime shortages. (Interestingly, the Montana class BB's, while authorized, were never laid down due to construction delays caused by wartime steel shortages and, by the time supplies were available to build them, the heavy battleship had been rendered obsolete by the aircraft carrier.) Teak, which became widely available to the British beginning around 1824 when they fought the First Anglo-Burmese War (shortly followed by the second) to take control of the primary source of the valuable timber, was favored for decks because teak weathered very well without the need for any paint or oil, provided a good footing, was abrasion resistant, and easy to maintain. Teak was not favored for other warship construction applications, though, because teak splinters something fierce on impact and large wood "splinters" flying from the impact of cannon shot caused more casualties in the wooden warships than anything else. The Navy built something like 143 aircraft carriers during the war, primarily the 24 large Essex class carriers and 50 Casablanca class escort or "jeep" carriers. All American carriers until the Midway class had Douglas fir wooden decks laid over structural steel as in the drawing in the post above. (In contrast to the British carriers which had armor-plated steel decks.) The wooden decks were favored because they were far lighter than armored decks, permitting more planes to be carried, and battle damage was easily repaired. They were also cooler in the tropics and therefore far easier on the plane tires when landing. (They did not, however, stand up to the Japanese kamakazi attacks as well as the armor-plate decked British carriers!) These wood-sheathed steel decks were not structural nor essential for watertightness, so their caulking was for the purpose of keeping water from running beneath the wood and rusting the deck. They used a special welding rig which would spot-weld the threaded spuds right to the steel deck as is still done today: Stud machine-welded to steel plate: Stud welding rig in use on steel deck: I'd be interested to know how they fastened teak decking to riveted iron decks before ship-welding technology came along. I've never had the opportunity to see a wood-sheathed riveted iron deck dissected. On wooden ships, the wooden decking was a primary structural feature of the ship and the wooden decks in an average-sized shop were easily four inches thick. These planks would be mechanically fastened to deck beams with spikes, bolts, or trunnels and the caulking would be driven "hard" into the seams which put tremendous rigidity into the hull structure. Decks were caulked with a "hawsing iron" which is a massive iron similar to an axe. It's a two-man job with one holding the iron in the seam and the other hitting it with a "beetle," a large two-handed mallet. Hawsing iron: Shipwright with an armful of beetles: