Bob Cleek

Very nicely done job! To my eye, your omission of the deck plank butts and plank fastening plugs or trunnels gives a very good effect without cluttering things up. Your nibbed planking against the covering boards is "finestkind!" That must have taken a bit of time to work out. Just a minor note: the tar, or "marine glue" in later times, which was poured hot into the deck seams is called "stopping" or more modernly "seam compound." The seam is caulked with oakum, or cotton "rope" in small craft, which is driven into the vee-shaped seam. The seam is created by planing the sides of the planks at a slight angle after they are initially fitted flush against each other. The seams are primed with paint, the caulking is driven home, and then the caulking material is soaked with thinned paint and allowed to dry. The "stopping" is then poured hot on top of the driven caulking material. The stopping is intended to protect the caulking material from the weather. The watertightness of the seam is provided by the driven caulking material and the swelling of the plank edges below the caulking seam against each other as with a wooden staved barrel. The width of the vee-shaped seam at the outboard face of the plank is dependent upon the thickness of the plank. The planks should be tightly butted against each other at their inboard edges with the vee-shaped seam above that. The angle of the vee need only be sufficient to hold the caulking material. There are rules of thumb as to how deep, and therefore how wide, the seam has to be to hold the caulking material. I'd have to go hunting for it, but offhand my recollection is that the depth of the seam should be about half the length of the plank thickness. (It's been a while since I last hung and caulked carvel plank.) Consequently, caulking irons are made with varying thicknesses to their edges to fit the different widths of the vee-shaped caulking seams. The irons' edges are identified as to their width by the number of "creases" in the edge of the seam. The creases are lengthwise indentations on the edge of the iron which gives the iron face a corrugated surface. A larger vessel's plank seams will require a "double" or "triple crease" iron, the "double" being twice the thickness of the single crease, and so on. Ship's caulking irons in a range of sizes: Approximately 7'' long. The "ship's iron" has a larger head that a "boat iron." Blades are 2-1/2'' wide "Ship's irons'" thicknesses below correspond to the seam width. The vee-shaped seam at the deck surface would be slightly wider than the properly sized iron so as to accommodate the stopping: Right to left: 1/32'' - #00 "Double aught crease iron" 1/16' - #0 "Single aught crease iron." 1/8'' - #1 "Single crease iron." 3/16 '- #2 "Double crease iron" 1/4''- #3 "Three crease iron." 5/16''- #4 "Four crease iron." (Not pictured below.) See: Ship Caulkers and Their Tools (sydnassloot.com) and C. DREW & Co. Shipwrights Caulking Tools (numismalink.com)

Just a general opinionated observation for what it's worth: I think that the overwhelming majority of modeling details which are less than optimal are the result of overscale small details which the modeler focuses upon and obsesses over at the expense of the overall impression of reality which is the true objective of the modeling endeavor. Slightly underscale details do not similarly offend the experienced viewer's eyes because our minds, being what they are, unconsciously compensate for details that are smaller than they should be but not for those that are larger and give us a "poke in the eye." It's always better to err on the side of subtlety. When miniaturists undertake to portray a subject with the level of detail found in a ship model, the smaller the scale the more the modeler must be an "impressionist" rather than a "realist." I've found that scale and historical accuracy should always take precedence over all else. If you do the research on scantlings for your vessel, you'll likely find that the stopping in its deck seams was narrower than a half inch. In most vessels other than naval warships maintained "Bristol fashion" with regularly holy-stoned decks, the decks will be quite dark, discolored by weathering, dirt, and the drips of pine tar and paint falling from aloft and tracked by the sticky bare feet of sailors climbing in tarred rigging softened by the hot sun.) Indeed, the deck of a working whaler would appear uniformly black from the grease spread by the rendering of blubber. The appearance of a ship's deck from a scale distance (i.e. if one were observing the prototype vessel from a full-scale distance) will very often lack the details of plank seams and fastening plugs or trunnels that so many modelers seem so determined to portray in miniature when in real life they'd be invisible or nearly so. Needless to say, carvel-hung hull plank seams wouldn't be discernable when viewed from the usual distant scale viewing distance because they were always finished fair and painted over. They weren't intended to be seen. Hull seams might become more apparent over time as the hull "worked" and became "tired," but even then they were painted over and would not show seams of contrasting paint color. Of course, there are modeling styles that deviate from what the eye would see of the prototype vessel. The most common of these would be the "as built" framed models whose purpose is to accurately portray timbering details and are finished "bright" (unpainted) as some of the Admiralty Board models seen in the higher quality maritime museum collections. Even in these often-unplanked open-framed models, where plank seams and fastenings may be shown, proper scale may well dictate that such details are nearly invisible or only very subtly suggested. In the finest 1:48 scale museum pieces, unfinished pearwood deck planking is sometimes merely drawn with a pencil line the width of a human hair, omitting plank ends or fastenings of any kind. The viewer's eyes see only the barest suggestion of "planking" with no hint of fastenings or plank butts, but their brain correctly says "planked decks." It is this "tricking the eye" that produces the illusion of reality in fine scale models. Overscale details such as prominent fastenings and plugs, particularly when set where no shipwright ever would have put them, too close to the plank edge or even a single fastening in a plank end, and shiny polished "real copper" plates with tacks having rounded heads two scale inches in diameter giving the overall effect of a terminal case of acne, may demonstrate the modeler's dedication and patience, but to no good effect beyond that. I post this opinion not to criticize any particular modeler's efforts, but rather as an exhortation in the interests of "better modeling." We often see a less experienced modeler proudly posting work in this forum which exhibits out-of-scale and inaccurate details, often after obviously spending a tremendous amount of time creating them. At that point, it's too late to comment gracefully on such flaws and so nobody mentions them, directly at least. Alternately, when newer modelers ask questions regarding their intentions to pursue such errors, experienced modelers circumspectly express their opinions in suggested alternative courses of action in order to avoid causing offense or hurt feelings. The result of this, together with the marketing gimmicks of some kit manufacturers ("Over 1,000 parts... includes real copper plates!") seems to only perpetuate these mistakes. So I offer these comments only generally to those who may wish to consider them. For those who might ask, "So what makes you an expert?" I can only answer, "Because these are all mistakes I've made myself!" Tom Lauria, a master modeler who has an excellent collection of YouTube videos on ship modeling, has a good video entitled Scale and the Compelling Impression. I highly recommend it!

Well, never was there ever a ship with a completely shiny coppered bottom, so I suppose your choice to have it shine is a stylistic one. I've polished more than my share of brass over the years. Here's a review of options from the really tough jobs to the easy ones. I wrote this before I saw BenD's post. If he says Brasso alone did that job for him, I'd definitely say, go for it! The "rub" is the rub, though. If your plating won't stand up to the rubbing that polishing requires, some of these products which work chemically rather than mechanically with an abrasive may be helpful. The first caveat is that I have no idea what you used to glue the plates down, so I can't say for sure that they won't come falling off if you just dip the whole hull in a de-oxidizing solution. That would be a relatively easy fix, put perhaps wreak havoc with the hull structure itself if it's plank on frame or bulkhead rather than solid wood. These suggestions should be taken with a grain of salt (which I think will also work) and always, always test these methods out on a sample piece before using them on the hull itself. All of these methods employ chemicals which breakdown the copper oxide tarnish. They work chemically and hard, rough rubbing should not be necessary. Repeated applications will be helpful in removing stubborn tarnish as there is some degree of "neutralizing" as each does its work. Take your choice, in order of ascending effectiveness: 1. Mix five parts water, one part vinegar, and add salt until the salt stops dissolving in the mix. Apply to the copper surface with a soft cloth to clean off the copper oxide, then rinse well. A soft toothbrush or cotton swab can be used on uneven surfaces. This is the cheapest, and probably mildest solution, but also the least effective. 2. Use Simple Green all-purpose cleaner. It's a great cleaner and will also remove copper oxidation. It's a mild liquid "soap" with a pleasant aroma commonly available anywhere cleaning supplies are sold. It contains a mild amount of citric acid. It's not particularly aggressive, but repeated applications will remove copper oxidation. See: https://www.walmart.com/ip/Simple-Green-All-Purpose-Cleaner-Concentrate-Spray-Bottle-Original-32-fl-oz/22301219?wl13=1755&selectedSellerId=0&http://clickserve.dartsearch.net/link/click?lid=92700060762254883&ds_s_kwgid=58700006715445296&ds_s_inventory_feed_id=97700000003583668&ds_a_cid=654818135&ds_a_caid=13956209185&ds_a_agid=126452889113&ds_a_lid=pla-1392082700544&ds_a_cid=116919406&ds_a_caid=361575031&ds_a_agid=120066732282 3. Use Barkeeper's Friend copper cleaner available online or from many stores. It's sold for polishing kitchen pots and pans. It comes in two forms, powdered and as a cream. Pick your own poison. I find the two equally acceptable. Follow the instructions on the container. Apply to the copper surface with a soft cloth to clean off the copper oxide, then rinse. As with any of the acidic cleaners, the longer it stays on and wet, the longer it works. You won't get far expecting instant results with acidic cleaners. Give them time to work. Barkeeper's Friend recommends waiting a full minute before rubbing it off, as I recall. A soft toothbrush or cotton swab can be used on uneven surfaces. This product is not as aggressive as a stronger solution of citric or oxalic acid and probably contains some other "magic ingredients" that their advertisements will tell you make their product better than the rest. See: Amazon.com: Bar Keepers Friend Powder Cleanser (2 x 12 oz) Multipurpose Cleaner, Stain & Rust Remover for Bathroom, Kitchen & Outdoor Use on Stainless Steel, Aluminum, Brass, Tile, Ceramic, Porcelain & More : Health & Household and Amazon.com: Bar Keepers Friend Soft Cleanser Liquid (26 oz - English/Spanish) - Multipurpose Cleaner & Rust Stain Remover for Stainless Steel, Porcelain, Ceramic Tile, Copper, Brass, and More (2) : Health & Household 4. Use CLR Cleaner ("Calcium, Lime, and Rust") as directed on the bottle. This product is sold primarily for removing rust and calcium deposits built up on plumbing fixtures. It is available in most hardware stores. It is a harsh chemical product that contains citric, gluconic, lactic, glycolic, and sulfamic acid. Don't ask me what all these acids are for, but this stuff is definitely the thermonuclear option! Use as directed on the bottle. It can be diluted with water for a less aggressive effect. You may want to experiment with varying strengths to see which works best. As with the rest, a soft cloth, toothbrush, or cotton swab should serve to apply the stuff. See: Amazon.com: CLR PRO CL4PROEA Calcium, Lime and Rust Remover, 28 oz Bottle : Health & Household 5. Mix a solution of citric or oxalic acid (available in paint and hardware stores as "wood bleach) and water following the instructions on the container. Apply to the copper surface with a soft cloth to clean off the copper oxide and rinse off. A soft toothbrush or cotton swabs can be used on uneven surfaces. Wear surgical gloves when handling this mild acidic solution for extended periods of time. It won't harm bare skin, but prolonged exposure will cause delayed burns of the sensitive tissues under your fingernails, causing indescribable agony for an interminable couple of days following overexposure. (Don't ask me how I know this!) See: Buy the Savogran 10501 Wood Bleach, Concentrated ~ 12 ounces | Hardware World and Amazon.com: Pure Original Ingredients Citric Acid (1 lb) Eco-Friendly Packaging, Natural, Food Safe : Health & Household After removal of the oxidation, you may wish to polish the copper to a higher shine. You may wish to try any copper polish for the job before using "the hard stuff" above. In fact, if the oxidation is slight, you may accomplish the finish you want using a copper polish alone. However, I may will run into some difficulty in trying to do so, though, because most polishes contain mild very abrasives and work by abrading the surface and your surface is decidedly not smooth. Their polishes' effectiveness will depend upon the surface's ability to withstand rubbing. Any copper polish is fine. Brasso (a cream,) Flitz (a paste or cream,) and Nevr-dull (an impregnated cotton wadding and USN bosuns' favorite) are all proven winners and folks each have their own preferences. See: Amazon.com: Brasso Metal Polish, 8 oz Bottle for Brass, Copper, Stainless Steel, Chrome, Aluminum, Pewter & Bronze, 8 oz (Pack of 3) : Health & Household, Amazon.com: Flitz Multi-Purpose Polish and Cleaner Paste for Metal, Plastic, Fiberglass, Aluminum, Jewelry, Sterling Silver: Great for Headlight Restoration + Rust Remover, Made in the USA 1.76 Ounce (Pack of 1) : Health & Household, and Amazon.com: Nevr Dull NEVER DULL POLISH 5OZ : Health & Household. (Full disclosure: I don't own any Amazon stock. I just use their links to identify the stuff. All of these products should be available in any hardware store or even many supermarkets. ) After you've polished your coppered bottom (making sure there's no polish residue remaining on the surface... perhaps easier said than done,) it will immediately begin to tarnish again, so coat it with a real clear gloss lacquer (and not a varnish which can yellow.) This is not a job for weak "eco-friendly" coatings. It's worth risking cancer for. (Just kidding... use only in a well-ventilated area... and all that.) Apply in multiple light coats, rather than thick coats. It's sold in spray cans if you want to make your life easier. You must thoroughly coat the surface with the lacquer, though. Even the slightest uncovered area will continue to tarnish and look terrible against the contrasting bright shiny polished copper. In fairness, I have to add that I've seen a lot of professionally lacquered brightly shined copper and brass items over the years and it seems that after a certain number of years, depending upon the local environment, they tend to develop tarnished black "spots," sometimes called "the pox," beneath the lacquer. This is probably a function of oxygen permeating the coating in some fashion. Manufacturers always lacquer coat their bright work because that keeps it looking "just polished" on the shop shelves and that can be many years, but, eventually, sooner or later, "the pox" strikes and there's no cure but to strip the lacquer from the piece entirely and keep it "bare" and polished regularly. This actually looks better than the factory lacquer because the detail doesn't polish as well and is thereby highlighted, but you have to keep up with the polishing. In the case of a rough-surfaced delicate miniature coppering job, you will probably never be able to strip it and refinish it short of destroying it. This will be your one shot at it. I must say that trying to polish a rough-textured surface like you've got there may prove to be an exercise in futility. You will have to polish it all, including every nook and cranny. Alternately, you may achieve a rather nice antiqued effect if the polishing isn't uniform, with darker, tarnished areas in the edges of the plates accenting them visually. Do remember to experiment and test your choice of methods before you hit the model itself. This is the sort of thing that is really easy to end up looking a lot worse than better if it goes sideways. I get it that you like "shiny," but you will not go wrong if you allow your copper to tarnish naturally to a "used penny" color. That's how it looks in real life after it's been in the air for a while. Exposed for longer and it will become green like the Statue of Liberty. Excellent forum post on painting faux coppered bottoms:

Sure. It happens all the time. You have to use one of the price-comparing apps to find out where the lowest price can be found. The Chinese manufacturers do it all the time. The buyer should beware of imitations, though. They might look exactly like the higher priced one and yet be of far inferior quality. With much of this sort of stuff, it is fortunately cheap enough that you can take a chance without getting hurt much if it turns out not to be as advertised.

I came across this interesting gizmo online. It's designed to tie snelling knots on fishing hooks or to tie loops in fishing line. I wonder if anybody has any experience with using one for model ship rigging. It seems that a nice small scale "hangman's noose" could be tied with it. That might make stropping small rope-stropped blocks, etc., a much easier task. ... Or not? Anybody know? See: https://www.lilybady.com/products/hooks?fbclid=IwAR0pQEdMc-qHnEvZ5kg6zR-34OO9sMP9zTNAX9NkKNJm6fguHtPssSGp1I4 for full particulars of the thing. Fifteen bucks online.

The truth of the matter is that there isn't a mini-table saw selling anywhere for around a hundred bucks that is suitable for the purposes you intend to use one for. This is because the two essentials in any small table saw are accuracy and torque. Each requires manufacturing costs directionally proportional to the degree of accuracy and the amount of torque the machine can produce. The $100 Chinese mini-table saws generally run 12 VDC high speed / low torque motors running around 5,000 RPM. A high speed motor is fine for lightweight work or for abrasive work. (e.g.: a ceramic cutting disk on a Dremel mototool for cutting brass tubing.) For cutting, torque, the twisting power of the motor shaft, is required. Less expensive powered tools trade speed for torque. In some applications, this is acceptable, but not where the motor lacks the torque to meet the demand of the job and "stalls out" or overheats. Simply put, high torque motors cost more to produce, which puts them outside the range of the $100 Chinese Amazon Specials. Similarly, accuracy in any powered tool depends upon mass. The weight of a powered tool is generally the quickest way to judge its quality. In micro-table saws we're not talking forklift grade weight, but the principle still applies. "Fit and finish" is also critical to accuracy. Saw fences that are adjusted with stamped metal wing nuts are a sure sign that the machine isn't going be capable of the accuracy one requires to do decent modeling work. Stamped metal parts instead of CNC-machined parts are another indicator of low quality and undependable accuracy tolerances. If all you have to spend is a hundred bucks, I agree with Allen and Roger: you'd be better off tuning up your full-sized table saw with a finishing blade and dance with the girl you brought. Of course, a decent specialty table saw blade can cost you more than $100 these days, as well. It is worth noting that MicroMark and Proxxon, retailers of modeling tools and supplies, each also offer respectable micro-table saws. While they are in the same price range as the Byrnes table saw, the Byrnes machine is a much better built machine, more technologically advanced, and generally considered a better value for the money. If I were you, which I'm not, I'd save my money until I could afford to buy a Byrnes Model Machines table saw. Byrnes Model Machines - Thickness Sander (Yeah, I know it says "thickness sander," but that's actually the saw page.) They are presently on vacation but are supposed to return the end of this month. The price of their saw isn't listed at the moment, I guess because they aren't shipping any until they return from vacation. One will probably run you six to eight hundred bucks, depending upon the cost of shipping and the options you elect to have on it. I know this is a lot of money for anybody, but for anyone who wants to even just cut their own strip wood for modeling, this saw will pay for itself in surprisingly short order. It will also hold its value and you will be able to readily sell it if you ever wish to do so. (Which, if the lack of eBay listings are any indication, isn't likely to happen.) I don't own stock in the Byrnes Model Machines company, but I hold Jim Byrnes and his products in high regard. The Byrnes "Jim Saw" is universally recognized as the finest micro-saw of its kind ever made and is an especially excellent machine that will afford you pride and joy of ownership and use for generations to come. It's worth skipping a few dinners out, shots at the local bar after work, or even a few hours of overtime on the job to acquire one! While it's advice that's ignored as often as it's offered, when you need a tool, buy the best tool you can afford. The most expensive tool is the one you have to buy more than once!

You certainly can. A bit of burnt umber, some yellow, and some white and you're good to go. No need to bother with the "flesh" color at all, actually. (You may want to save the bottle for posterity. It will be a collector's item some day. "Flesh color" has become a politically incorrect "Eurocentric" term these days. Mixing colors isn't rocket science, although there can be some surprises using synthetic paints where the base color wasn't a "pure" pigment. If you don't remember from grammar school, a "color wheel" indicates which primary colors when mixed together will yield secondary colors and so on. See: Color wheel - Wikipedia For your purposes, however, I would suggest you go to a local artists' supply or crafts store and simply purchase a small bottle of acrylic craft paint of a suitable color, or colors. It's the same stuff and probably a lot less expensive than the "model paints. You can also purchase higher quality acrylic artists' oil paints sold in tubes. A few small tubes of basic ship modeling colors plus black and white and you should be able to mix whatever you'd need for a ship model. Find out what thinning solvent is required for whichever brand of acrylic oil color you purchase. It will be water or denatured alcohol. Use this thinner to thin the oil paint which will be the consistency of tooth paste as iti comes out of the tube. You will probably find that your thinned paint may still have somewhat of a gloss finish, and you can obtain "flattening solution" from the same retailer you buy your oil paint from that can be added to yield a matte finish. You may also wish to obtain some "accelerator," which can be added to your thinned paint to make it dry faster. (Artists' oils are made to dry slowly so an oil painter can work on a painting over a a span of days without the paint on the canvas drying overnight.) Follow the instructions on the containers for the use of such additives or ask for assistance at the store. They should be able to advise you about these "paint conditioners." You will find that if you carefully replace the caps on your tubes of oil colors and keep the cap threads clean when replacing the caps, your tubed acrylic artists' oil colors will last practically forever without drying out. As a plastic modeler, you probably already know the versatility of painting acrylics on plastics. Obtaining very realistic wooden effects using various weathering techniques are possible. You might want to watch a few YouTube videos if you aren't already familiar with these tricks of the trade. The war gaming figure painters have developed this into a fine art and there's much to discover in their videos. The YouTube instructions on the use of acrylic artists' oils on plastic models will also be helpful. The learning curve isn''t steep. Once you become comfortable mixing your own colors and your own paint for brush or airbrush, you'll never pay those inflated "modeling colors" again.

I concur with the above posters. It's a particularly charming "decorator" model that may have some nominal value as an antique at this point, assuming someone has a place for it in their interior decoration scheme. It's probably of German or Spanish origin from the first quarter of the 20th dentury and made for the export market. It is decidedly not an "ex-voto," "church ship," or "votive model." The very few authenticated votive models contemporary to the period of your model are much more simply crafted, if not downright crude when compared to than your model. Additionally, your model exhibits a significant number of obviously mass-produced parts made with tooling that would not have been available to the average sea-going builder-donor of an actual votive model. Note particularly the many accurately turned pieces that indicate the use of a lathe, metal castings, especially the anchors and figurehead that are of cast metal, and (brass?) nails and escutcheon pins. It's highly unkikely that a 15th century European seaman giving thanks for a safe voyage would have access to such tools and materials. The 15th century "Mataro" votive model in the Maritime Museum in Rotterdam, Holland. See: Model Making History; Matar� - the Oldest Museum Model (lifeinscale.net)

From Wiki: http://wiki.hmssurprise.org/phase3/index.php/Cunt_splice **** splice A '**** splice', often softened to 'cut splice' or 'bight splice' for publication and in genteel conversation, is formed by eye splicing two different pieces of line into each other the same distance from the bitter end of each piece, forming "a Collar or Eye...in the Bight of the Rope. It is used for Pendents, Jib-Guys, &c."[1] Because the Eye is in the middle of the resultant rope, tension in the rope will tighten the eye around a wooden collar or fairlead. In Master and Commander, the bosun, Mr. Watt, personally works a **** splice into the breeching for the twelve-pounder bow-chaser that Aubrey mounts in HMS Sophie.[2] References ↑ Lever, Darcy. The Young Sea Officer's Sheet Anchor: or, A Key to the Leading of Rigging and to Practical Seamanship. (c)1998 by Dover Publications, Inc.: p.5 ↑ O'Brian, Patrick. Master and Commander. (c) 1969 by Patrick O'Brian. J. B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia and New York, First Edition: p. 63. What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced but, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel, q.v., this image of a carronade aboard HMS Victory. It is conceivable that the gun's cascabel knob would have been placed in the splice. In that case, as the gun recoiled, the increased tension in each side of the splice would have tightened it around the cascabel knob. ****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** The repeated interruption of four asterisks redacting the well-recognized name of the subject splice in the article above are apparently artifacts of some sort of automated "net nanny" Bowdlerizing algorithm. The gymnastics employed by cunning linguists to avoid the use of a visually descriptive Anglo-Saxon nautical term is rather pretentious. Note at footnote 2. above that the editorial comment, "What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced, bur, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel." Is incorrect and misleading. Allanyed's explanation above of varying practices according to the period is correct. When a breaching rope was simply turned about the cascabel ball, it was commonly lashed together at the point where the rope crossed to form the loop in order to securely fasten the rope to the neck of the ball so it couldn't come adrift in use. For modeling purposes, where scale renders actual splices impossible, faux splices can be created by tapering the bitter ends of the ropes by scraping the individual strands with the edge of a sharp blade or carefully trimming them at an angle with a sharp scissors. The tapered ends, rather than being tucked as in an actual splice, are then laid against the rope and secured with adhesive and a simple whipping applied over the area where the "splice" occurs. This creates the tapered appearance of a true whipped splice while avoiding an unsightly out-of-scale "lump" where the splices occur.

I have a Vanda-Lay Dremel-powered drill press. Vanda-Lay makes some interesting tools and their quality is probably second only to Jim Byrnes' Model Machines tools. That said, there is no question that the Byrnes thickness sander is the better tool and the better buy, as well. I see from checking Jim's website that they are not taking orders for machines at the moment because they took time off for summer vacation, but will be back shipping machines in mid-August. I suppose this is why they don't have the prices for the machines listed on their website at the moment! As I recall, the Byrnes sander is about the same, or even less money than the Vanda-Lay thickness sander with the motor. I have to say, owning a Byrnes thickness sander, that it is the "better buy," even if it costs a bit more than the Vanda-Lay. These sanders require some power to work effectively. I don't doubt that you can power one with a hand drill motor as Vanda-Lay suggests and a few have noted above, but I would think that would put some serious power demands on a hand drill motor, particularly if you are using it for a prolonged period. I also don't think there are any hand drill motors that put out anything like the RPMs that either the Byrnes motor or the power tool motor Vanda-Lay sells for somewhere around $300 do. The fact that the Byrnes' integral motor takes up far less bench space than the Vanda-Lay, regardless of how the Vanda-Lay is powered, is no small consideration, not to mention that the integral motor on the Byrnes machine is far more "elegant" than the cobbled-together power options for the Vanda-Lay. There are two big differences that put the Byrnes head and shoulders over the Vanda-Lay. The first, but not the greatest, difference is that the Byrnes is exceptionally accurate and is easier to adjust. It has an indexed adjustment knob that allow adjustments in increments of .002". The Vanda-Lay may be just as accurate but I expect it is more fiddily to set. The second, and biggest... huge... difference in the two machines is that the Vanda-Lay has a three-inch wide drum. It will only sand wood three inches wide or less. The Byrnes machine has a six-inch wide drum! The Byrnes sander will handle twice the width capacity of the Vanda-Lay and the Byrnes offers the option of loading its six inch wide drum with two different grits of abrasive sheet, each three inches wide, on the six inch drum. This allows you to use half of the drum for coarser sanding and the other for finer sanding, should you desire to do so. So, for the same price, all else considered, the Byrnes is twice the machine in my estimation. I realize that price is often a serious issue for all of us. All I can say in that regard here is that the difference in price isn't much to get twice the machine in the Byrnes. It can't be said enough that the cheapest tool in the end is often the most expensive one. You could buy any one of the Byrnes Model Machines, use it for ten years, and if you didn't beat it up, probably sell it easily for half or two thirds of what you paid for it. Not so with the Vanda-Lay. If it's a difference of even a couple of hundred bucks, how long will it really take for you to forget the "pain" of that? These days, where I live, at least, that's maybe three half-way decent dinners out with the Missus. If you get the Byrnes, you won't be sorry.

Great finds! Those old MoTorBoaTing magazine Ideal Series plans books are really great. Apparently, Hearst Publishing still owns the copyrights on the Ideal Series. There's something between twenty and thirty volumes to the set, but I've only seen a handful here and there and always grabbed them when I could. Some are full of really classic William and John Atkin designs. Years ago, I tried to find out of Hearst Publishing would allow me to do a "Best of" anthology of plans from the Ideal Series. The jerks wouldn't even reply to my letter.

It would depend upon the model kit. One should expect that plastic parts would be clean, but it's always possible that they aren't. Handling plastic parts with bare hands prior to painting can certainly leave skin oils that may interfere with a coating. I never worried about it much when I was building plastic models, but, obviously, when in doubt, cleaning the parts is advisable and can't hurt. A soak and rinse in an appropriate mild cleaning solution which itself is not prone to leaving any sort of residue on the part should be sufficient to remove any oils or grease prior to applying any coating to plastic parts.

I can't say whether these models were made in Singapore, Vietnam, or Mauritius or not, but they are the sort of product that small ship model factories in countries with developing economies are now turning out for the mass export. Singapore and Vietnam seem to have well-established ship model building industries. Mauritius has been the most prolific exporter of ship models since the last quarter of the 20th Century. Selling ship models for export is apparently a significant segment of the economy of this tiny island nation. Their product quality range runs from the almost crude to the very well-done. It's quite fascinating to see how they build these models on an assembly line basis. It's even more amazing that they can turn a profit doing so! Certainly, the people working in these small factories can't be making much at all. I expect much of the profit goes to the middle men who import the product and resell it around the world, but still and all, the Mauritians must be making enough building them for it to be worth their while to do so. Check out these websites. While we will all lament that we often can't even give away our completed models, there's a whole industry out there selling ship models to an apparently viable customer base. See: http://customwoodhandicrafts.com/custom-wood-model-ships/ https://hoiancraftships.com/ https://silhoutech.com/ http://aemodels.com/AE-MODELS-TEAM-PTE-LTD.-Services-Ship-Rig-Models-Rig-model-supplier-Singapore-Model-makers-in-Singapore https://bobatoshipmodels.com/ https://historic-marine.com/ https://le-port-ship-model-factory-and-showroom.business.site/ https://mautourco.com/model-ship-building-works-of-art/ https://www.bbc.com/news/av/business-43432017

Have you tried binder clips? Handy and cheap. Lots of different sizes available.

Hi guys, hi Johann. Can you please help me. I am trying to find how to do certain knots like this one. Where did you find how to tie them? The Ashley Book of Knots is generally recognized as one of the two encyclopedic works on knots of all kinds. It's been in print forever now and there are many used copies available online as well as new ones. It's a volume I expect anyone who has occasion to work with cordage of any kind to appreciate as an essential reference work. The Ashley Book of Knots: Clifford W. Ashley: 9780385040259: Amazon.com: Books The Arts of the Sailor by Hervey Garrett Smith is another classic on the subject of rigging and fancy rope work. It's not encyclopedic, but it has much of the basics. Another encyclopedic work is the Encyclopedia of Knots and Fancy Rope Work by Hensel and Graumont. Encyclopedia of Knots and Fancy Rope Work: Hensel, John, Graumont, Raoul: 9780870330216: Amazon.com: Books Similar to Ashley's above, this volume purports to describe every knot known to man and probably can claim the record for that notwithstanding Ashley's similar claim. While Ashley's is entertainingly illustrated with many drawings and is done in "coffee table" style, Ashley's organizes its knots by the purposes and trades which commonly employ the particular knots, while "Graumont and Hensel" is organized by type of knot as defined by the knot type's mechanics and so is organized by chapters on knots, bends, hitches, and so on. "Graumont and Hensel" is a much more academic and dry reference work illustrated with black and white photographs. The Rigging of Ships in the Days of the Spritsail Topmast - 1600-1720 by Anderson is another valuable classic which was written specifically for ship modelers. It specifically addresses the period between 1600 and 1720. The Rigging of Ships: in the Days of the Spritsail Topmast, 1600-1720 (Dover Maritime): Anderson, R. C.: 9780486279602: Amazon.com: Books Some have found Peterson's Rigging Period Ship Models helpful, although it has been criticized with apparent validity for suffering some inaccuracies. Rigging Period Ship Models: A Step-By-Step Guide to the Intricacies of Square-Rig: PETERSSON, Lennarth: 9781848321021: Amazon.com: Books There are other more period-specific books on rigging and rope work. These are contemporary works and quite technical. Two of these are available in PDF format for free on the MSW forum website in the drop-down menu at the top of the forum homepage. Both happen to be called The Art of Rigging. One is by David Steel and the other by George Biddlecomb and are usually referenced simply as "Steel's" and "Biddlecomb." TheArtOfRigging-Steel.pdf (thenrg.org) The art of rigging (thenrg.org) Many of these reference books address full-size work and not miniature model-making, but reducing full-size prototypes to scale is what we are about, so it's an easy enough task to tie our knots smaller with smaller rope, or to develop ways of faking it to accommodate our smaller scales. As far as tying small knots, I suggest anybody who's interested in tying rigging knots should spend some time searching YouTube for videos on "surgical instrument knot tying" or "instrument suture tying" and the like. There are many instructional videos, many posted by medical schools, demonstrating how to tie very small knots in very confined spaces using surgical instruments which can easily be purchased for little money on eBay and other sites. These are easily learned basic techniques of great practical value to modelers. For example:

Not me and I've been using it for going on fifty years or so. Of course, a museum professional will tell you it's not "Class I archival" unless it has a hundred-year life span and we can't know that just yet. What you want to steer clear of is anything that "out-gasses" acidic fumes, especially if your model will be cased (as it should be if you think it is worth keeping.) There are some very valuable articles in the "Articles Database" and "More" drop-down menus that every modeler would do well to read. These should answer your questions about materials longevity. Some consider obsessing about the archival qualities of modeling materials is a bit "over the top," and maybe it is. Everybody's mileage may differ, but for my money, I see all aspects of ship modeling as an exercise in striving to "do the common thing uncommonly well," or at least as well as I am able to do it. Especially if one is building from scratch, you never know whether your one-of-a-kind model might be of some interest to someone else after you're gone. It doesn't take any more money or effort to use materials that will outlast us, so why not do so? Nautical Research Guild - Article - Ephemeral Materials in Ship Models (thenrg.org) Nautical Research Journal - Vol 43 (thenrg.org) Nautical Research Guild - Article - Specifications for Construction of Exhibition Models of U.S. Naval Vessels (thenrg.org) Planking Downloads and Tutorials and Videos - Model Ship World™

I'd urge you to test sanding the heads off of brass nails before you go inserting them on your workpiece. Wood, being a lot softer, sands much more easily than brass nails. If you want to secure planking, you can drill holes and glue wood or bamboo "dowels" into the holes or, as some do, insert pieces of nylon fishing line into the holes. These options are more than adequately strong.

If it's bees' wax, I'd think it would not be a good idea. Bees' wax tends to be acidic and over time could cause the thread to become weakened. Wax of any kind on rigging thread can attract and hold dust. At "scale viewing distances," there's no observable shine to tarred rigging. If a coating is required on rigging thread, clear shellac is a good option and is invisible once dry.

Hadn't thought of a kayak. That'll do it and it's easily car-topped, too. She sure does look pretty under sail.

Well, it certainly looks like you are well on your way to success! Beautifully done, clean, crisp work. It looks perfect,

Beautiful photos! Quite a clever display solution, too! If you don't mind a few curious questions: How does she sail? Have you noticed any similarities in sailing characteristics between the prototype and the model? How ded the R?C sheet servos work out? Is it possible to let the sheets run free in the event of a gust of wind and a potential knock-down? I also am curious about retrieval options. She doesn't appear to be powered, so what do you do if she is becalmed or otherwise "incapacitated" in the middle of the pond? In the old days, when "free sailed" pond yachts were in vogue, they'd only sail them on purpose-built model sailing ponds and the boats that "went their own way" would eventually drift to the edge of the pond and be fetched with long poles or they'd have a row boat that they could use to go out and retrieve the model boats. As far as I know, there are only two such model yacht ponds in the U.S. anymore, one in New York's Central Park and the other, Spreckles Lake in San Francisco's Golden Gate Park. (See: https://www.sfmyc.org/ )

Not sure if you are telling this story after the fact or in real time. I'm betting your local Joann's fabric store is going to give you a blank stare when you ask if they have any three-quarter ounce nylon spinnaker cloth! Very creative fabrication solution for the sail track slides. They look great, too.

Indeed they do. Actually, there are three basic types of molding sand and lots of specialty sands for various applications, but the basic, tried and true "el cheapo" material is called "green sand." It's a mixture of very fine sand with about ten percent finely ground up kitty litter and water. There are lots of YouTube videos on how to mix up your own casting sand. You can also buy it premixed from foundry supply houses.

I believe the archival material for inking such details is old fashioned India ink applied with a drafting pen over a smooth wood surface previously sealed with shellac or thinned varnish. India ink is basically water, shellac, and lampblack. Modern "markers" with synthetic inks are not necessarily color-fast. "Permanent" means it won't wash out of your clothes and "waterproof" means it won't run or smear if it gets wet. Beyond that, it's anybody's guess.

Here you go: It's from the "More" drop-down menu at the top of the forum homepage under "ropemaking."