Bob Cleek

Bridge City Tools, the Tiffany's of tool companies, has a new tool that's perfect for spar-tapering, although it's actually designed for making chopsticks! https://bridgecitytools.com/products/csmv1-chopstick-master?variant=31915440046193 It's on sale right now, marked down from $339.00 $269.00! Such a deal! They're serious. I don't think this is an April Fool's joke. They do have a now-more-affordable modelmaker's plane with a clever and supposedly accurate thicknessing feature that's reduced from $169.00 to $98.00. I might be tempted to step up from my trusty old Stanley #100. https://bridgecitytools.com/products/hp-8-mini-block-plane

That horse arrangement would permit crew to work either side of the boom on the horses simultaneously. (They're called horses on the yards, too, the pendents along the yards' lengths which support the horses are called stirrups, IIRC.) However, again, one would question what evolution would occasion the need to have two crew out on the boom at the same time. Given their size, they'd provide a "leg up" from the taffrail, but that's about it. The swivel guns mounted port and starboard are unusual as well, unless, of course, somebody is trying to board the vessel broadside to the stern. (Normally, they would be stowed below and only mounted for action and then on the side from whence an attack was anticipated.) Lady Washington's designer, who consulted me on another of this traditional designs long ago, knows what he's doing and takes care to get it all historically correct. You won't go far wrong following his lead.

It's Portia Takakjian, "Tah-kok-gee-in." Her AOTS book was on Essex. HMS Fubbs may have been one of the three builds addressed in her Ship Modeling Techniques book. I fortunately found a great deal on a used copy that's coming in the mail. I've had my eye out for this title at a reasonable price for some time. AOTS: The 32 Gun Frigate Essex https://www.amazon.com/32-Gun-Frigate-Essex-Anatomy-Ship/dp/0851775411 (Hardcover: 3 used from $154.84 - 1 new from 97.75) (Paperback: 3 used from $565.99 - 1 new from $919.00) Ship Modeling Techniques https://www.amazon.com/Modeling-Techniques-Portia-Takakjian-1990-04-06/dp/B01HCADDZ4 (Paperback: "3 Used from $183.87 - 2 new from $768.57" I really don't know what's with Amazon's book pricing. Perhaps they need to revise their algorithms. It seems like some sort of digital "monkey see - monkey do" issue is operative. Somebody sees a price on line and asks more for theirs, and that gets repeated over and over again and the prices just keep getting inflated automatically like Bitcoins. I can't imagine why anybody would pay $919.00 for a new paperback copy of an AOTS book when a lot of 27 new hardcover copies were just remaindered for $150.00 at an online auction. I can't imagine anybody's paying the kind of prices that some of the books on Amazon are listed for. it's certain that poor Portia, who died too young, never saw the kind of money her two books are bringing these days. She was working on an AOTS volume on the 32 gun frigate Raleigh at the time of her death. She was a fascinating maritime historian and ship modeler about whom not a lot seems to have been written. A classically trained illustrator, her "day job" was as an academic scientific illustrator, her maritime interests were an avocation and she only modeled ships later in her life. Her papers were left to the G.W. Blunt White Library at Mystic Seaport. What I found particularly fascinating was that while raising two boys as a single mom, she managed to build what her Mystic Seaport biography calls " one of the best, privately held, period shipbuilding and naval architecture book collections in the USA." Wouldn't we all give our eye teeth for something like that! Here's her bio from the Mystic Seaport website: https://research.mysticseaport.org/coll/coll289/ Biography of Portia Takakjian Shortly after Portia Takakjian’s death on February 17, 1992, Scottie Dayton, friend and associate, commented in the May/June issue of Seaways as follows: “On 17 February noted ship modeler, researcher and author, Portia Takakjian lost her battle with emphysema. True to her nature, Portia was busy helping others right to the end. She was an extraordinary lady, as anyone who knew her will tell you. Her capacity for caring and giving was boundless. She was born in Los Angles in 1930, but spent most of her time in the villages of Tarrytown and Piermont on the Hudson River just above New York City. After completing high school she worked as a fashion model for the Ford Agency while attending Pratt Institute in Brooklyn and later the Art Students League. Portia’s art career originally focused on illustrating children’s books. Her reputation in this field earned a listing in Gale’s “Authors and Illustrators”, while some of her work became part of the Kerlan Collection at the University of Minnesota. Besides illustrating books, Takakjian rose to the level of senior illustrator and draftsperson at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory. Her interest in ship modeling surfaced while raising sons Kyle and Erik. Takakjian understood how vital a quality reference library was and set about establishing one of the best, privately held, period shipbuilding and naval architecture book collections in the USA. As her knowledge and skills increased, her studio also evolved into a first-class model shop. When the Hudson River Museum invited Portia to exhibit her models, the interest in how they were constructed led to teaching a weekly class in her workshop. She realized early on that there was little published material to help the beginner, so she began imparting what she’d learned by writing magazine articles. Portia had much to be proud of, but the publication of the “32-Gun Frigate Essex” by Conway Maritime Press was a crowning achievement. “Essex” was the first title ever produced on an early American vessel for their esteemed Anatomy of the Ship series. Conway’s editors were so impressed with the quality of her plans and the accuracy of her modeling that they permitted her to choose the vessel and deadline for another title. Portia selected the 32-gun frigate Raleigh (1778). Her obsession to finish Raleigh “before it finishes me” drove her over each physical obstacle. Portia left behind an impressive legacy in her models and writings, but more importantly, she touched and forever enriched the lives of those she met.”

Rather than sanding, I would scrape the affected area with a scraper and see if a careful reapplication of stain can repair the problem before getting into removing the piece. Thanks for reminding me of another reason why I hate using CA unless it's absolutely necessary. Even if CA might not have been the culprit.

I think it's mainly because Dremel markets it's "moto-tool" as being able to do a thousand and one different things and therein lies a lot of it's appeal to less-sophisticated DIY-ers. My wife gets more use out of her Dremel that she uses to sand down her dogs' nails than I do out of mine in my workshop! There are some things Dremels will do very well (and a Foredom flex-shaft machine will do better,) but the more things any tool is advertised as being capable of doing, the less likely it is to do very many of them well.

Interesting feature. I can't claim to be any authority on the period, but it looks like what is called "stave planking" and in such applications wasn't a rarity over the centuries, although more frequently seen in sharply curved forms, particularly on rounded sterns. It's not structurally strong, but it doesn't need to be. In the instance pictured, it does seems to be intentionally decorative. I do see the suggestions of what could be interpreted as "balusters," but I don' think that's likely. That would be a heck of a lot of balusters to turn, and for what purpose? I think interpretation would depend a lot upon the size of the drawing. The Van De Veldes' originals I've see are amazing in the level of detail they achieve, even at very small sizes. This appears to be a stand-alone pencil drawing and not a cropped section from one of their trademark black and white "panorama" paintings. Perhaps the "staved" depiction may have been simply a shading technique he used?

I'll bet you stir it well after adding the white spirits, right?

With the disclaimer that I have no experience with this particular line of tools at all, I'll risk sharing the observation that "If it seems too good to be true, it usually is too good to be true." Generally speaking, tools (with which I do have a lot of general experience) marketed to the "hobbyist" or, in the current parlance, the "crafter" or "maker," are generally a poor investment. They tend to be underpowered and poorly constructed. The quality is markedly wanting, but the price, while often less, and sometimes much less, than the "professional's choice" model of the same tool, is expensive when one considered what they are getting for their money. Buying the best tool one can possibly afford is always a much better investment over time. Additionally, most of the now widely marketed tools of this style which feature low voltage power requirements, whether they be battery-powered and powered by a proprietary interchangeable power supply (e.g. the Proxxon or MicroMake systems) are dependent upon often-limited manufacturer support. When the manufacturer goes out of business or abandons the product line, owners are often left holding the bag when they can't get parts, proprietary accessories, or proprietary rechargeable batteries anymore. Note, as well, that the Makerx tools' prices do not include batteries or power supplies. At the risk of sounding arrogantly presumptuous, I'll say most any sixty dollar airbrush system isn't going to provide the buyer with a lot of satisfaction. Cheap tools are always the most expensive in the long run. You will probably be far more satisfied, and money ahead over time, buying a quality airbrush from this forum's airbrush company sponsor using their MSW discount and buying a decent airbrush compressor to go with it. Use the forum's search feature to find prior threads on airbrush selections. Other's have already figured out the best airbrush choices for modeling purposes. Learn from the mistakes of others and save money and grief. See: https://usaairbrushsupply.com/

There's really no point in buying "satin" if you are going to wipe it on. If you thin gloss material and wipe it on, it's going to dry satin anyway. "Canned satin" will work, so go ahead and use it, but the problem with canned satin polys and varnishes is that they are made by adding fine "dust" to dull the gloss and you must regularly stir the stuff in the can to keep the "dust" in even suspension in the material. (Varnishes are always stirred, never shaken. Shaking ads minute bubbles to it which will ruin the finish.) Those who don't know this will often apply "satin" finishes right out of the material at top of a can in which the "satin dust" has settled and then can't figure out why their finish turned out glossy. Another thing to remember is that satin polys and varnishes almost always do not have any UV inhibitor added, so they don't resist UV degradation anywhere near those with UV inhibitors. This may not be a big deal with models that are never placed in direct sunlight, but no professional yacht painter worth their salt will ever use a satin varnish on anything that's going to be exposed to direct sunlight. The proper practice for producing a satin clear finish is to use a quality gloss coating with UV protection and then flatten the gloss by hand rubbing when it's dry with rottenstone and/or pumice or a fine Scotch-brite pad to obtain a uniform satin finish. Manufacturer-compounded "satin" clear finishes only mimic a quality hand rubbed finish and are quite inferior to the real thing.

As Jaager pointed out, the comment was about the model. It was not an ad hominem judgment at all. It didn't "smack of being judgmental," it was definitely judgmental and appropriately so."Judgmental" is good when based on objective facts. Here, the model in question was "of no socially redeeming value," as it were. Like "fake news," it was a "fake model," "... a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing." A model of a fantasy vessel that could never of existed and is not accurately representative of any particular type of vessel is something that is simply cluttering up the historical record, so to speak. The statement, "...models like this one may look interesting to a layman, but in fact they are simply rubbish." is a very true statement which can be said about many models and, where appropriate, should be said. If only the general public appreciated that fact, they wouldn't be continually defrauded by unscrupulous grifters who sell "rubbish" to unwitting buyers who think they are buying a ship model of considerable value. Most people can spot a "paint-by-numbers" Mona Lisa copy, but its ship model analog not so much.

I didn't find anything objectionable about your posts, Ab. I understood you completely. Others were apparently looking for some other response. I share your graciously stated perspective: "... models like this one may look interesting to a layman, but in fact they are simply rubbish. But ... you can have a lot of fun playing around with it." I don't see much value in spending an inordinate amount of bandwidth on such models in what is essentially an academic-level forum about serious ship modeling and related maritime history. I am sure Mr. Hoving has forgotten more about ship models and maritime history than I'll ever know after spending my entire life being interested in those subjects, but I do sometimes find myself compelled to comment when I see things posted which I know to be simply wrong. The endeavor of ship modeling is an exercise in the pursuit of excellence, if nothing else. Historical accuracy and technical craftsmanship and artistry are the metrics that define the efforts of serious modelers. This forum has distinguished itself in those respects. It's "where the big dogs run." One problem with social media is its inclusiveness. "Everybody's welcome" and the number of members is, for many, a measure of the quality of a site's content, which isn't necessarily true, except from the perspective of sponsors and advertisers who are primarilyi interested in the extent of their own exposure. Nevertheless, forums with high content do draw participants and there tends to be a "dumbing down" or dilution of the quality of the content as more and more less knowledgeable and experienced participants jump on the bandwagon. It seems that high quality forums tend to suffer from this phenomenon and sophisticated and experienced participants tend to drift off when they find that the time it takes them to read posts of diminishing quality and interest becomes less and less well spent. This degradation is exacerbated by the tendency of social media to increasingly attract those seeking attention and affirmation as well as those those seeking to learn and to contribute something worthwhile when they are able. So, when someone "comes into someone's log and lecture(s) them about the futility of their efforts based on... superior knowledge," they aren't doing anything "unbecoming," they're just trying to contribute something of value. In large measure, constructive criticism serves to maintain the quality of a forum's content. The post which has been criticized in actuality provided a precise and complete response to the original query, albeit not what the poster was hoping to hear: the nature of the vessel, the source and quality of the plans upon which it was based, and a candid opinion as to the historic value of the model, plus encouragement to the original poster to continue to pursue working on it if they found doing so enjoyable. I learned something of value from Ab's post and I thank him for it. I now know something more about a particular book and am now able to avoid wasting money and shelf space on a worthless volume. I can't say the same of the other posts in this thread. For those who are seeking affirmation and pats on the back, there's another well-known ship modeling forum on the internet that operates on the Special Olympics "Everybody Gets a Prize" model. The best part of social media is that there's something for everyone on the internet. If, on the other hand, one wishes to learn from teachers who know more than they do, they have to expect that their papers are going to be graded.

Clever trick the way you offset the davit stock to cut the taper!

Why not? If you're faithful to the prototype, your conscience is clear. I doubt it will cost you any points in a competition, that's for sure! The judges will be so overwhelmed by the gestalt of it all, they'll never notice that the prototype accommodation was built by a kitchen cabinetmaker and not a marine joiner.

Midwest Products produces a wide selection of milled basswood for modeling, running from small dimension strips and thin sheets, through large blocks the size of a brick and larger. https://midwestproducts.com/collections/basswood These can usually be found in the lumber section of any Ace Hardware store and many other chain hardware stores, as well as most any craft store, such as Michaels. Midwest often has a good size display rack in such places stocked with a wide selection. Sourcing basswood is no problem at all. You should be able to find something very close to what you require easily at a local store. Importantly, buying "hands on" will allow you to select a premium piece with the grain just the way you want it, rather than taking your chances ordering mail order. Even Walmart has it: https://www.walmart.com/ip/MIDWEST-PRODUCTS-4422-BASSWOOD-BLOCK-2X4X12/36775784

I'm sure I'd have driven Stirling and Sons batty if they were building her for me. I'd make sure they provided for ventilation in the locker doors as well, whether that were a decorative cut-out scroll sawed into the face of the door, a row of holes along the top edge, or a panel of bronze wire or woven cane mesh to make sure things in the locker didn't get all musty and moldy, too. True, a disguised swinging latch handle could be done, but from a stress distribution standpoint, that would probably be considered some pretty poor engineering. If one was thrown off balance by a wave while holding on to such a moveable handle, I'd expect it would be pretty easy to bend the shaft of the handle. I'd file that idea under "If it's such a good idea, how come nobody else thought of it before?" The options pictured in the Toplicht and Davey and Co. catalogs have been "state of the art" since at least the late 1800's. I've probably been aboard hundreds of fine (and not so fine) yachts over the years. I've never seen a disguised "grab and twist" locker handle. They do make one like this, though: https://www.toplicht.de/en/shop/innenbeschlaege/vorreiber-und-riegel/vorreiber/vorreiber-1 These are the sorts of details that the great designers like Nathaniel and L. Francis Herreshoff, Fife, Camper and Nicholson's, and J. Laurent Giles so enjoyed inventing, many of which became trademarks of the yachts they designed. There's a lot of room for artistic license in modeling, so go for it! It's such an amazingly beautiful build. Wouldn't it be wonderful when it's done to be able to walk into one of the premier yards with it in hand and tell them, "Build me one just like it full size!" Parenthetically, my own "dream yacht," which will forever remain just that, in this life, at least, is Giles' Dyarchy, a cutter quite similar to your model. I have copies of all Giles' original drawings and a license to build one model of her. One of these years, I hope to do so. Your build log is plowing the hard soil ahead of me! Your model's saloon reminds me of a very similar old British cutter I crewed on close to fifty years ago in a classic yacht race. As is often the case, the owners had no racing experience, and so recruited a bunch of us "young bucks" thinking we'd bring home the silver for them. As it wasn't our boat, we weren't particularly concerned about "babying" her. The owners lived aboard and, unbeknownst to us, the wife had a big bowl of soured milk covered with a dish towel out of which she was trying to make her own cheese. (I kid you not!) She'd stowed it chocked in with towels and whatever else on the pilot berth above and behind the saloon settee. As we were plowing along, we had to cross the wake of a large ship and, when we did, that bowl of curds and whey became airborne with quite a bit of velocity, flying across the saloon and coming to rest on the sole after bouncing off the base of the settee on the opposite side. It wasn't pretty, but the worst thing about for the crew was trying to keep a straight face while we continued to race along despite the cries of dismay from below!

If I may be so bold as to presume to make another recommendation... Such grab handles would not likely be seen on any well-found seagoing vessel. All accommodation lockers require positive latching mechanisms to keep them from flying open when the vessel heels in a seaway, especially when a locker's weighty contents are thrown against the door. (Magnets, spring clips, and spring-loaded detent balls are sometimes seen on power boats, but simply won't cut it on a sailing vessel that will routinely be thrashing around at a significant angle of heel.) Given the period, these may be a finger-hole through the door with an elbow latch behind it, so the the finger can be inserted to press down on a spring-loaded latch to unlatch the door, which would latch when pushed shut, or a "button knob" which was a knob with a button in the middle which, when pressed, released the spring-loaded latch. Less complex latches were also used, such at the usual barrel bolts and sliding or swinging bars. Elbow catch for finger-hole access: Push-button knob locker latch (also available with a keyed locking mechanism. Alternate, larger wardrobe latch: Or, in keeping with your "theme," there are flush spring catches with finger ring pulls: See generally: Toplicht (Hamburg) https://www.toplicht.de/en/shop/innenbeschlaege/schnappverschluss-und-schnaepper/?p=3 and Davey and Co. (London) http://davey.co.uk/pdf/interior_fittings.pdf my favorite go-to sources for fine traditional yacht fittings (and priced like Tiffany's jewelry, unfortunately.)

Tung oil is a component of quality varnishes, together with thinners and driers, but is not much good by itself. In its raw form, it takes quite a long time to "dry" and may not be compatible with other coatings. I don't want to sound rude, but your questions betray that you lack experience with the basic concepts of finish coating, be it paint or varnish. I urge you to search in YouTube for videos on fine furniture finishing and painting and familiarize yourself with the basic principles. After you have done so, test and practice on scrap wood before applying anything to your model. A test should always be made on the same wood species and grain orientation as your model before you apply that finish to the model. Lots of things can go wrong, even when you are experienced, especially with today's synthetic coatings. This practice can save you a lot of grief. Check these out for starters: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=how+to+fill+wood+grain+for+a+fine+finish If it is an open grain surface that you intend to paint, you should build up several coats of sanding basecoat until the pores are filled and then sand the entire hull down to 320 grit or so until it is smooth as a baby's bottom. Tack well and then apply your finish coats.

Fantastic! I almost feel bad being the occasion of putting you through all that, but just almost. Not quite. That's really beautiful.

There are two reasons why the 17th Century is the most challenging period to model: 1) The large amount of "gingerbread" carved decoration on the vessels requiring a high level of miniature carving or sculptural skill and 2) the dearth of accurate contemporary historical data. Even where 17th Century contemporary written works are at all extant, they are written in archaic language and difficult to decipher. Good luck with your interest in the 17th Century period, but it's the steepest learning curve of all. For someone starting out, I'd suggest the Dover quality paperback reprint of Anderson's 1927 volume The Rigging of Ships in the Days of he Spritsail Topmast - 1600-1720. It's cheap and comprehensive. https://store.doverpublications.com/0486710653.html?gclid=CjwKCAiAg8OBBhA8EiwAlKw3kuLl6XqmoMX0RQa5JTiUTaJyXTUssJLT33eRP0YGPNx8yynW1eCU6xoCEsoQAvD_BwE For general history and background, though not perhaps ship modeling "how to do it" details, one interested in the 17th Century period should also consider any or all of Richard Endsor's works, all of which are currently available: The Restoration Warship: The Design, Construction and Career of a Third Rate of Charles II's Navy. (2009) https://www.amazon.com/Richard-Endsor/e/B0030INS44%3Fref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_share The Master Shipwright's Secrets: How Charles II Built the Restoration Navy (2020) https://www.amazon.com/Richard-Endsor/e/B0030INS44%3Fref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_share Warships for the King: Ann Wyatt (1658-1757) Her Life and Her Ships (2012) (Contains 1:96 modeling plans set for Cumberland in pocket) https://www.seawatchbooks.com/ItemDisplay.php?sku=112001 The Great Ordnance Survey of 1698, a fasimile (2013) https://www.seawatchbooks.com/ItemDisplay.php?sku=113003 and The Warship Anne: An Illustrated History (2017) https://www.amazon.com/Warship-Anne-illustrated-history/dp/1844864391 Not being a modeler of 17th Century vessels, I haven't laid my hands on any of Endsor's books, but they are very highly regarded by 17th Century period modelers and I plan to pick them up for my general research library. They seem to represent the current state of the art in terms of historical research and likely include all the information one would have to otherwise laboriously mine from the reprints of contemporary works. Perhaps somebody who has any of them can provide an eyewitness review of them. (Library-building tip: google around and look for used or "remaindered" (publisher's close-outs) copies. These high quality specialty modeling volumes are often very expensive when first released to the relatively small modeler's market and, a year or three later, are "remaindered" for a fraction of their publication price. Used copies pop up at reasonable prices, as well, often when a deceased modeler's research library is sent off to the used book dealers. Prices for "classic" works remain high until reprints are available. Out-of-print and in demand volumes may require taking out a second mortgage, though.)

I don't doubt that, but the issue is, I believe, "compared to what?" Seawatch appears to me on first direct impression after a somewhat protracted chat with Cathy, to be a retirement online business run by a husband and wife. At present, Bob is incapacitated and Cathy is caring for him and keeping the business running. The "heavy lifting" of warehousing and shipping is outsourced. Their website needs to be rebuilt and the coding has been destroyed, so their son, who did the programming, has to start from scratch, this after losing his home in one of our firestorms. (Recovering from which is a near impossible task for many of the victims. "'Socialism' is when the fire department comes to put out the fire, 'Capitalism' is when you try to collect on your fire insurance policy.") What doesn't seem fair to me, assuming one knows the circumstances, is to expect the speed and efficiency of an international online marketing and delivery conglomerate. I didn't get an immediate email response, either, but Cathy called me back right away when I left a phone voicemail message and was most helpful. In the olden days, we had to wait for "mail orders" and nobody complained. We've been spoiled by modern mega-technology. Seawatch provides a very small niche publishing service for a very narrow spectrum of customers. I'm sure that in order to have that business model "pencil out," they have to do it with relatively limited business resources. Given that fact, I don't think it is fair to complain when one doesn't get an immediate response from some fellow working in a customer service "boiler room" in Mumbai when they email an inquiry. As I said, Seawatch ain't Amazon. If it weren't for them, I doubt the titles they publish would be available to the hobby at all. I really appreciate their efforts on our behalves. Everyone should appreciate the small entrepreneurs who provide the ship modeling fraternity access to parts, tools, information, and other products unique to the hobby. We are watching those sources dry up one by one because the smaller "one man band" businesses simply cannot compete with the likes of the huge online conglomerates. Scale wood is becoming increasingly hard to find as is amply demonstrated by the many posts lamenting the suppliers who have gone out of business. Chuck Passaro of Syren Ship Models has just stopped producing his line of scale rope because he can't keep up with the demand and maintain the quality control he feels he must. His posts concerning the abuse he has received from customers exhibiting "bad behavior," while sometimes related in humorous anecdotes, amply demonstrate what our suppliers have to put up with from spoiled and outrageously demanding consumers. I think we really need to take care of and respect the small businesses that are trying to survive by providing us what so many rely upon. When they are gone, there will be nothing but junky pirated Chinese kits, if that, and total scratch-building and that development doesn't bode well for the longevity of the model ship building hobby.

Generally painted white, I believe. White paint was the second cheapest paint, after "barn red" red lead oxide paint. It reflected the heat of the sun and weathered better than any other coating of the time. A white bottom was less prone to drying out and opening up and so required towing to keep it swelled tight less often when the boats were carried aboard on long voyages. It was also the most visible color available at the time, a particular advantage with dories, whaleboats, and ship's boats that came to be used used as lifeboats.

In the last 30 years, the introduction and perfection of Ultra High Molecular weight Polyethylene ("HMPE") braided fiber cordage has revolutionized the metal and fiber cordage industry. HMPE line has begun to replace wire rope for many applications. This rope is sold under the brand names Dyneema and Spectra fiber line. The two have slightly different performance parameters. Spectra has greater tensile strength in larger diameters and wears slightly better than Dyneema, but is more elastic than Dyneema, which is favored for standing rigging. Another type of HPME line is called Plasma rope, which has the greatest strength of all for its weight. Amsteel rope by Samson Rope, a Plasma rope, is as strong as steel, but has only 1/7 the weight of steel and is specifically marketed as a replacement for wire rope. These new light weight synthetics are much more flexible than wire rope and cable and are replacing metal rope across the board in many applications. 375 ton Amsteel-Blue Dyneema recovery tow rope: Sailing vessels have begun to adopt HMPE line for standing rigging as well, often serving HMPE shrouds to mimic the appearance of traditional fiber and metal rope and cable. The service also provides protection from UV degradation and chafe, which are problematic. UV resistance when left bare is 8 to 10 years, nearly the same lifespan of stainless steel. Reportedly, served and "tarred" or painted, the lifespan of HMPE cordage is nearly infinite. At a seventh the weight of steel, the reduction of weight aloft lowers the vessel's center of gravity and makes the vessel much stiffer, yielding better sailing performance. HMPE has been widely adopted by the racing fraternity for this reason. I don't think there's an America's Cup contender that isn't using it at this point. Below: a gang of Dyneema standing rigging with leathered hound eyes for a traditional wooden yacht. See: http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?227538-A-New-Rig-for-Julia-Parcelled-and-Served-Dyneema&highlight=Dyneema a description of the process and more photos.

Yes. No seaman would ever try to pull on a wire rope. Handling wire rope, which is really fairly flexible cable made up of a greater number of strands than the more rigid cable used for standing rigging, has a tendency when worn or damaged to have broken individual strands that spring out away from the cable. Understandably, these are called "meat hooks" and if one runs their hands carelessly down a cable and is caught by a "meat hook," at best, it's time to tell the sawbones to get out his sewing basket. Wire rope is not flexible enough to be tied off to anything and lacks the friction to hold any sort of knot. Wire rope which is used for halyards or sheets, when not permanently wound on a winch, will have a suitable length of fiber line spliced to its end with a "wire to rope splice" so that the "working end" of the wire rope is that length of fiber cordage. http://econologica.org/splice.html

Ah, ha! I thought you were talking about the table saw! Duh! As for the sander, as explained above, the luthier model will sand a thicker piece of wood. I wouldn't think it would be any more useful for ship modeling unless someone was working in very large scales. However, that said, the "three inch - six inch" distinction with the sanders mentioned in their website actually refers to the width of the abrasive sheets used on the drum. (It's a bit confusing in the website photo.) Both sanders will take two three inch sheets or one six inch sheet on the drum. The two three inch sheets are intended for sanding up to three inch wide stock, the two three inch sheets being different grits, so you could mount 80 grit on one side and hog off a lot of material and then move over to the other side of the drum and sand a finer surface with 180 grit or whatever grits you wish. The two 3" abrasive sheets are held on the drum with two metal wedges held in place with two screws, one wedge for each sheet. (Look closely at the picture. Alternately, on either model sander, one can mount a single six inch wide sheet on the drum and sand with a single grit of abrasive sheet, allowing sanding a flat piece of stock up to six inches wide. For this application, they have an optional six inch wide wedged bar to more easily load and hold the six inch wide abrasive sheet. You can mount a six inch sheet using the two three inch bars, but for eight bucks, the convenience of the six inch wedge is worth it. (In ensures getting an even tension on the abrasive sheet, as well.) I'll leave the screed on the Jim Saw posted in case somebody is interested.

There is no difference between the 230VAC and the 120VAC Model Machines saws. The 230VAC machine has a 230 volt motor and the 120 volt machine has a 120 volt motor. Both motors are 1/3 horsepower. The two options exist because two-phase and three-phase alternating current voltages vary from country to country in the world. The voltages aren't standardized. The two most common two-phase "mains voltages" are 120VAC and 230VAC. For example, North America and Mexico run on 120VAC, while much of Europe and South America run on 230VAC. (See: https://www.generatorsource.com/Voltages_and_Hz_by_Country.aspx) I'm not sure what you are referring to when you ask "Is the 6 inch wide that much more useful than the 3 inch wide machine?" I am only aware of a size difference in the Byrnes saws tables. The standard "Jim Saw" has a 12" wide table and the new "extended table" option has an 18" wide table. The new wider table makes cutting wide stock more convenient, to be sure, and if you had bucks to burn, it would be nice to have, but it's probably more useful for people who customarily cut larger pieces of stock than most modelers do. It probably would appeal to luthiers more than modelers. Before I would spring for the extended table, I'd certainly buy the cross-cutting sled. It is very finely made and as accurate as the basic saw and accuracy at high tolerances is what the Byrnes saw is all about. You can make your own cross-cut sled out of wood, but it won't be as accurate as the CNC machined Byrnes cross-cut sled. I'd advise anybody buying a Byrnes saw for modeling to "bite the bullet" if at all possible and purchase the basic saw or the extended table model with the following accessories because you'll eventually buy them anyway and you'll probably save a fair amount on shipping if it all comes in the same shipment: Sliding table (cross-cut sled) Extended rip fence Miter gage adjustable extension Rip taper gage Micrometer stop ("standard" inch measurements or metric, as might be your preference) Miter bar (extends miter gage) Replacement belt Accessory pack (Extra screws and miter pin some of which you will eventually drop, never to be seen again. Worth twice the cost in saved aggravation.) Zero clearance insert (One for the stock blade comes with the saw. You'll want one for each of the kerf widths of the thinner blades you buy.) Additional blades as required. (You'll want two or three thin ones, probably. Read this PDF before selecting blades: Byrnes Saw Operation.pdf 6.42 MB · 444 downloads . Also, read this entire thread before you decide on which accessories you want to purchase. It's full of good information and discussions on which accessories are best for ship modeling. I know that's going to add somewhere around $300 to the cost of the basic saw, plus what you add in blades and inserts, or $160 or so if you pass on the sliding cross-cut sled, but these accessories are really what one would want to get the greatest use out of the machine. What's the point of buying a saw that is accurate to thousandths of an inch and not springing for the $55 micrometer stop that will make measured .001" fence adjustments for you? If you read the above threads, you'll see that nobody has a bad word to say about the Byrnes table saw. As they say, it's the gold standard. It will hold its value, as well, so if you ever find yourself with no further use for it, you will be able to recover a good portion of your investment on resale. For the difference in the quality and accuracy of this saw over any others on the market, there's really no excuse for not paying a bit more for it except simply not being able to afford it an if that's a problem, consider that it will probably pay for itself in the savings realized by being able to mill your own wood.