Bob Cleek

Well, yes and no. Just to put a finer point on it, the ventilator cowl was around long before Stephens designed Dorade. What was added to Dorade was a box, properly called a "Dorade box," upon which the ventilator cowl is mounted. The box has a hole on the top for the ventilator, a half-height baffle in the middle, and a hole offset on the other side of the baffle. This permits water to enter the cowl vent, run down into the box on one side of the baffle and out drain holes, while permitting the air to move over the baffle and down the hole through the deck on the other side of the baffle. The boxes weren't original to Sephens' Dorade design. They were added shortly after her launch to solve the problem of water running into the accommodation below. "Boxes like on Dorade" became "Dorade boxes," and, it seems, over the years, many have come to incorrectly call ordinary cowl vents "Dorade boxes," but the cowl vents preceded the boxes by quite some time. Dorade's boxes on a model of her.

Was that holder for the giant Allen wrench from the factory or something you added. It's a simple and elegant solution to "where did I last put it?" problems!

You only forget to clean an airbrush properly once.

Not that I know of, but I would expect that one that would suit could be readily sourced. I've heard of cheap digital calipers being cannibalized to create similar digital readouts. That said, it seems like a lot of trouble for little advantage. I've never had a battery go dead on a mechanical micrometer, either. If I were going to attempt it, I'd expect the easiest way to go would be to make a mount for a digital dial indicator that mounted into the table slide slot and measured the movement of the fence or work piece.

You'll find the Byrnes thickness and disk sanders are of equal quality and usefulness. Jim Byrnes's tools are masterpieces of restrained elegance in design and broad utility. It's rare to encounter a line of products with which no fault can be found, save, perhaps, that there aren't enough of them. I'd love to see him come up with a few more!

This is very interesting, important, and helpful information. Those of us "of a certain age," are keenly aware of how short a span of time 35 years is. I have a 1/4" scale pilot schooner model (cased) I built forty years ago which is in excellent condition despite the limitations of materials technology available at that time. She is rigged with cotton thread. Your experience with polyester thread mirrors my own experience using it (mistakenly) to sew full-scale marine canvas work. It lasted less than a year or so and then turned to crumbles. Prompted by your post, I did a bit of research and found to my surprise that polyester thread isn't recommended for use in UV exposed applications and in such only has a life-expectancy of about two years according to the manufacturers. Surely, polyester thread that is protected from direct UV exposure will last longer, but "longer" is a relative thing in this instance. Like most plastics, it will deteriorate over time, characteristically by becoming increasingly brittle, UV or not. The present state-of-the-art thread in terms of longevity is supposedly polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) thread. PTFE is basically Teflon. It's also the same stuff that white plumber's thread tape is made of. The manufacturers claim it is impervious to UV exposure and has an unlimited lifespan. It has a lower strength rating than polyester thread, but polyester thread's strength rapidly decreases as it ages until it is quickly less strong than PTFE thread. More recently, similarly "bulletproof" threads have become available, such as Kevlar and Nomex thread which are extremely strong and fire-resistant, respectively. As always, there's a catch. PTFE thread, which is the present "gold standard" costs three to ten times what polyester thread does. Kevlar and Nomex are even more expensive than that. Moreover, all of these polymer (plastic) threads are extremely difficult to color and generally require coloring at the time the fibers are manufactured, adding pigment when the plastic is compounded. This stuff can't be dyed by dipping it in strong coffee, to say the least. As the issue raised in this thread is primarily the increasing cost of natural fiber thread, it quickly becomes apparent that "you get what you pay for" and natural fiber, even at higher prices than in the past, is the most cost-effective alternative for getting the job done right. From what I can see, polyester thread is about the last thing I'd ever want to use on anything I wanted to last. It is definitely not "archival." I'm with you. I can't for the life of me figure out why a respected museum would specify polyester thread for rigging models. Chuck apparently "has to dance with the girl he brought," because the museum which "pays the piper gets to call the tune," but if I were faced with similar circumstances, I'd make sure I'd made a record by sending them written notice that while the job would be done exactly as specified, I could not warrant the suitability of the materials specified. Nobody wants to have a customer coming back to bite you in the butt three or five years later, as they always do when their otherwise contraindicated specified method or material fails. That's been the case so often in boatyards with customers who insist the newest untried product on the market they saw advertised in a boating magazine be used for expensive maintenance jobs that the yards routinely "paper" the customer to make sure they are covered if the new coating or whatever turns out to be a dud.

Shortly after Longridge wrote his book, Emco-Maier in Austria came out with their first Unimats, which pretty much set the future standard for "multi-machines" in the model-making size range. I expect Roemer discovered that the post-war market for a modeling multi-tool was limited and would require prohibitively expensive international print marketing to create enough demand to justify resuming production. Ironically, Emco-Maier benefited from the Marshall Plan's subsidized reconstruction of European manufacturing industries, while Roemer would not have been able to do so. Also, in 1955, people were discovering television which, as most modelers know, really kicked the teeth out of the home modeling hobby market and it's never recovered since. Time was, most "gentlemen" had hobbies of one sort or another to fill their leisure evening time after work. A look at the many hobby magazines published pre-War and shortly thereafter reveal how extensive this activity was. (See: https://books.google.com/books/about/Popular_Mechanics.html?id=49gDAAAAMBAJ for all the Popular Mechanics back issues on line. Lots of ship model plans in the old magazines.) The modeling machine niche was always a small one occupied by "one-man shops" or small family concerns in many instances. Fortunately, the internet has made sourcing modeling tools and materials far easier for hobbyists today and made the international consumer market more reachable to modeling vendors who often remain small volume operations like Byrnes Model Machines, Vanda-Lay Industries, and Syren Ship Models. They'd probably be far less viable enterprises without the internet's "word-of-mouth" and search-engine-driven advertising platform.

It's often easy enough to run a sharp plane down the edge of the piece after it's cut at a right angle and obtain a bevel. (Or, turn the plane upside down in a vise and run the workpiece over the plane blade for even better control of the cut.) I've also used the Byrnes disk sander for beveling. The table tilts for that purpose. You'll pay as much for a tilting arbor saw and will get a lot more use out of the Byrnes sander for other tasks as well. The biggest limitation of a tilting arbor saw for really fine work is that to get a zero clearance on the blade opening, you have to make a custom saw plate for every angle you want to bevel.

Although a horde of ants climbing in your rigging might be a bit disconcerting for some!

There's really nothing easier than dyeing scale rope black with India ink. For short lengths, I've even "cheated" and used a black permanent "Magic Marker." Truth be told, I don't think anybody would miss the black, and if they did, they could dye it themselves. It's not quite so easy to dye polyester, though.

I know little about thread, but there is such a thing as "cotton wrapped polyester" thread. It supposedly offers "the best qualities of both." It's just a completely uninformed thought, but might the cotton component in "cotton/polyester" thread make it less susceptible to unraveling. One thing I do know is that cotton swells (the lay tightens) when wet, while polyester doesn't. Does anybody know if cotton/polyester might work better than polyester thread for laying up scale line? I have no idea whether this solves the skyrocketing price dilemma, of course.

Very entertaining and I expect helpful to those starting out!

Probably one of the best sources for information on small brushes is an old-school sign painter. Sign painting "quills" are very expensive and the sign painters took great care with them so they'd last a long time. Unfortunately, sign painting is another craft which has taken a big hit in the "digital age" with computer-generated vinyl letters and signs. They aren't the same, of course, and a knowledgeable eye can spot the computer-generated lettering straightaway, particularly on curved surfaces such as boat transoms. It also bears mentioning that sign painting paints are quite suitable for modeling and probably less expensive when bought in pint cans rather than oen ounce bottles. They have the same requirements: lots of very fine pigment and good leveling ability. Sign painters need a paint that will cover well in a single stroke of the brush. They can't be going over a letter over and over again. "One Shot" is a long-popular brand of sign paint in the U.S. Oil based, like all good paint, of course.

There are many products now on the market which permit you to make your own decals with an ink-jet printer. They are popular with model railroaders for signage on model railroad rolling stock. There is a special type which permits printing white letters. I've never used it, but they've got it.

Natural bristle brushes (the expensive ones) are far less forgiving of abuse than synthetic bristle brushes. Natural bristles are best for oil-based paints, while synthetic bristles are best for water-based (for want of a better term) acrylics. Natural bristle brushes require proper cleaning and storage if they are to survive. Harsh detergents wash the natural oils from bristle brushes and greatly shorten their lifespans. I've also noticed that there is now a wide selection of small-sized brushes, primarily synthetics, sold at very reasonable prices as "nail decorating brushes." These are sold for use by manicurists painting fingernails with all those dots and lines and so on that are now fashionable with some women. eBay is full of them. Some are high-quality and some not. The prices seem much less than similar products in modeling tool catalogs.

Not to mention that FB is a huge time-waster. Half the posts these days are advertisements, another third a "click bait" asking you to "share if you agree." Then there are the "friends" who feel the need to post pictures of what they cooked for dinner last night, as if anybody gives a hoot. Worst of all, on the subject-matter related pages, it seems to attract people who know little about a subject, but are nonetheless compelled to say something, anything, about everything that's posted. The percentage of actually valuable information on FB is really rather small. Unfortunately, so many people seem to live on it, that FB can sometimes be the only way to get in touch with others. (It's also good for looking up old girlfriends and feeling great about "dodging a bullet..." or not.

Very nicely done!

Ship modeling was a very popular hobby in the first third of the Twentieth Century, particularly between the wars. Magazines like Popular Mechanics featured ship model plans in nearly every issue. Remember, this was at a time when there was no television and money was very tight. Guys had to find something to do with their time. A lot of models were built then, but by today's "state of the art" standards, they appear quite crude. Some were "sailor built" models by seamen who'd "swallowed the anchor," (retired) and others by hobbyists. The "sailor-built" models are often apparent by their attention to the accuracy of the rigging (more apparent the more complicated the rigging is.) You'll see minor rigging features that would have been known to a man working in the rigging of a ship, while elsewhere on the model, particularly with respect to the hull lines, the model wouldn't be so accurate. That, of course, would be expected if the modeler knew his subject from the perspective of somebody who knew the vessel's rig intimately, but may well have never seen the vessel out of the water. Closer examination would be necessary to form a confident opinion, but this model may be "sailor-built." The anchor davit on the port bow is an interesting feature (the anchor may have come adrift of that,) what appears to be a crane to port of the foremast is unusual and warrants some research, and the rig appears to have been given more attention than the hull and deck furniture. (The "crane" may offer a clue to the use of the vessel if its purpose can be identified.) The "sailor-built" models will bring a higher value, particularly if they are of an identifiable ship. That said, this model appears to be a rather nice bit of "folk art" that is now somewhere around ninety years old. It could use a good cleaning (with care... don't put it in the dishwasher!) and probably some light restoration if some of the rigging has come adrift. It's certainly worthy of display, if it's to your taste. (But I'd lose the plywood shadow box, if I were you.) If not, it will be appreciated by somebody. There are those who collect things like old homemade fishing plugs, duck decoys, whirly-gigs,... and ship models. It may be "primitive," but have you priced a Grandma Moses painting lately?

EdT's method is excellent. It can, however, be further refined by the use of powered dedicated production set ups which yield perfectly shaped blocks on a "mass production" basis. This is Chuck Passaro's method of construction for his Syren Ship Models company's ready-made boxwood blocks. In deference to Chuck's "trade secrets," I'll say no more about how (I think) he does it, but I'd strongly suggest one consider clicking on his "Syren" link on the MSW forum home page and ordering what you need from him. They are perfect and very reasonably priced. https://www.syrenshipmodelcompany.com/

I think Chuck's idea is best. It's easily done and should correct the error entirely. I disagree that Just leaving it as drawn isn't going to be noticed. Maybe not by an ignorant eye, but you will always know it's there and if you ever show it to a knowledgeable viewer, it's the sort of glaring error that jumps right out and pokes you in the eye. You can't have a ship that's going to shoot out a third of its standing rigging with her first broadside! Shame on Mamoli. This kind of error by an established kit manufacturer is inexcusable in my book, but unfortunately all too frequent.

Amazing work on the ventilation cowls, Michael! I'd never have thought it possible if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes, and in brass, too. Side-mount half-cowls were once rather common on power boats in the US. The "step" at the bottom of the doghouse here seems as if it would allow for a Dorade box-type drain arrangement with the outlet below the cowl about an inch above the deck on the side of the "step" on the prototype, assuming a drain could be run from inboard. I've never seen them installed in pairs on the same side, which I expect in this prototype was in recognition of the fact that they don't work very well. They are only half the capacity of a full cowl, so that's half the air flow. Because they are up against the cabin sides, the air flow is further limited. Finally, as the air circulation on a boat of this type is from forward aft, they aren't in a position to contribute much when placed well aft, especially next to a hatch that is frequently open anyway, although when closed up, they would allow some air to exit the saloon. This isn't any criticism of the model, mind you. Just observations about what is now a somewhat rarely encountered fitting. I've seen similar brass fittings, e.g., bells and binnacles, gold plated to good effect. The result is a model that looks like it's brass is kept polished. If you know a dentist or somebody who works in a dental lab, they may be able to do it for you inexpensively. It's a simple process, as you probably know. It only takes a microns-thing coating. Your photos are much appreciated. Before these, I would never have considered making cowl ventilators any way other than by casting or electro-plating a wax plug painted with metallic paint. Either method has significant difficulties and limitations. I expect if one were of a mind to do so, the flanges of two halves as here could be silver soldered together and the excess filed off to yield a full cowl. I vaguely anticipate that making a few of those may well be in my future. Outstanding work!

It's possible that it is well-preserved. If the waters are cold enough, there won't be borers. That was so with the Mary Rose, wasn't it? She was down much longer. One would almost expect that many, of not all undamaged cannon would have been salvaged. (The burst one could easily have been left behind by the salvors.) Cannon were valuable and salvage techniques were surprisingly sophisticated in those days. "Wet" diving bells (open bottoms) had been in common use for quite some time before the Bonhomme Richard sank. Over a hundred years earlier, In 1658, Albrecht von Treileben was permitted to salvage the warship Vasa, which sank in Stockholm harbor on its maiden voyage in 1628. Between 1663-1665 von Treileben's divers were successful in raising most of the cannon, working from a diving bell.

And we won't even begin to tell war stories of what mishaps can happen running an engine lathe! (Google images: "lathe accidents" on an empty stomach only!)

Hospitals and medical schools have extensive courses and protocols for handling "sharps." There are particular ways surgeons are taught to handle scalpels to minimize the danger of cuts. Baring going to medical school, you might consider getting a pair of stainless steel gloves. Google "cut-resistant gloves." There are many different styles, brands, and types. They are not expensive at all. The one pictured below is made for meat cutters, I believe. They are woven of yarn with a stainless steel core. https://www.superiorglove.com/en/white-rhino-7-gauge-wire-core-cut-resistant-composite-knit-gloves

"I wish I could get more people to convert over to using real knives with Rc62 blades and learning how to sharpen them instead of using X-Acto." Very true! The history of the X-Acto knife is an interesting example of marketing. The system was first invented in the 1930's as a surgical scalpel. Up to about that time, most scalpels were "one piece" and had to be expertly sharpened for each use after heat-sterilization, which dulled their edges. The X-Acto knife was an attempt to cash in on the market for disposable blades. (Like Gillette with "safety" razors, the handles were low-priced "loss leaders" and they'd make their money selling the blades.) The X-Acto scalpel failed because its threaded collet closer and slotted collet holding system was difficult to clean and sterilize. Not a minute too soon, however, the X-Acto company changed the name of their "scalpel" to a "hobby knife" and the rest was history. They still make their money on the disposable blades and if blades are not intended to be resharpened, there's no need to make them out of expensive tool steel that holds an edge for a good long time. I use X-Acto (or Excel) brand blades because they are better than the ones that come from the Patriotic People's Hobby Knife Blade Collective, and I sharpen them frequently as I work, keeping a stone handy on my bench. I have to say, though, that I don't use them all that much. Wherever possible, I use saws, sharp quality chisels, and small planes for shaping wood (avoiding sandpaper for shaping tasks.) I use various types of surgical scissors for rigging line cutting. You can do a lot with an X-Acto knife for as long as it stays sharp, but, more often than not, it's not the best tool for the job. Your knives above are real works of art and warrant the investment in a good blade that will hold an edge for a good long time. I think the reason it's hard to get people to use "real knives" as well as other edged tools, is that sharpening and maintaining a good cutting edge is fast becoming a lost art. Time was, (as some of us remember well,) every boy owned his very own pocket knife by age seven or eight and was carefully instructed in how to properly sharpen it. It was practically a rite of passage. Now, it's common to see guys pay hundreds of dollars for Lie Nielsen planes and then go out and spend hundreds more for fancy electric "sharpening systems" that promise instant gratification without skill or experience.