Bob Cleek

The Theodore Alteneder and Sons drafting instrument company made stainless steel drafting triangles years ago. They came in various sizes. Alteneder made some of he highest quality drafting instruments in their day.  https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/drafting-triangle-with-handle-theo-alteneder  You'll have to track the eBay "drafting instruments" offerings for a while before you come across one these days. (In the last few years, high quality manual drafting instruments have become very collectible and can be surprisingly expensive, although there are still a few bargains to be found by the knowledgeable buyer.) Metal triangles can also be sometimes found on eBay in the machinist's tools section.
 
I'm somewhat confused by your report of accuracy problems on internet reviews. It's not rocket science to produce a 12" 90 degree triangle out of sheet metal. I'd expect most sheet metal shops worth their salt would be able to turn one out for you in a few minutes. What kind of accuracy are you talking about? A Starrett or Brown and Sharpe (these are identical products) draftsman's protractor is accurate to five minutes of arc. (It was Starrett's catalog item No. 362.) This is the instrument that would have been used by a draftsman who wanted the most accurate instrument available. They were frequently used to replace triangles. They come up on eBay with some frequency, or used to. They sold for $75 bucks in the 1960's. A mint example in a good condition velvet lined fitted case may now set you back $100+, but who knows on any given day on eBay. It's a lovely instrument with classic Starrett aand Brown and Sharpe "finestkind" quality.
 

 

I wouldn't be surprised if they were on the home-page. They are "classics." I believe I posted the URLs here once before. I agree that miniature and small-scale models do demand certain accommodations. The Navy standards aren't specifically intended for miniatures, but rather for models intended for museum display. Avoiding dissimilar materials is always a good practice. I'd add to that avoiding modern materials with unproven archival qualities. Many may not value their models enough to take such pains, but they may be selling themselves short. We never know if long after we're gone, our work, if it survives, may have value we never imagined. The builders of the "Prisoner of War" models come to mind. I'm sure they never could have imagined the present value of their few works which have survived. They used natural materials out of necessity and these were "archival" by chance. Were they built with many modern materials commonly used today, particularly the products of modern chemical technology, I doubt they'd have lasted as long. I experienced this phenomenon personally just the other day when my 1970's vintage Singer sewing machine "packed it in" when it's plastic gears crumbled to bits and pieces. (Fortunately, parts are available for me to rebuild it, although if one were to have a repair shop do so, it would be cheaper to buy a new machine.)

The Theodore Alteneder and Sons drafting instrument company made stainless steel drafting triangles years ago. They came in various sizes. Alteneder made some of he highest quality drafting instruments in their day.  https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/drafting-triangle-with-handle-theo-alteneder  You'll have to track the eBay "drafting instruments" offerings for a while before you come across one these days. (In the last few years, high quality manual drafting instruments have become very collectible and can be surprisingly expensive, although there are still a few bargains to be found by the knowledgeable buyer.) Metal triangles can also be sometimes found on eBay in the machinist's tools section.
 
I'm somewhat confused by your report of accuracy problems on internet reviews. It's not rocket science to produce a 12" 90 degree triangle out of sheet metal. I'd expect most sheet metal shops worth their salt would be able to turn one out for you in a few minutes. What kind of accuracy are you talking about? A Starrett or Brown and Sharpe (these are identical products) draftsman's protractor is accurate to five minutes of arc. (It was Starrett's catalog item No. 362.) This is the instrument that would have been used by a draftsman who wanted the most accurate instrument available. They were frequently used to replace triangles. They come up on eBay with some frequency, or used to. They sold for $75 bucks in the 1960's. A mint example in a good condition velvet lined fitted case may now set you back $100+, but who knows on any given day on eBay. It's a lovely instrument with classic Starrett aand Brown and Sharpe "finestkind" quality.
 

 

The Theodore Alteneder and Sons drafting instrument company made stainless steel drafting triangles years ago. They came in various sizes. Alteneder made some of he highest quality drafting instruments in their day.  https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/drafting-triangle-with-handle-theo-alteneder  You'll have to track the eBay "drafting instruments" offerings for a while before you come across one these days. (In the last few years, high quality manual drafting instruments have become very collectible and can be surprisingly expensive, although there are still a few bargains to be found by the knowledgeable buyer.) Metal triangles can also be sometimes found on eBay in the machinist's tools section.
 
I'm somewhat confused by your report of accuracy problems on internet reviews. It's not rocket science to produce a 12" 90 degree triangle out of sheet metal. I'd expect most sheet metal shops worth their salt would be able to turn one out for you in a few minutes. What kind of accuracy are you talking about? A Starrett or Brown and Sharpe (these are identical products) draftsman's protractor is accurate to five minutes of arc. (It was Starrett's catalog item No. 362.) This is the instrument that would have been used by a draftsman who wanted the most accurate instrument available. They were frequently used to replace triangles. They come up on eBay with some frequency, or used to. They sold for $75 bucks in the 1960's. A mint example in a good condition velvet lined fitted case may now set you back $100+, but who knows on any given day on eBay. It's a lovely instrument with classic Starrett aand Brown and Sharpe "finestkind" quality.
 

 

This discussion has me wondering a bit more about scale effect as it applies to color.  
I am wondering if @ 1:600  the black would look better if it were actually a very dark grey.
If it is an Atlantic Ocean vessel,  just a slight hint of green in the dark grey?

Personally Chris, at that scale the window look darn good.  I wouldn't try adding frames, etc.  Leave like they are.  If you were building at a larger scale, then it might be worth it.  

That's what I've decided to do. It's a 1/600 scale SS France so there are just so many tiny windows which are impossible to mask. As you can see here I can mask the general outline of the windows but the actual individual frames are way too small to mask and spray. The windows I just did are actually divided into 3 sections each so I now need to get white paint on two horizontal lines per window. Then there are the sections of windows above what I just painted which basically have the same issues only there are a lot more of them!
 
So my thinking was it would be great if I had something I could apply into each window and do a neater job and save a lot of eyestrain and time. I am going to try and learn how to dry brush and see if I can get white paint somewhat neatly on them that way after painting the black.

Weren't these articles on the NRG home-page for a long time ? At least I have been aware of them for some ten+ years.
 
While I have been advocating in principle the conclusions, the problem is, that many of the 'safe' materials and practices are not very useful for the miniature or small-scale shipmodeller, particularly, when building ships from the last quarter of the 19th century on. They are just not practical.
 
One recommendation, however, that is important to heed, is to use as few different materials as possible in any one model.

Perhaps apropos of not too awfully much, or possibly of interest: General Admiral, Russian Imperial Navy, 1858. Designed and built by William H. Webb. 
 
 
 
 

Proper India Ink is waterproof when dry, but it has to be used on an absorbent ground. It will dry on semi glossy paper, but takes forever. It's no good on plastic or an enamel finish.

IIRC, dried real India ink should not run under any circumstances. That's why it's used to write on biology specimen tags that can be placed in preservative liquid along with the specimen. It's basically lampblack and water, although shellac is often added in commercial bottled India inks as a binder. The shellac is soluble in alcohol and the alcohol mixes with water. Acrylics are often thinned with water and alcohol, also. There may be some problems with the alcohol in the ink, if any, affecting the alcohol-soluble acrylic paint, but I'd tend to doubt it. What you describe you are trying to do is exactly what India ink is most famously able to do. I think Jaeger offers the best explanation of the phenomenon you have described. 

This research paper from the Curator of Navy Ship Models, Naval Sea Systems Command, is also extremely helpful: https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Home/Warfare-Centers/NSWC-Carderock/Resources/Curator-of-Navy-Ship-Models/Lead-Corrosion-in-Exhibition-Ship-Models/
 
While "lead bloom" or lead oxidation, is the more commonly known issue, it is well for the modeler to become well aware of the archival properties of all materials used in a model and of archival construction practices. "It's a jungle out there!" and there are many materials, or combinations of materials, that aren't really suitable for a model one wishes to last as well as it might. The Navy's curatorial staff has produced an excellent paper, Specifications for Building Exhibition Ship Models, which is the Navy's specifications for any model they commission to be built commercially. While there's always room for innovation, any serious modeler would do well to keep these specifications in mind when building any model, even if they aren't building it for the U.S. Navy.  See: https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Home/Warfare-Centers/NSWC-Carderock/Resources/Curator-of-Navy-Ship-Models/Specifications-for-Building-Exhibition-Ship-Models/

Everyone has different work habits and abilities and mine are not the best.  I struggle to maintain a clean work environment.   Keeping an airbrush clean requires periodic disassembly so for me simple and rugged is better.
 
I have a Badger 350 airbrush.  In fact I have a spare but that’s another story.  It works well with my home mixed acrylic paints and is foolproof for me to disassemble and clean.  No long needles to bend.  It is available in three nozzle types, coarse, medium, and fine but the different nozzles all fit on the same body.  I pretty much just spray paint so I don’t feel that I need the additional features of a double acting mode.l.
 
My air source is a no name compressor bought at Menards for about $100.  It has a regulator to control air pressure- Very Important- and a 3 gallon tank.  Fitted with quick disconnects it also powers an air nailer and easily pumped up a flat tire on my wife’s car.
 
For me, having a good controllable air source is more important than a fancier airbrush.
 
Roger
 
 
 
 
 
 

It sounds like Chinese pirates weren't much different in the real clipper ship days than they are in the clipper ship model days.
 

That’s where I’ve seen that.  I saw that when I was a kid. One of the motivating reasons why clippers are my favorite design.

The colorized photo appears to be extensively "photoshopped." Note the addition of the ship, warehouse, and hills in the distance, the two men and a woman standing in the center foreground, the fellow carrying a timber halfway up the ramp, the absence of the jackstaff and the supporting pole on the port bow by the anchor. How many differences can you spot? 
 
I guest the colorist took some artistic license with the original photo.
 
 

 

Or cut a groove with whatever you've got and split the log with wedges and a maul. Not always possible, depending upon the log and the species, but that's the way they did it in the old days. Still works today.

Excellent point. However, it was my impression that no coppering at all was done until the vessel was first launched and swelled up, for the reason you note. What difference would it make to copper most of the hull when it was as likely to leak in the coppered as it was the uncoppered seams?

It was common practice (in naval dockyards, at least) to launch, check for any leaky seams, drydock, seal, then copper the bottom. Otherwise it would be harder to detect the source of water ingress and a pain to remove the copper to caulk the offending seam(s.)

I noticed. Maybe they ran out and were waiting for a delivery of more?
 
Taking a "second enlightened look" at the picture, it doesn't appear as if she's immediately ready for launching. I'd expect chain to be faked out on the ground to slow her down and more of the scaffolding to be removed and cleared away. The apparent lack of spectators ashore when a large crowd would be expected to attend the launching, and the crowd on deck, which I would expect not to be usual during a launching, may indicate that the event was some sort of "open house" shortly before launching, but not immediately before. 

I'm wondering why it appears she is being launched prior to all her plates being added.....?

You need a bigger workbench! Or not. Get two tables the same height and spread them as far apart as you want. You can also simply clamp a plank longer than your workbench to its top and put your ropewalk ends at either end of the plank. Or am I missing something here?

What a great picture! Thanks for posting it. 
 
While not a matter directly relevant to the previous discussion, I was amazed to seek how many people had climbed aboard to ride her down the ways, apparently. The photo would suggest more went down the ways along with her than watched from the shore and they all lined the rail to pose for the photographer! It appears that every one of them trudged up that ramp and then climbed that rickety wooden ladder to get up over the rail! No safety harnesses. No railings or lifelines. No "Safety First" signs in that shipyard, I'd wager!
 
Disembarking them once she was in the water must have been a good trick, too.

Mounted on the perminant display board and case