Bob Cleek

Grant    Everyone has their own way, but I would do the colors separately.  The white strip that is between the black and red it is key.  I have used pinstriping tape you can get from any auto parts store or on-line.  It will give a perfect line top and bottom.  After it is on, the entire hull can be hit with five or six coats of clear which will soften the edge of the striping tape as it does have a slight thickness and would be noticeable on close inspection.  The photo below has a relatively wide tape, but various widths are available.  (The finish on the model in the photo is way to shiny IMHO, but that is what the buyer requested.)  Egg shell/semi-gloss finish would probably be more appropriate.   If you opt not to use tape and just go with paint, be sure to seal the masking tape that you use to give the straight edge with a couple coats of clear.   It will minimize any paint bleeding under the tape.   
Allan
 

Mark,   yes, probably even if green.  It is probably just me, but I think it would be seriously meshugga to pay the extra cost of shipping green wood from Brazil to Europe, as well as having to deal with the agricultural customs regulations for wood that could harbor pests.  Just speculation, but I assumed that it would be kiln dried before it was loaded into a container.  But you would be paying a lot for water were it indeed green wood.
 
 
 
I come at this from a very specific aspect of all this. 
This is strictly based on my philosophy and experience, an opinion piece only:
 
I favor POF at a higher end scale, but not a heroic one.   A scale of 1:48 would be ideal, detail can be had without too much faking.  Not wishing to sacrifice too much detail, but needing to be practical about display size, I opted for 1:60.  I wish my imaginary fleet to all be the same scale.  Even at 1:60 a first rate man of war is an imposing presence. 
Using Castello for framing at the larger range of scale,  My guess is that a single frigate size vessel may use about 2"x6"x48" or more of your lumber stock.  What with the curving timbers, there is a high proportion of waste.  Castello is so expensive that it would only make sense to have open framing below the wale, on both sides. 
With wood this expensive and it becoming difficult to restock,  serious tools are needed to process it.  This means that a free standing bandsaw with a blade that is stronger than mere steel is needed.  The waste from a tablesaw - multiple passes, flipping the stock is too expensive in wood lost to kerf.  The one advantage that a tablesaw has over a bandsaw (other than initial cost) is that you do not need to worship at the alter of blade replacement.
 
If you intend to use this just for planking, deck furniture, and masting,  your cost in lumber per vessel will be significantly less.  However, with boards this large, hard  and heavy,  it will still require serious shop machinery to work them.
 
Now,  if you have the proper tools, skills and time  and you load up a large supply,  you may be able to sell milled Castello to the community.  With it being a sellers market, you would stand a chance of recovering what you spend on tools, blades, and lumber in a reasonable time, and supply a sought after product.  HOWEVER, given that this would be skilled labor on your part, I doubt that you would be able to sell this at a price that sufficiently rewards your labor.

That sounds exactly like the way it's done on full sized decks!   In real life, the tar is heated, just like "hot mop" roofing tar, and placed in a purpose-made ladle with a long spout on it, or a #10 tin can with the edge bent to a spout if you don't do enough of it to make buying a paying ladle worthwhile. The hot tar is poured into the seams with a bit of overflow around the edges. After it solidifies to a rubbery consistence, a sharp broad chisel or even a razor blade in a scraper, is run down each seam to trim the excess stopping off level with the plank edges. If the job was to be done "Bristol fashion," the deck would then be sanded or holystoned to clean up the decks where the stopping had gone over the edges. Otherwise, it would just be left to wear off. On smaller yacht decks, we'd tape the seam edges, if not the entire deck, which solved the problem of the stopping getting all over the deck. On big ships in the old days, they didn't bother with that. The really nice thing about marine glue is that if for whatever reason the stopping pulled loose from the edges of the planks, it was a simple matter to "spot heat" it so it flowed back and stuck to the plank edges. With the modern polysulfide goops, you have to clean out the whole seam and refill the stopping.                                  

I must say that seam stopping ("grout" is plaster that is spread between tiles) does look extremely realistic, the out of scale grain figuring notwithstanding. How did you accomplish this effect? I can't imagine you cooked the "tar" (the actual term is "marine glue," actually, though it's not a glue at all, but a concoction of tar and rubber) and then paid the seams with the resulting liquid out of a tiny seam stopping ladle!
 

https://www.fisheriessupply.com/davey-and-co-jeffery-s-no-2-black-marine-glue-deck-caulking-compound
 
 

Yeah, but was organic, water-based,  and environmentally friendly! Not that nasty old-fashioned stuff made out of tree sap, vegetable oil, and chalk. Doesn't that give you a warm satisfied feeling that you're saving the earth?  

That sounds exactly like the way it's done on full sized decks!   In real life, the tar is heated, just like "hot mop" roofing tar, and placed in a purpose-made ladle with a long spout on it, or a #10 tin can with the edge bent to a spout if you don't do enough of it to make buying a paying ladle worthwhile. The hot tar is poured into the seams with a bit of overflow around the edges. After it solidifies to a rubbery consistence, a sharp broad chisel or even a razor blade in a scraper, is run down each seam to trim the excess stopping off level with the plank edges. If the job was to be done "Bristol fashion," the deck would then be sanded or holystoned to clean up the decks where the stopping had gone over the edges. Otherwise, it would just be left to wear off. On smaller yacht decks, we'd tape the seam edges, if not the entire deck, which solved the problem of the stopping getting all over the deck. On big ships in the old days, they didn't bother with that. The really nice thing about marine glue is that if for whatever reason the stopping pulled loose from the edges of the planks, it was a simple matter to "spot heat" it so it flowed back and stuck to the plank edges. With the modern polysulfide goops, you have to clean out the whole seam and refill the stopping.                                  

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?

The thicker the thread, the thicker the rope. The easiest is to buy heavier thread for your layup. You can also double or triple the number of threads you attach to each hook. Just make sure the tension of the multiple thread strands is equal on each hook. 
 
If you read this section on ropemaking, you will find charts of formulae, recipes, if you will, for making different thicknesses of rope.

I don't think there will be a problem with that small amount BUT there are lead free solders that are not silver solder requiring high heat. 
stay-brite by J W Harris Co is lead free, it blackens like silver solder and has a high silver content.  I have used it and it has replaced true silver solder in all but rare cases in my shop.  Nothing we do with scale models requires the strength of a true silver solder.
Look at Jeweler supply outlets - there are lead free solders that are easy to work with.
Kurt
 

Bob,
 
It was a mess! Note that I said I built the model (from a kit) about 50 years ago. It was the last deck that I calked with tar!
 
As I recall I laid the planks and then ran a knife blade between them to create the gap for the grout. Then I heated the tar and rubbed the thick liquid into the grooves. And that left a lot of tar on the tops of the planks. After scraping the excess tar away I tried sanding the deck, but that just smeared the tar over the planks, so I had to scrape again.
 
I didn't pack the grooves with cotton and oakum before applying the tar, so it isn't truly "authentic."
 
The kit planks were a coarse grained wood - out of scale, but typical for kits of that period. And the caulk grooves were also too wide for scale.
 
The "tar" was actually a mil-spec black marine glue. We just called it "tar" because it looked like tar. It has aged a bit now, with half a century of dust accumulated on the tar.
 

Beyond what I said above, I've got no more information on David Goodchild. These days, I have to remind myself more and more frequently that people I've known for years are getting older, too. A lot of them were older than I in the first place. "Whatever happened to Charlie?... Oh, he died a couple of years ago." is sadly a common experience for me these days. The last time he "dropped off the radar" a few years ago, some of us who had done business with him over the years were hoping somebody would take over his business. I think it's pretty much a "one man show," but his catalog was amazing and from all indications was always thriving. 
 
Also, I believe he did not maintain any inventory of printed books, but rather produced each reprint on demand as it was ordered. I'm not sure how what technology he used, but his books were not photocopies of the original, but rather separately typeset bound volumes. The process was that an order would come in and he'd have the copy printed and bound and then sent out. I'm not positive, but I don't think he was doing the printing in house. It's also entirely possible that the local pandemic restrictions shut down his printing operation. He lives, or used to live, in the suburbs of Philadelphia, as I recall. I don't know what the pandemic situation is there right now. Like a lot of businesses, he may simply be shut down due to the pandemic. Your order would have been right around the time the "lock downs" started and it may have been stuck in the pipeline.
 
If it's any consolation, The David Goodchild I know would never take somebody's money and skip out. There's got to be an explanation there somewhere.

It is indeed disappointing, but such errors are one of the drawbacks of kits generally. It's very difficult for anyone starting out to discern which kits are the really good ones. Fortunately, MSW contains a lot of information on kit quality that is invaluable in that regard. Kits provide valuable experience to one degree or another and, at some point, one realizes they've built enough kits that they can "ride a two-wheeler without training wheels" and start seriously kit-bashing and scratch-building.
 
In the grand scheme of things, it's a very small detail. Frankly, nobody other than an eagle-eyed modeling wonk is ever going to notice it and I'm sure to uninitiated eyes it will appear just as it ought to be. In fact, from an artistic perspective, the exaggeration of something that's supposed to be there but otherwise can't be seen at scale may well satisfy the eye of the beholder. Don't let it discourage you!  Our first models are never out best. Modeling is a process and it would quickly get boring if each successive model we build doesn't pose new challenges and new opportunities to "beat our personal best." Perfection is probably impossible, but the exercise of pursuing it offers continuing satisfaction from a hobby that can keep one interested for a lifetime. Do the best you can with her, as you obviously are. The care you are taking with this one shows you've got what it takes. Models are like a lot of things. You'll always cherish the memory of your first one, but you'll get a lot better at it the more you do it.
 
 

Yeah, but was organic, water-based,  and environmentally friendly! Not that nasty old-fashioned stuff made out of tree sap, vegetable oil, and chalk. Doesn't that give you a warm satisfied feeling that you're saving the earth?  

It’s a shop!  Unless you have a magic ability to avoid spilling or splattering paint the floor is going to take a beating.  What’s wrong with the flooring that you already have?  If you want to dress it up a bit add a coat or two of grey alkyd porch and deck paint.
 
Roger

People are always fast with 'buts', but I would be somewhat cautious with this kind of vinyl floor tiles. I did my mother's porcelain-painting workshop floor with them and with time two issues emerged: a) the adhesive started to ooze out between the seams of the tiles and obviously started to attract dirt, resulting in an ungainly appearance of the light coloured floor b) with time also some corners of the tiles started to lift off and became ripped off in high-traffic areas. Not sure whether this was a fault due to my inexperience as a floor-layer, or is an inherent flaw of the material.
 
The dirty seam problem probably could be abated by laying single black and white tiles, as then the seams would not be very visible.
 
Otherwise, I personally would rather go for a wooden/laminate floor ... more forgiving, when tools drop or paint/solvents are spilled. It can also be refurbished by sanding and revarnishing.

I must say that seam stopping ("grout" is plaster that is spread between tiles) does look extremely realistic, the out of scale grain figuring notwithstanding. How did you accomplish this effect? I can't imagine you cooked the "tar" (the actual term is "marine glue," actually, though it's not a glue at all, but a concoction of tar and rubber) and then paid the seams with the resulting liquid out of a tiny seam stopping ladle!
 

https://www.fisheriessupply.com/davey-and-co-jeffery-s-no-2-black-marine-glue-deck-caulking-compound
 
 

It is indeed disappointing, but such errors are one of the drawbacks of kits generally. It's very difficult for anyone starting out to discern which kits are the really good ones. Fortunately, MSW contains a lot of information on kit quality that is invaluable in that regard. Kits provide valuable experience to one degree or another and, at some point, one realizes they've built enough kits that they can "ride a two-wheeler without training wheels" and start seriously kit-bashing and scratch-building.
 
In the grand scheme of things, it's a very small detail. Frankly, nobody other than an eagle-eyed modeling wonk is ever going to notice it and I'm sure to uninitiated eyes it will appear just as it ought to be. In fact, from an artistic perspective, the exaggeration of something that's supposed to be there but otherwise can't be seen at scale may well satisfy the eye of the beholder. Don't let it discourage you!  Our first models are never out best. Modeling is a process and it would quickly get boring if each successive model we build doesn't pose new challenges and new opportunities to "beat our personal best." Perfection is probably impossible, but the exercise of pursuing it offers continuing satisfaction from a hobby that can keep one interested for a lifetime. Do the best you can with her, as you obviously are. The care you are taking with this one shows you've got what it takes. Models are like a lot of things. You'll always cherish the memory of your first one, but you'll get a lot better at it the more you do it.
 
 

I think that is very true to some extent. I've restored a couple of old apparently sailor-made models and have one "in the on deck circle" in my shop right now. I believe it's of the Archibald Russell, although I haven't gotten around to researching it enough to be sure. It's my impression that it isn't so much that the sail area is proportionately larger, but that the rig is perfectly accurate in terms of overall scale and the run of the lines, but details like blocks are over-scale, and the detail of the hull is wanting, particularly below the waterline. Sailors didn't often see the underwater parts of their ships, of course. While their work aloft gave them a good recall of the run of the rigging, but in the top hamper deprived them of an overall sense of proportion of various details, like blocks. I'd say, though, that however crudely executed the model might be, if the rigging is right, it's probably a sailor-made model. 

That's a good point. Scale distance is a major factor in coloring. Subtle is good. It's a matter of the modeler's taste and judgment.
 
You can be sure I've seen my share of planked decks from every angle. Indeed, I've paid more than my share of deck seams. Some of the most common errors in today's models involve over-scale details like deck seams, timber joints, trunnels and plugs, and copper plating tacks. 

"The included instructions had me pencil in the lines and dots before the shellac went on. I don't really want to completely refinish the deck, (unless you think its a good idea), so I will try and scrape/sand it off first, or ill try the Goof Off. Can you explain what you mean by "reconsider your planking length and butt spacing?" Again, I am just following instructions. Did I do something poorly?"
 
It's good that you shellacked over the pencil marks. That will prevent the pencil lead from smearing if you try to remove the tape adhesive with solvent. I'd try the solvent, Goof Off or acetone, first. The adhesive will probably wipe off easily. If not, then try scraping. Scraping is the more radical option. If you need to, you can always scrape and sand the surface down to bare wood and refinish the whole thing. You wouldn't be the first of us who's done that. (Don't ask me how I know this!  )
 
Well, it's not that big of a deal, but black dots don't represent the appearance of a laid wooden deck. Metal fastenings through the planks into the deck beams are always covered with a wooden plug of the same species of wood used for the planking, or fastened with trunnels (pegs) and, from a distance, are virtually invisible. I don't know why the instructions would have one represent deck planking fastenings with a black pencil dot.  Metal fastenings are always set deeply into the deck planks and plugged with wood so that fastenings, which were often iron on older ships would not rust and would not stand proud when the deck wore down some. If trunnels (wooden pegs) were used to fasten the deck planks, they were wood-colored and not black. (Trunnels were often made of a slightly darker wood of a different species, frequently of locust.) The wood plugs or trunnels also permitted the decks to be "holystoned," that being "sanded" clean with flat stones having a hole in the center which permitted a long handle to be inserted so they could be swung back and forth like a mop. This kept decks, which were often covered with tar dripping from the rigging aloft, particularly in the heat of the tropics, clean, but at the cost of considerable abrasion of the wood over time. Holystoning wouldn't be possible if nail heads were standing proud of the surface of the deck.
 
As for the planking, I'm not certain of the scale of your model, and it is a somewhat esoteric detail which may not matter to you at this point in your modeling, but there are scale considerations with plank length. How long would the average deck plank be on your vessel? The longer the better. Planking stock was rarely longer than twenty-four to thirty feet long because that was the limit of what could be gotten out of the tree. A deck would not be planked with six foot planks. The distance between the planking butts (ends) should be somewhere in the range of 18' to 24'. On the model, that should be reflected in the applicable scale size. The length is significant because it affects the butt spacing in the same way bricks are laid so the vertical joints are staggered. If the plank butts all were placed on the same deck beam, that would be a very weak deck at that point. If the planks are staggered "like bricks in a wall" so that the butts are all as far apart as possible on each deck beam, that will yield the strongest deck structure possible. There are methods of laying out the deck planking to "stagger the butts." The below thread explains the methods of laying out deck planking in great detail. This is a small detail and failing to do it correctly doesn't "ruin" a model at all, but it is good to remember that a model is a collection of small details which  make up a whole. The more small details that are done right, the better the model. 
 
 

I think that is very true to some extent. I've restored a couple of old apparently sailor-made models and have one "in the on deck circle" in my shop right now. I believe it's of the Archibald Russell, although I haven't gotten around to researching it enough to be sure. It's my impression that it isn't so much that the sail area is proportionately larger, but that the rig is perfectly accurate in terms of overall scale and the run of the lines, but details like blocks are over-scale, and the detail of the hull is wanting, particularly below the waterline. Sailors didn't often see the underwater parts of their ships, of course. While their work aloft gave them a good recall of the run of the rigging, but in the top hamper deprived them of an overall sense of proportion of various details, like blocks. I'd say, though, that however crudely executed the model might be, if the rigging is right, it's probably a sailor-made model. 

"The included instructions had me pencil in the lines and dots before the shellac went on. I don't really want to completely refinish the deck, (unless you think its a good idea), so I will try and scrape/sand it off first, or ill try the Goof Off. Can you explain what you mean by "reconsider your planking length and butt spacing?" Again, I am just following instructions. Did I do something poorly?"
 
It's good that you shellacked over the pencil marks. That will prevent the pencil lead from smearing if you try to remove the tape adhesive with solvent. I'd try the solvent, Goof Off or acetone, first. The adhesive will probably wipe off easily. If not, then try scraping. Scraping is the more radical option. If you need to, you can always scrape and sand the surface down to bare wood and refinish the whole thing. You wouldn't be the first of us who's done that. (Don't ask me how I know this!  )
 
Well, it's not that big of a deal, but black dots don't represent the appearance of a laid wooden deck. Metal fastenings through the planks into the deck beams are always covered with a wooden plug of the same species of wood used for the planking, or fastened with trunnels (pegs) and, from a distance, are virtually invisible. I don't know why the instructions would have one represent deck planking fastenings with a black pencil dot.  Metal fastenings are always set deeply into the deck planks and plugged with wood so that fastenings, which were often iron on older ships would not rust and would not stand proud when the deck wore down some. If trunnels (wooden pegs) were used to fasten the deck planks, they were wood-colored and not black. (Trunnels were often made of a slightly darker wood of a different species, frequently of locust.) The wood plugs or trunnels also permitted the decks to be "holystoned," that being "sanded" clean with flat stones having a hole in the center which permitted a long handle to be inserted so they could be swung back and forth like a mop. This kept decks, which were often covered with tar dripping from the rigging aloft, particularly in the heat of the tropics, clean, but at the cost of considerable abrasion of the wood over time. Holystoning wouldn't be possible if nail heads were standing proud of the surface of the deck.
 
As for the planking, I'm not certain of the scale of your model, and it is a somewhat esoteric detail which may not matter to you at this point in your modeling, but there are scale considerations with plank length. How long would the average deck plank be on your vessel? The longer the better. Planking stock was rarely longer than twenty-four to thirty feet long because that was the limit of what could be gotten out of the tree. A deck would not be planked with six foot planks. The distance between the planking butts (ends) should be somewhere in the range of 18' to 24'. On the model, that should be reflected in the applicable scale size. The length is significant because it affects the butt spacing in the same way bricks are laid so the vertical joints are staggered. If the plank butts all were placed on the same deck beam, that would be a very weak deck at that point. If the planks are staggered "like bricks in a wall" so that the butts are all as far apart as possible on each deck beam, that will yield the strongest deck structure possible. There are methods of laying out the deck planking to "stagger the butts." The below thread explains the methods of laying out deck planking in great detail. This is a small detail and failing to do it correctly doesn't "ruin" a model at all, but it is good to remember that a model is a collection of small details which  make up a whole. The more small details that are done right, the better the model. 
 
 

Hallelujah bro!  I would add to that: yards.

I think that is very true to some extent. I've restored a couple of old apparently sailor-made models and have one "in the on deck circle" in my shop right now. I believe it's of the Archibald Russell, although I haven't gotten around to researching it enough to be sure. It's my impression that it isn't so much that the sail area is proportionately larger, but that the rig is perfectly accurate in terms of overall scale and the run of the lines, but details like blocks are over-scale, and the detail of the hull is wanting, particularly below the waterline. Sailors didn't often see the underwater parts of their ships, of course. While their work aloft gave them a good recall of the run of the rigging, but in the top hamper deprived them of an overall sense of proportion of various details, like blocks. I'd say, though, that however crudely executed the model might be, if the rigging is right, it's probably a sailor-made model. 

I am somewhat envious.  My active experience with ships are ones with steel decks.  Now I am too lazy to volunteer on ones with caulked seams...except maybe as a docent.
 
    On the subject of perception, sometimes first hand knowledge can be skewed.  It was noted that prisoner of war models (and old swabby models) made by topmen and other crew that spent alot of time aloft seemed to be out of proportion:  the sail area was proportionately larger than the hull, because presumably that is how they saw the world.  Urban legend, perhaps, but that's my story and I'm sticking to it.