Bob Cleek

Zinsser's Bulls Eye prepared shellac is definitely what everybody seems to use here in the U.S. unless they are mixing their own shellac with flakes and alcohol. HOWEVER, what is shown above is amber shellac. Shellac comes in a range of colors on the "honey brown" or "amber" spectrum. Amber shellac is "amber colored." A single coat of Bulls Eye amber shellac will color the shellacked surface with a transparent film that has an "amber colored" or "light orange/brown" cast. Additional coats of amber shellac will add additional layers of this coloration to the point where a half-dozen or so coats will result in a very dark brown color. If this coloration is undesirable on your model (and I've never seen an application where I would have desired it on a model at all) Zinsser's Bulls Eye Clear Shellac should be used. The amber shellac is shellac's natural color. The clear shellac is bleached so that the shellac adds no coloration to the surface to which it's applied. For the purposes of sealing wood in modeling applications, I would strongly recommend that clear shellac be used.  If a change in the appearance of the wood is desired, a thinned stain or dye should be used, followed by a coat of thinned shellac to seal the surface.
 
Other than for finishing large flat areas without surface detail, such as bright finished hulls, model bases and cases, and the like, I would not recommend the use of any "wipe on" finish such as an oil commonly used to finish furniture. Such oils, unless greatly thinned, are thick and tend to collect in the nooks, crannies, and details of a model and are very difficult to apply in a sufficiently thin coating. Application of oils is also very difficult because they cannot be "rubbed" very effectively and rubbing always risks accidentally doing damage to small detail parts applied to the surface.  Finally, most rubbed oils take time to fully polymerize and so tend to attract and collect dust and dirt that are very difficult, if not impossible, to remove. Finishing scale models well requires a "scale" finish coating. The thicker the coating, the more the thickness of the coating impairs the crispness of scale detail that is to be desired. This means that paints should be of high quality with a relatively high content of finely ground pigment. High quality commercially bottled "scale model paint" is made to meet this requirement, as are quality "tubed" artists' oils and acrylics which can be suitably thinned by the user for bristle brush or airbrush application. Thinned clear shellac ("2 pound cut" or less) provides an advantage in this respect as a clear finish or sealer over opaque paints, stains, and dyes in that it provides an extremely thin coating which soaks into the wood surface and is virtually invisible when the alcohol solvent quickly evaporates. (Shellac is also an excellent fixative for rigging knots and "starching" rigging line to shape catenary curves in the line. Thicker "cuts" of shellac, which can be obtained from pre-mixed shellac by simply allowing a sufficient amount of the alcohol solvent to evaporate, is also suitable for use as an adhesive which, where the occasion demands it and can be easily dissolved and removed with the application of alcohol. 
 
Where bare wood is to be portrayed on a model, such as is frequently the case with decks, and the wood species used fails to provide the required scale appearance of bare wood, which is often the case, I would recommend the use of a thinned stain or a dye. Achieving the effect desired from the application of a stain or dye can be tricky and testing and experimentation is essential before application to be sure the effect one wishes will be achieved. If one isn't familiar with working with mixing finishes, they should find that one of the bottled premixed stains offered by the model paint manufacturers will provide a more certain outcome than mixing their own. 
 
Finally, the necessity of testing all finishes and finish combinations on a model before application to the model cannot be stressed enough. Frequently, correction of a "disaster" in the finishing process is near impossible to accomplish. Due consideration must be given to the compatibility of finish materials is critical. While shellac somewhat uniquely can be considered a "universal" sealer that "plays well" with any subsequent coating applied to it, dissimilar coating products often are not compatible with each other and the application of one over the other can result in disastrous consequences. Particularly, oil-based finishes and water-based finishes (e.g., acrylics) should never be presumed to be compatible with each other without testing. Even similar types of coatings from different manufacturers must be tested for compatibility with each other. Notably, some acrylic paints are thinned with water, others with alcohol, and still others, according to their manufacturers, are thinned with proprietary thinners. As the saying goes, "For best results, follow the manufacturer's instructions!  

Right you are. Gyros is another Chinese pirate product. The "real deal" original is the U.S. made V.F. Rogers Drill Bit Set - #61 to #80. However, V.F.Rogers, the original manufacturer, doesn't seem to be in business anymore. MicroMark is selling the Rogers Drill Bit Set which they say they get from Excel hobby knives company. Excel's catalog says they are made in the U.S.A., but I don't know if Excel is now making them or just wholesaling them or what. They've been around for a long time. Another mystery thanks to the world of "offshoring" and Chinese import tool clones. 
 
$30 from MicroMark. The Rogers Drill Bit Set, #61 - #80 (Set Of 20), 20 drill bits from #61 to #80, Includes an indexed drill bit stand, Ultra-sharp high-speed drill bits (micromark.com)  $30.00 USD from MicroMark.  $53.51 USD from Excel Hobby Blade Corporation, which makes or wholesales them these days. 20 Piece Drill Dome Set – Excel Blades You can get individual wire gauge bits from McMaster-Carr, but they aren't cheap! drill bits | McMaster-Carr.  MicroMark sometimes sells little plastic tubes with ten or a dozen wire gauge bits of the same size at dramatically reduced prices as "loss leaders" when they have their big annual sales. I bought the whole range of 20 bits for the Rogers' stand in tubes of ten from MicroMark some time ago. So far, they seem to work fine. Buying them singly to replace broken bits in the drill stand can get painful quickly. McMaster-Carr wants $5.54 USD apiece for an 80 ga. 3/4" long uncoated HSS bit and $1.39 USD for a 60 ga. 1 5/8" one. I don't doubt that the McMaster-Carr bits will cut better and be better all-around in terms of quality control, but I have no idea if they break any less than the cheaper (and probably Chinese made) bits from the hobby outlets. There's a break-even point there somewhere, but I have no idea whether paying top dollar for U.S. made commercial quality bits is worth the money for general modeling use. 
 
Original V.F. Rogers Drill Bit Set. Note "Drill Stand" embossed on top of base center, not "Gyros" letter "G."

 
Original Rogers drill stand bottoms: Manufacturer's ID and patent number: 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Zinsser's Bulls Eye prepared shellac is definitely what everybody seems to use here in the U.S. unless they are mixing their own shellac with flakes and alcohol. HOWEVER, what is shown above is amber shellac. Shellac comes in a range of colors on the "honey brown" or "amber" spectrum. Amber shellac is "amber colored." A single coat of Bulls Eye amber shellac will color the shellacked surface with a transparent film that has an "amber colored" or "light orange/brown" cast. Additional coats of amber shellac will add additional layers of this coloration to the point where a half-dozen or so coats will result in a very dark brown color. If this coloration is undesirable on your model (and I've never seen an application where I would have desired it on a model at all) Zinsser's Bulls Eye Clear Shellac should be used. The amber shellac is shellac's natural color. The clear shellac is bleached so that the shellac adds no coloration to the surface to which it's applied. For the purposes of sealing wood in modeling applications, I would strongly recommend that clear shellac be used.  If a change in the appearance of the wood is desired, a thinned stain or dye should be used, followed by a coat of thinned shellac to seal the surface.
 
Other than for finishing large flat areas without surface detail, such as bright finished hulls, model bases and cases, and the like, I would not recommend the use of any "wipe on" finish such as an oil commonly used to finish furniture. Such oils, unless greatly thinned, are thick and tend to collect in the nooks, crannies, and details of a model and are very difficult to apply in a sufficiently thin coating. Application of oils is also very difficult because they cannot be "rubbed" very effectively and rubbing always risks accidentally doing damage to small detail parts applied to the surface.  Finally, most rubbed oils take time to fully polymerize and so tend to attract and collect dust and dirt that are very difficult, if not impossible, to remove. Finishing scale models well requires a "scale" finish coating. The thicker the coating, the more the thickness of the coating impairs the crispness of scale detail that is to be desired. This means that paints should be of high quality with a relatively high content of finely ground pigment. High quality commercially bottled "scale model paint" is made to meet this requirement, as are quality "tubed" artists' oils and acrylics which can be suitably thinned by the user for bristle brush or airbrush application. Thinned clear shellac ("2 pound cut" or less) provides an advantage in this respect as a clear finish or sealer over opaque paints, stains, and dyes in that it provides an extremely thin coating which soaks into the wood surface and is virtually invisible when the alcohol solvent quickly evaporates. (Shellac is also an excellent fixative for rigging knots and "starching" rigging line to shape catenary curves in the line. Thicker "cuts" of shellac, which can be obtained from pre-mixed shellac by simply allowing a sufficient amount of the alcohol solvent to evaporate, is also suitable for use as an adhesive which, where the occasion demands it and can be easily dissolved and removed with the application of alcohol. 
 
Where bare wood is to be portrayed on a model, such as is frequently the case with decks, and the wood species used fails to provide the required scale appearance of bare wood, which is often the case, I would recommend the use of a thinned stain or a dye. Achieving the effect desired from the application of a stain or dye can be tricky and testing and experimentation is essential before application to be sure the effect one wishes will be achieved. If one isn't familiar with working with mixing finishes, they should find that one of the bottled premixed stains offered by the model paint manufacturers will provide a more certain outcome than mixing their own. 
 
Finally, the necessity of testing all finishes and finish combinations on a model before application to the model cannot be stressed enough. Frequently, correction of a "disaster" in the finishing process is near impossible to accomplish. Due consideration must be given to the compatibility of finish materials is critical. While shellac somewhat uniquely can be considered a "universal" sealer that "plays well" with any subsequent coating applied to it, dissimilar coating products often are not compatible with each other and the application of one over the other can result in disastrous consequences. Particularly, oil-based finishes and water-based finishes (e.g., acrylics) should never be presumed to be compatible with each other without testing. Even similar types of coatings from different manufacturers must be tested for compatibility with each other. Notably, some acrylic paints are thinned with water, others with alcohol, and still others, according to their manufacturers, are thinned with proprietary thinners. As the saying goes, "For best results, follow the manufacturer's instructions!  

Zinsser's Bulls Eye prepared shellac is definitely what everybody seems to use here in the U.S. unless they are mixing their own shellac with flakes and alcohol. HOWEVER, what is shown above is amber shellac. Shellac comes in a range of colors on the "honey brown" or "amber" spectrum. Amber shellac is "amber colored." A single coat of Bulls Eye amber shellac will color the shellacked surface with a transparent film that has an "amber colored" or "light orange/brown" cast. Additional coats of amber shellac will add additional layers of this coloration to the point where a half-dozen or so coats will result in a very dark brown color. If this coloration is undesirable on your model (and I've never seen an application where I would have desired it on a model at all) Zinsser's Bulls Eye Clear Shellac should be used. The amber shellac is shellac's natural color. The clear shellac is bleached so that the shellac adds no coloration to the surface to which it's applied. For the purposes of sealing wood in modeling applications, I would strongly recommend that clear shellac be used.  If a change in the appearance of the wood is desired, a thinned stain or dye should be used, followed by a coat of thinned shellac to seal the surface.
 
Other than for finishing large flat areas without surface detail, such as bright finished hulls, model bases and cases, and the like, I would not recommend the use of any "wipe on" finish such as an oil commonly used to finish furniture. Such oils, unless greatly thinned, are thick and tend to collect in the nooks, crannies, and details of a model and are very difficult to apply in a sufficiently thin coating. Application of oils is also very difficult because they cannot be "rubbed" very effectively and rubbing always risks accidentally doing damage to small detail parts applied to the surface.  Finally, most rubbed oils take time to fully polymerize and so tend to attract and collect dust and dirt that are very difficult, if not impossible, to remove. Finishing scale models well requires a "scale" finish coating. The thicker the coating, the more the thickness of the coating impairs the crispness of scale detail that is to be desired. This means that paints should be of high quality with a relatively high content of finely ground pigment. High quality commercially bottled "scale model paint" is made to meet this requirement, as are quality "tubed" artists' oils and acrylics which can be suitably thinned by the user for bristle brush or airbrush application. Thinned clear shellac ("2 pound cut" or less) provides an advantage in this respect as a clear finish or sealer over opaque paints, stains, and dyes in that it provides an extremely thin coating which soaks into the wood surface and is virtually invisible when the alcohol solvent quickly evaporates. (Shellac is also an excellent fixative for rigging knots and "starching" rigging line to shape catenary curves in the line. Thicker "cuts" of shellac, which can be obtained from pre-mixed shellac by simply allowing a sufficient amount of the alcohol solvent to evaporate, is also suitable for use as an adhesive which, where the occasion demands it and can be easily dissolved and removed with the application of alcohol. 
 
Where bare wood is to be portrayed on a model, such as is frequently the case with decks, and the wood species used fails to provide the required scale appearance of bare wood, which is often the case, I would recommend the use of a thinned stain or a dye. Achieving the effect desired from the application of a stain or dye can be tricky and testing and experimentation is essential before application to be sure the effect one wishes will be achieved. If one isn't familiar with working with mixing finishes, they should find that one of the bottled premixed stains offered by the model paint manufacturers will provide a more certain outcome than mixing their own. 
 
Finally, the necessity of testing all finishes and finish combinations on a model before application to the model cannot be stressed enough. Frequently, correction of a "disaster" in the finishing process is near impossible to accomplish. Due consideration must be given to the compatibility of finish materials is critical. While shellac somewhat uniquely can be considered a "universal" sealer that "plays well" with any subsequent coating applied to it, dissimilar coating products often are not compatible with each other and the application of one over the other can result in disastrous consequences. Particularly, oil-based finishes and water-based finishes (e.g., acrylics) should never be presumed to be compatible with each other without testing. Even similar types of coatings from different manufacturers must be tested for compatibility with each other. Notably, some acrylic paints are thinned with water, others with alcohol, and still others, according to their manufacturers, are thinned with proprietary thinners. As the saying goes, "For best results, follow the manufacturer's instructions!  

Right you are. Gyros is another Chinese pirate product. The "real deal" original is the U.S. made V.F. Rogers Drill Bit Set - #61 to #80. However, V.F.Rogers, the original manufacturer, doesn't seem to be in business anymore. MicroMark is selling the Rogers Drill Bit Set which they say they get from Excel hobby knives company. Excel's catalog says they are made in the U.S.A., but I don't know if Excel is now making them or just wholesaling them or what. They've been around for a long time. Another mystery thanks to the world of "offshoring" and Chinese import tool clones. 
 
$30 from MicroMark. The Rogers Drill Bit Set, #61 - #80 (Set Of 20), 20 drill bits from #61 to #80, Includes an indexed drill bit stand, Ultra-sharp high-speed drill bits (micromark.com)  $30.00 USD from MicroMark.  $53.51 USD from Excel Hobby Blade Corporation, which makes or wholesales them these days. 20 Piece Drill Dome Set – Excel Blades You can get individual wire gauge bits from McMaster-Carr, but they aren't cheap! drill bits | McMaster-Carr.  MicroMark sometimes sells little plastic tubes with ten or a dozen wire gauge bits of the same size at dramatically reduced prices as "loss leaders" when they have their big annual sales. I bought the whole range of 20 bits for the Rogers' stand in tubes of ten from MicroMark some time ago. So far, they seem to work fine. Buying them singly to replace broken bits in the drill stand can get painful quickly. McMaster-Carr wants $5.54 USD apiece for an 80 ga. 3/4" long uncoated HSS bit and $1.39 USD for a 60 ga. 1 5/8" one. I don't doubt that the McMaster-Carr bits will cut better and be better all-around in terms of quality control, but I have no idea if they break any less than the cheaper (and probably Chinese made) bits from the hobby outlets. There's a break-even point there somewhere, but I have no idea whether paying top dollar for U.S. made commercial quality bits is worth the money for general modeling use. 
 
Original V.F. Rogers Drill Bit Set. Note "Drill Stand" embossed on top of base center, not "Gyros" letter "G."

 
Original Rogers drill stand bottoms: Manufacturer's ID and patent number: 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Personally, I would shy away from oil on models. In case of decks, I would use a nitrocellulose-based sanding filler (not the acrylic-based ones). Depending on the wood, one or two coats will be sufficient. Don't apply to liberally and rub down with finest (0000) steel-wool. Dedust carefully and perhaps use a magnet to catch any swarf from the steel-wool. Such a treatment will not change the apearance of the wood significantly - decks on ships were never treated, as it would make them slippery and unsafe.
 
In principle, one should not rely on glue alone for fastening, unless for larger surfaces. Normally, such deck-fittings would actually not sit on the deck, but would be attached to structural elements of the hull and planking would go around them. As the items in question seem to be cast from white-metal, I would carefully drill pin-holes into their bottom, insert a short pin temporarly to help locating the corresponding hole on the deck, drill this hole and then insert pins of appropriate lengths. As the parts seem to be metal, using epoxi for glueing is good advice. Otherwise, the nail varnish (or better zapon varnish) also works, as it adheres well to metal (zapon varnish is traditionally used to protect silver-ware from tarnishing) and sheer-forces are taken up by the pins.
 
Shellac either in flakes or as ready-made solution should be readily available in the UK. Not sure, whether this French brand is still available in those post-Brexit days, but Liberon does have shellac-solution. 
 

Which is the product that you are naming "oil"?
For the deck furniture that is wood, PVA to bond.
For metal - two part epoxy.
For plastic - no idea.
PVA requires a porous or rough surface for its hyphae to get a grip. rough bare wood.
Epoxy will bond to which ever material it meets - except maybe plastics or if your "oil" is actual oil - like mineral oil or castor oil that stays liquid - no bond.
If it is a polymerizing oil  - Tung, Linseed, or various nut oils - the epoxy will bond to it and the strength of the oil bond to wood will be the strength of the fitting's bond.
 
Old style oil based vanish was often Linseed with a heavy metal catalyst to speed polymerization.
Polyurethane is straight up plastic.  If this is what you mean by varnish, I am with you in finding it unacceptable.
 
In any case, any fitting should bond to the bare wood.  Protect the footprint of the fitting with tape before you apply any clear finish.
You seem determined about the oil,  so suggesting half saturated shellac as a primer or solo and rhen full strength shellac if a clear layer is desired.
If you are serious about assuring that the fittings stay bonded, add a mechanical component.
This is tricky to do.  For metal or plastic,  a solid brass pin - fit into a hole in the middle of the fitting's footprint and into a hole in the deck. -epoxy both ends.
For a wood fixture - a bamboo "dowel" "trunnel" instead of brass.  PVA.  - This is really "old school".

Castrovejo would the keyword to watch out for re. eye surgery instruments. I think he was a Californian surgeon. I have various scissors, needle-holders and such.

If you don't already have it, Harold Underhill's "Masting and Rigging the Clipper Ship and Ocean Carrier" is an indispensable reference for clippers. He describes everything in detail, with hundreds of illustrations and full page plates, and appendices telling how to calculate the sizes of everything. The book has the most inclusive index I have seen, with page numbers for every part of the rigging. It is a joy to read and learn about ships of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
 
I'll be watching this one to see how it develops!

I’m used to the Real Rogers Drill bitts and still have my Rogers stand.  The replacement drills on order are Chicago Latrobe, supposed to be made in the USA.  We’ll see.
 
Roger

Right you are. Gyros is another Chinese pirate product. The "real deal" original is the U.S. made V.F. Rogers Drill Bit Set - #61 to #80. However, V.F.Rogers, the original manufacturer, doesn't seem to be in business anymore. MicroMark is selling the Rogers Drill Bit Set which they say they get from Excel hobby knives company. Excel's catalog says they are made in the U.S.A., but I don't know if Excel is now making them or just wholesaling them or what. They've been around for a long time. Another mystery thanks to the world of "offshoring" and Chinese import tool clones. 
 
$30 from MicroMark. The Rogers Drill Bit Set, #61 - #80 (Set Of 20), 20 drill bits from #61 to #80, Includes an indexed drill bit stand, Ultra-sharp high-speed drill bits (micromark.com)  $30.00 USD from MicroMark.  $53.51 USD from Excel Hobby Blade Corporation, which makes or wholesales them these days. 20 Piece Drill Dome Set – Excel Blades You can get individual wire gauge bits from McMaster-Carr, but they aren't cheap! drill bits | McMaster-Carr.  MicroMark sometimes sells little plastic tubes with ten or a dozen wire gauge bits of the same size at dramatically reduced prices as "loss leaders" when they have their big annual sales. I bought the whole range of 20 bits for the Rogers' stand in tubes of ten from MicroMark some time ago. So far, they seem to work fine. Buying them singly to replace broken bits in the drill stand can get painful quickly. McMaster-Carr wants $5.54 USD apiece for an 80 ga. 3/4" long uncoated HSS bit and $1.39 USD for a 60 ga. 1 5/8" one. I don't doubt that the McMaster-Carr bits will cut better and be better all-around in terms of quality control, but I have no idea if they break any less than the cheaper (and probably Chinese made) bits from the hobby outlets. There's a break-even point there somewhere, but I have no idea whether paying top dollar for U.S. made commercial quality bits is worth the money for general modeling use. 
 
Original V.F. Rogers Drill Bit Set. Note "Drill Stand" embossed on top of base center, not "Gyros" letter "G."

 
Original Rogers drill stand bottoms: Manufacturer's ID and patent number: 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Right you are. Gyros is another Chinese pirate product. The "real deal" original is the U.S. made V.F. Rogers Drill Bit Set - #61 to #80. However, V.F.Rogers, the original manufacturer, doesn't seem to be in business anymore. MicroMark is selling the Rogers Drill Bit Set which they say they get from Excel hobby knives company. Excel's catalog says they are made in the U.S.A., but I don't know if Excel is now making them or just wholesaling them or what. They've been around for a long time. Another mystery thanks to the world of "offshoring" and Chinese import tool clones. 
 
$30 from MicroMark. The Rogers Drill Bit Set, #61 - #80 (Set Of 20), 20 drill bits from #61 to #80, Includes an indexed drill bit stand, Ultra-sharp high-speed drill bits (micromark.com)  $30.00 USD from MicroMark.  $53.51 USD from Excel Hobby Blade Corporation, which makes or wholesales them these days. 20 Piece Drill Dome Set – Excel Blades You can get individual wire gauge bits from McMaster-Carr, but they aren't cheap! drill bits | McMaster-Carr.  MicroMark sometimes sells little plastic tubes with ten or a dozen wire gauge bits of the same size at dramatically reduced prices as "loss leaders" when they have their big annual sales. I bought the whole range of 20 bits for the Rogers' stand in tubes of ten from MicroMark some time ago. So far, they seem to work fine. Buying them singly to replace broken bits in the drill stand can get painful quickly. McMaster-Carr wants $5.54 USD apiece for an 80 ga. 3/4" long uncoated HSS bit and $1.39 USD for a 60 ga. 1 5/8" one. I don't doubt that the McMaster-Carr bits will cut better and be better all-around in terms of quality control, but I have no idea if they break any less than the cheaper (and probably Chinese made) bits from the hobby outlets. There's a break-even point there somewhere, but I have no idea whether paying top dollar for U.S. made commercial quality bits is worth the money for general modeling use. 
 
Original V.F. Rogers Drill Bit Set. Note "Drill Stand" embossed on top of base center, not "Gyros" letter "G."

 
Original Rogers drill stand bottoms: Manufacturer's ID and patent number: 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Great progress, Keith! Congratulations on the great outcome on your surgery.
 
Just a thought in passing: These days (in the US, at least) many of the surgical instruments used are "disposable." It's not worth the cost in time and labor to autoclave and sterile package them after each use as was done in the good old days. Regrettably, I expect some of these discards are piled up for sale in large lots to resellers on eBay or to be resold in Third World countries and a lot of it is now sent to the landfill as "bio-hazard waste." You might mention to your surgeon that you'd appreciate it if s/he would save the disposable instruments for you. There's probably a nice Castroviejo iris scissors in your surgical tray, along with maybe some nice tweezers. The eye and micro-surgeons have the best medical instruments to repurpose for modeling use. Unfortunately, I lost my "connection" for "dull," (a relative term) dental burrs some time ago when my friend, and institutional dentist working for the state, told me they were now under an order to "bio-hazard bag" all their discards without exception.  I suppose that's a prudent protocol, but I hate to think that for every kid that makes a trip to the emergency room, there's a nice needle holder that goes into the trash bin.  

I like to drill with conventional HSS Drill bitts.  I use my Sherline Lathe fitted with a milling column and sensitive drilling attachment.  This allows me to clamp the object being drilled in a vise secured to the lathe cross slide to accurately position the drill bit over the center punched mark.  I do not have the touch for using carbide drill bitts.  They usually shatter on the first hole.
 
My current project involves cross drilling a .020” hole through a 1/16” brass tube.  I need 48 of these tiny pieces.  I decided to drill them as a row of holes along the tube, the individual pieces to be cut apart later.  I filed a flat on the top of the tube and center punched each hole location.  I had bought a brand new set 61-80 Gyros Brand wire sized drills from Amazon. I chucked the correct sized drill bitt and started drilling.  Each of the first 8 holes took forever even with considerable pressure on the drill.  Different lubricants and drill speeds made no difference.  Frustrated, I rummaged around my tool supplies and found a similar sized no-named drill bitt bought long ago.  It drilled through each hole like it was butter. 
 
The Gyros drills heavily promoted by Amazon are Chinese Imports. I just ordered a set of Made in USA replacements.  
 
Roger

Apologies to all, who looked here in vain for new developments, but real life severely interfered with my workshop time and the zen mental state to carry out miniature work ...
 
In the meantime, I wish all Forum Members a peaceful Christmas and a successful New Year 2024 !

Another bit about rivets as a reference to putting them on models.
 
On the Cleveland class cruisers of WWII that I am familiar with. Below the water line rivet heads were to be "as nearly flush as possible." The leading edges of hull plates of different thicknesses were chamfered by grinding to about 45 degrees. Backing plates were inside the hull plating. Quite a bit of effort was made to reduce drag.
 
Above the water line backing plates were outside the hull plating. Rivet heads were visible if you were standing close to them, but had very slight height above the plating and slightly conical. This was also true of the rivets on the turrets.
 
None of the riveting would be noticeable from more than a few yards/meters distant. There is no reason to put them on models.
 
I don't know how many decades this type of riveting goes back before the 1930s, but at some point builders began taking steps to reduce underwater drag.

You might want to check out Model Building with Brass by Ken Foran. Model Building with Brass book by Ken Foran (thriftbooks.com) This relatively new book contains a wealth of information on the subject.
 
There are surely those with far more experience that I who will weigh in, so for what little it may be worth, if it is the "fork on a rod with a hole drilled in a thick spot just above the neck of the fork" in the diagram that you want to make, you might want to "do the math" first. While I can't tell from the drawing whether the hole is to be drilled through a "flattened" section of the rod or through a round sectioned "swelled" or "ball" section of the rod, either way, I don't think you can fabricate a 1.70 MM flat (or "ball") with a .50 MM (or slightly larger) hole on a length of 1.15 MM brass rod without adding material to the 1.15 MM rod stock. There doesn't seem to be enough "meat" there to work the available material do it.
 
I don't know if you have a suitable lathe, which would make the task relatively easy, but even without a lathe, the task is possible, but will take more care and time. Simply put, the fork, neck, and "ball with a hole in it" is formed from square bar machinable brass and the 1.15 MM wire stock is silver-soldered into a hole in the end of the "ball with a hole in it. As the part looks like it's not the only one on the model, machining it as explained below makes the uniform fabrication of a number of the same part a lot easier "on an assembly line" basis. You can modify the following suggestion to suit the tools you have available if necessary. 
 
1.)     Cut a section of solid machinable square brass bar stock of the exact square section size as the forks and as long as the distance between the open end of the fork and the "ball with a hole in it, plus a suitable length to permit drilling a tailstock center and parting off at the end of the "ball with a hole in it."  If the forks are not square in section, use square stock the same size as the widest dimension of the fork. If you can't find square bar stock exactly the size of the fork's (widest) outside dimension, use square bar stock of the least-oversized bar stock available. 
 
2.)     Using machinist's "Prussian blue" or alcohol soluble permanent marker ink, carefully layout the placement of the two holes necessary the shape of the fork ends, the "notch" in the solid square bar to be removed to form the two sides of the fork, the shape of the ends of the fork sides, the "neck" of the fork, and the diameter of the "ball" section.  If you must use bar stock that is oversized and/or the fork is rectangular in section, layout the amount of waste to be removed to reduce the fork to the proper outside dimensions taking care that the amounts to be removed are equal on both sides of the stock retained in order to retain the concentricity of the forks, the "neck" and the "ball with a hole in it. Also mark the dead centers of each end of the section of bar stock.
 
3.)      Preferably using a drill press or mill/drill (preferably with an x-y table) to ensure perpendicularity, drill two holes of the required diameter(s) entirely through the flat-sided solid bar stock in the appropriate locations, one to form the eyes of the fork and one to form the hole in the "rod." (These two holes are drilled parallel to each other through the centerline of the bar stock.) Carefully drill a suitably sized center hole in the "ball with a hole in it" end of the bar stock to accommodate the lathe tailstock center, which would preferably be a live center if one is available.
 
4.)     Chuck the fork end of bar stock into the lathe headstock and mount the tailstock center into the other end of the bar. Turn the shapes of the fork shoulders, "neck" between the fork shoulders and the "ball with a hole in it," and the "ball" itself following the layout forming the "shoulders and neck" of the fork and the "ball" shape as per the layout and the detail of the part shape as you've laid it out. (The .50 MM hole will end up exactly in the middle of the "ball" section if your layout and drilling was accurate.) Turning the "ball" shape can be done using a file to shape it by eye (and template), by a custom half-round cutting tool, or a template and "duplicating" attachment on the lathe, or even a "ball turner" if one is available. However, the shape of the end of the ball where the hole will be drilled to insert the 1.15 MM wire must be decided first. If it is to have a "sharp" transition, the end of the ball can be perfectly round. If it is to appear to transition gradually to the diameter of the 1.15 MM wire, the curved transition will have to be formed when turning the ball. The completion of the forming of the end of the ball, however, is best done by parting off the surplus end of the bar and doing the shaping "in the open" free of the tailstock center. When the "ball with the hole in it has been parted, but the "bottom end" not completely turned, leaving the workpiece in the headstock chuck, place a tailstock chuck holding a 1.15 MM drill bit in the tailstock and, using the tailstock advance, drill through the center of the end of the ball end and through to hole in the ball. Then finish the turning of the ball end. If a curved shoulder transition between the ball and the 1.15 MM wire is desired, a short piece of the 1.15 MM wire can be inserted and the "shoulder" between the ball and the wire worked right up to the wire to turn a seamless transition. Note, however, that there isn't a lot of "meat" in the "ball" to hold the 1.15 MM wire. The larger you can make the "ball," the more space there will be for the 1.15 MM hole. By your measurements, there will only be .275 MM on either side of the 1.15 MM hole into the 1.70 MM ball. This won't matter once a good silver-soldered joint is making it all one piece, but the size of the hole will impact the appearance of the ball and you may have to do some drawing and planning of the shape of the ball so the appearance of a "swelled ball on a 1.15 MM shaft" is achieved. An experimental "dry run" on the wire to ball connection is probably indicated and it may be necessary to turn down the diameter of the 1.15 MM wire to provide a "peg" at the end to be soldered into a smaller hole in the "ball." +
 
5.)       Remove the workpiece from the lathe. If the fork is smaller than the bar stock on two or four sides, carefully remove the excess material to yield the proper dimensions of the fork. This is a piece of cake if you have mill or even a drill press with an x-y table as it is light work.  Otherwise, a flat belt or disk sander or file should do the trick. With the dimensions of the fork established, shape the ends of the fork (simultaneously) using whatever tools are available. (They appear to be half-rounded.)
 
6.)    After forming the ends of the fork sides, using a mill if you have one, or a jeweler's saw and files if you don't, remove the waste center of the solid bar to form the space between the two fork sides. This is tricky If not using a mill.  Using hand tools demands that care be taken to cut sufficiently "wide of the line" to permit accurate filing or using abrasive tape to ensure straight and perpendicular faces of the jaws on either side of the open space between them. The "slot" between the fork sides has to be accurately machined if the resulting fork is to look good. Accurate layout is essential. If the slot cannot be milled, a drill press (preferably with an accurate x-y table) can be used to drill a series of suitably sized holes through the square stock to remove most of the waste between the fork sides. Assuming the "waste removal" holes are accurately drilled, they can provide a valuable index for hand-shaping. The bulk of the waste can be roughly removed by sawing with a jeweler's saw to "connect the holes" and files can rough out the rest, taking care not to remove any material deeper than the edge of the drilled holes. Once "roughed out," machinist's "Prussian blue" or an alcohol-soluble permanent marker can be used to mark the faces of the exactly drilled "waste removal" holes. Thus marked, final shaping can be completed very accurately using the "bluing" to indicate the desired "flat" to be formed.
 
7.)    Polish the part as required. Clean the part well as per standard silver-soldering procedure paying particular attention to the inside of the 1.15 MM hole in the end of the "ball with the hole in it. Insert a suitable length of 1.15 MM wire in the hole in the end of the ball to a depth which is not less than the inside edge of the drilled hole inside end of the 1.15 MM hole. This is essential to provide as much of a contact surface between the two parts as possible for the solder joint as discussed above. Silver-solder the two pieces together.  Using a drill and/or a round jeweler's file, remove the end portion of the 1.15 MM wire inside the hole in the "ball with a hole in it" so that the inside of the hole is smooth all around. Remove any excess solder from the face of the piece. The silver-solder joint on the face of the "ball" and inside the hole in the ball, should be invisible if you are better at it than I usually am.  
 
As usual, it's easier done than said. Hope this helps.

That was exactly what I thought. Once you get down to eight or sixteen sides, rounding it up is a piece of cake with a sheet of sandpaper. (In real life, they might rough out the shape of a solid mast or spar with an adze, but the finish work would have been done with a spar plane, which would have a concave sole and iron sized to match the circumference of the spar. It would take a set of these to get an accurately rounded spar.) I was thinking of a similar arrangement, but rather than a shim that slid under the spar, there would be a grooved "bench hook" base to hold the spar for planing and a threaded "jack" that could be finely adjusted to raise the base and the degree of taper one desired. Once the measurements were identified, an "inches per foot" taper index for each of the scales one used could be attached, making setup even less tedious. A plane would run on a "sled" or in a level track to cut the taper set by the amount of rise above the track set by the "jack" adjustment. This sort of a jig could also be used for cutting scale scarfs. It's the way many scarfs are made in full-size construction these days, often with a router base mounted on a sled running on an angled base.
 
 

I've heard good things about that HP-8 plane. (They also sell a stainless and titanium "commemorative model" for $300.) The Bridge City catalog is very entertaining. They seem to be the Tiffany's of tools and priced similarly as well! Real jewelry for tool nuts. See: Planes – Bridge City Tool Works (bridgecitytools.com) 
 
Bridge City offers a chopstick tapered planing jig that uses the HP-8 plane called the "Chopstick Master." It seems that with a little bit of re-engineering, it could be a really neat tool for making tapered scale masts, spars, and dowels. The catch, of course, is that this jig system would probably cost you more than a Proxxon wood lathe! It's worth taking a look at it if anybody is considering building a jig for planing "sticks." Bridge City makes theirs fancy, of course, but the principles of their jig may be adaptable for modeling use. See: Mini Workshop – Bridge City Tool Works (bridgecitytools.com)

Planking at the bow is tapered. Forget YouTube for a moment and read some PDFs first.
 
Remember,  planking is not a race. 
First
read the pdf'S,
then think how you gowing to do the planking,
then try if the plank fits
and only then gleu the plank on the model.
 
 
 

For a first time planking, very good.
But
Take your time for the second planking, this will largely determine the appearance of your model later.
Also take a look at your cannon ports, they don't all seem the same size on the picture

The article by David Antscherl on planking in the data base on planking explains lining off as well.    https://thenrg.org/resources/Documents/articles/APrimerOnPlanking.pdf
 
To get any of the Passaro vids, just Google Chuck Passaro planking video part 1                or 2,,,, or 3,,,, or 4
 
Allan

Toni,
This may be off the wall, but would you consider setting your build aside and get some experience with high quality beginner models such as the 3 part series from Model Shipways designed by David Antscherl and/or the terrific Medway longboat kit by Chuck Passaro at Syren Ship Models.   You will learn how to properly plank as well as a lot of other things that will carry over to future more complex builds.  Just a thought that may prevent a lot of frustration.    
 
 If you would rather stay with the kit you already have, the suggestion above to study the planking tutorials as well as the four part You Tube series on proper planking is key.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCWooJ1o3cM
 
 
Allan

Try getting hold of a copy of Ship Modeling Simplified by Frank Mastini. It's often available in public libraries as well as being easy to find (and cheap) online. The book is a bit dated in some respects, but it's still a good introduction to the hobby.

There are active discussions that pop up every so often on the forum about showing treenails on wooden planked hulls and nails on copper sheathing.  Proponents seem to treat this more as a way to exhibit detailed craftsmanship than accurately replicating true to scale appearance.  More politely, it’s a modeling convention.
 
Since there are far fewer of us modeling steel hulled vessels adding riveted detail gets less attention.  I personally choose not to do it for a number of reasons.  First, most steel hulled vessels are considerably larger than their commonly modeled wood sisters so are modeled at a smaller scale.  The common modeling scale for wood hulled vessels is 1:48.  My present project had a real life length of 240 ft.  At this scale the model would be 60” long; too long for in home display so I am modeling this at a scale of 1:96.  At this scale a 2” flattened rivet head is only about .02” in diameter; tiny.
 
Many modelers look to the rivet detail on HO scale model railroads for inspiration.  These domed head rivets are “Snap Head” rivets formed with a die.  They were used to join relatively thin plating together.  Heavy ship hull plating requiring high high structural strength and watertight construction was joined with “PanHead” rivets.  The heavy Pan Head was usually located on the inside and the rivet’s Point was driven from the outside.  The outboard end of a properly driven rivet was nearly flush, and almost invisible at any reasonable scale viewing distance.
 
Rivet patterns were determined by rules published by the various Classification Societies that graded vessels for insurance purposes.  They specified different patterns for various applications within the hull.  These were quite complex as they specified both the pattern and the number of rows of rivets.  Accurately modeling these therefore, requires a hull plating expansion drawing.  Just showing a single line of rivets in inaccurate and misleading.
 
Roger