Bob Cleek

A number of years ago I bought shellac flakes to make my own shellac.  I still have most of  them.  Here in the US, ready mixed Shellac is widely available at paint, home improvement, and hardware stores.  It is not expensive.  It can be easily thinned with alcohol if necessary.  I, therefore, see no need to make my own stuff or to worry about the Cut.  For most applications the eyeball can be a good guide to thinning.
 
Roger

I would dare say that it also depends on how rounded the boat ends are. Don't have access to it at the moment, but didn't Eric McKee say something about this in: MCKEE, E. (1980): Clenched Lap or Clinker.- 30 p., Greenwich (National Maritime Museum).
 
 

One user on the Forum cautioned about steel wool. It can leave tiny pieces embedded in wood that will eventually rust. So be sure to clean thoroughly after using it.
 
I love #0000 steel wool for producing a fine satin finish.

I have had good luck with a two pound cut.  I get a flat finish with two coats and a rubbing down with steel wool after each coat.   Steel wool is messy, but I like the finish it leaves.  I always head to the garage or out side when I use it.  

The raw dark shellac has a wax component.  The wax increases solubility in ethanol.
The more refined the shellac, the more wax is removed.
There is a shellac that is one step more refined than super blonde,  super blonde is pretty refined.
I think amber is close to saturated at 4 lb cut
I think super blonde is about saturated at 2 lb cut,
1 lb cut is a good concentration if you have the patience.
 
If you round 
1 gal = ~ 4000ml
1 lb =  ~ 500g
500/4000 = 12.5%    10% is easy to make if you get a 100 ml graduated cylinder  and Amazon has electronic scales for~$15
so small batches are easy to make.  I like round numbers 10% 20% .....
 

If you are using a traditional thin wash of linseed oil, solvent (turpentine?), and a dash of color from pine tar or raw umber tubed artists' oil paint, I think you will find the result very pleasing. Capillary action is exactly the ticket. You'll probably find also that the slightly greater amount of wash that finds its way into the corners, joints, and seams and perhaps around the fastenings, will produce a slightly darker color that will add interest and realism to the finished product. It's a really nice model. In my opinion, we don't see enough small working craft modeled. Most modelers seem more interested in building huge historic ships of the line than humble workboats with just as much historic importance.  

Thank you for all the replies! And for the nice words about my model.
 
Yes. I should have painted this before attaching the stringer. I really wanted to see how it looked and couldn't wait to let the paint dry...
 
At least I didn't repeat the same mistake with later parts.
 
Chuck, excellent tip with the crooked tips!
 
Druxey and Bob, at least everything will be painted in the same tar coloured wash. But it's good to know how to protect the surfaces otherwise.
 
Glen, ship in a bottle builders sure has to come up with some ingenious tool adaptations!
 
I think I will try using cut offs from make up sponges held with by tweezers and use a generous amount of my wash and linseed mix and let capillary action transport it where I can not reach.
 

That's some beautiful work! Even at large scale (1:12 ?), real clinched-nail fastened clinker planking is quite an accomplishment. I'm looking forward to your posting the finished model! 
 
Ditto to what everybody else said. I will only add that it's unclear whether you intend to "paint" the entire model with opaque paint or plan to leave a fair amount of the interior finished "bright." (Meaning that the wood would be finished with some sort of clear coating such as shellac, varnish or an oil. I've done my share of refinishing traditionally-built full-sized boats of that type and, as you probably know, even "in real life" that sort of finishing job is a real challenge to get the less accessible areas covered. It's for this reason that most clinker planked traditionally framed boats often have their interiors "washed" with what we call "boat soup" here in the U.S. (i.e., a half and half mixture of linseed oil and turpentine, with a dash of pine tar) instead of being coated with glossy varnish or paint. Wiping on a flat (matte) sealer coat of a clear oil-based finish is a lot less of a chore as it rarely requires more than a wash-down for preparation and the "soup" can be wiped on with a sponge or rag without worrying about brush strokes and cutting-in where opaque paint edge meets the "bare" wood. (When refinishing the oiled wood, which is required periodically, a thin clear coating can actually be wiped on right over the edge of a painted area and then wiped off the paint before it dries without any masking required at all.) 
 
For a model, gloss finishes are generally avoided, so you might want to consider applying some sort of thinned clear "wipe on" finish on the inboard areas, just as is done with the full-size prototypes. Thin clear (sometimes called "white" or "bleached") shellac (e.g. "2 or 3 pound cut"...the consistency of water) or even well-thinned varnish, linseed oil, or clear polyurethane coating could be applied relatively easily using cotton tipped swabs or, better still, those foam tipped applicator sticks they sell for applying cosmetics. The foam swabs will carry more liquid than the cotton ones and not pose a risk of leaving bits of cotton on the surface. A well-thinned coating material can even be "flooded" into the nooks and crannies and the excess that collects in the corners wiped or "blotted" up once the coating has soaked into the bare wood. You might even consider pouring a considerable amount into the bilges and just sloshing it around and then draining off the surplus and wiping up the excess on the surfaces thereafter.
 
Keep in mind that I'm not saying I've done it this way before on a model, so experimentation is required before you do anything to that beautiful workmanship which cannot be undone, but I've done enough finishing over the years to think it should work fine. I'm not suggesting that you try to put a high gloss varnish finish on it in this manner way at all. This is simply an application method for applying a sealing coat that will bring up the color of the wood and protect it from stains and such. This approach is best done before any painting with an opaque coating is applied to other portions of the model, but you may have to "dance with the girl your brought" and avoid staining what you've already painted with masking tape. Once it dries, a thin application of any good oil-based clear coating should be easy to cover with your opaque paint where the edges of the two meet. Keep in mind, however, that care should be taken to be sure that the different coating materials you use are compatible. Not all are. Here, again, experimentation before application to the model is imperative. Always test coating combinations on a scrap of the same surface material you intend to use them on and let them dry well before proceeding to apply them on the finished work. This is particularly true of any of the more "synthetic" coatings such as the polyurethanes, epoxies, and acrylics or anything advertised as an "eco-friendly" replacement for traditional coatings. These modern coatings, as good as many of them are, often contain exotic chemicals that don't get along with each other and can produce unexpectedly disappointing, if not disastrous, results when they are applied on top of each other.
 
On the other hand, if it is your intention to paint the entire inboard area of the boat with an opaque paint, a "wipe on" solution for the hard-to-reach places won't work, in which case, I wish you much luck and may God have mercy on your soul!  

Back when her restoration was completed, she was reportedly going to be homeported at Mystic Seaport, CT. I didn't find her on a quick search of the USCG vessel information database, but I'd be quite surprised if she were not a US flagged vessel with USCG documentation. That would require a hailing port on the transom (or stern quarters) expressed as a city and state. That requirement isn't unique to the US, but rather is required by international law. A Liberian flagged vessel would, for example, carry the hailing port of "Monrovia." A British flagged vessel would carry a hailing port like "Liverpool," and so on. The hailing port has to be written in clear block lettering of no less than a 4" high font. It could be that she was pending transfer of ownership and the new owners intended to register her with a new hailing port. In the US, at least, a registered home port can expose the vessel owner to incurring sales and/or ongoing annual property taxes. (In California we see a lot of Oregon hailing ports on large yachts because, unlike California, Oregon has no sales tax. Just a guess, though.)

That's some beautiful work! Even at large scale (1:12 ?), real clinched-nail fastened clinker planking is quite an accomplishment. I'm looking forward to your posting the finished model! 
 
Ditto to what everybody else said. I will only add that it's unclear whether you intend to "paint" the entire model with opaque paint or plan to leave a fair amount of the interior finished "bright." (Meaning that the wood would be finished with some sort of clear coating such as shellac, varnish or an oil. I've done my share of refinishing traditionally-built full-sized boats of that type and, as you probably know, even "in real life" that sort of finishing job is a real challenge to get the less accessible areas covered. It's for this reason that most clinker planked traditionally framed boats often have their interiors "washed" with what we call "boat soup" here in the U.S. (i.e., a half and half mixture of linseed oil and turpentine, with a dash of pine tar) instead of being coated with glossy varnish or paint. Wiping on a flat (matte) sealer coat of a clear oil-based finish is a lot less of a chore as it rarely requires more than a wash-down for preparation and the "soup" can be wiped on with a sponge or rag without worrying about brush strokes and cutting-in where opaque paint edge meets the "bare" wood. (When refinishing the oiled wood, which is required periodically, a thin clear coating can actually be wiped on right over the edge of a painted area and then wiped off the paint before it dries without any masking required at all.) 
 
For a model, gloss finishes are generally avoided, so you might want to consider applying some sort of thinned clear "wipe on" finish on the inboard areas, just as is done with the full-size prototypes. Thin clear (sometimes called "white" or "bleached") shellac (e.g. "2 or 3 pound cut"...the consistency of water) or even well-thinned varnish, linseed oil, or clear polyurethane coating could be applied relatively easily using cotton tipped swabs or, better still, those foam tipped applicator sticks they sell for applying cosmetics. The foam swabs will carry more liquid than the cotton ones and not pose a risk of leaving bits of cotton on the surface. A well-thinned coating material can even be "flooded" into the nooks and crannies and the excess that collects in the corners wiped or "blotted" up once the coating has soaked into the bare wood. You might even consider pouring a considerable amount into the bilges and just sloshing it around and then draining off the surplus and wiping up the excess on the surfaces thereafter.
 
Keep in mind that I'm not saying I've done it this way before on a model, so experimentation is required before you do anything to that beautiful workmanship which cannot be undone, but I've done enough finishing over the years to think it should work fine. I'm not suggesting that you try to put a high gloss varnish finish on it in this manner way at all. This is simply an application method for applying a sealing coat that will bring up the color of the wood and protect it from stains and such. This approach is best done before any painting with an opaque coating is applied to other portions of the model, but you may have to "dance with the girl your brought" and avoid staining what you've already painted with masking tape. Once it dries, a thin application of any good oil-based clear coating should be easy to cover with your opaque paint where the edges of the two meet. Keep in mind, however, that care should be taken to be sure that the different coating materials you use are compatible. Not all are. Here, again, experimentation before application to the model is imperative. Always test coating combinations on a scrap of the same surface material you intend to use them on and let them dry well before proceeding to apply them on the finished work. This is particularly true of any of the more "synthetic" coatings such as the polyurethanes, epoxies, and acrylics or anything advertised as an "eco-friendly" replacement for traditional coatings. These modern coatings, as good as many of them are, often contain exotic chemicals that don't get along with each other and can produce unexpectedly disappointing, if not disastrous, results when they are applied on top of each other.
 
On the other hand, if it is your intention to paint the entire inboard area of the boat with an opaque paint, a "wipe on" solution for the hard-to-reach places won't work, in which case, I wish you much luck and may God have mercy on your soul!  

Well, simply put...there is no reason to wait in order to paint.   Its best to have painted those areas before they became hard to reach.   Usually that is best when planning.   It is much easier to do a bit of touch up later and dust can be cleaned away without hurting the painted surfaces.
 
Having said that...I do keep several brushes of good quality in a cup of water all the time.   I do this to actually force the tips of the brush to bend and keep the bend.  This allows me to apply a bit of paint to the tip of the brush which can be used to get in some tight spaces.  But not that tight.   It is always best to paint parts before they become inaccessible. 
 
I have other brushes with even more of a bend.  These are three I had readily at hand.
 

An interesting point, Roger. Of course, were she repowered with diesel and lost her steam power, the historic value of the vessel would be reduced tremendously. The steam engine is an historic thing unto itself. With respect to our questions about her hailing port and registration and McNeil's decision to "electronically automate" her steam plant, there may well be a few flies in the ointment. I know a bit about steam power and am relying on my memory here, so don't hold me to it, but, as I recall, under the USCG regulations, at least, a steam powered vessel over fifty feet in length used for any commercial purpose (which would include charter service) must operate with a USCG certified  marine steam engineer on duty in the engine room and, as might be expected, the steam plant must be thoroughly safety-inspected on a regular schedule. Then there's the issue of obtaining insurance which would add a big chunk to her annual operating budget! I doubt she's capable of anything other than coastal voyaging, as she can't possibly carry enough fuel for ocean crossings. She's not a toy for anyone on a budget, so I doubt even giving her away would be an easy task, let alone trying to sell her for anything remotely close to what McNeil put into restoring her. We all can thrill to the accomplishment of her restoration, but in the end she may turn out to be a very expensive white elephant. Then again, as "the rich get richer," maybe another billionaire just might be crazy enough to take the bait.  

The deck appears to be a veneer product made by Teak Decking Systems ("TDS" - World's Premier Teak Decking by Teakdecking Systems — Teakdecking Systems) The structural deck would be welded steel, TDS is laid out on a sheet of plywood and then the teak veneer is glued to the plywood in the configuration designed and shipped out of the factory as an exactly cut prefabricated sheet. (Note the absence of fastener plugs in the teak deck planks.) What you are looking at in the pictures is a modern "faux" laid teak deck, not a real one. I don't know how the original deck was laid out, exactly. It was probably much thicker (and wider) teak planking bolted to the deck beams or through the steel plate deck, then caulked and it was probably laid out to coincide with the bases of the deck furniture. The modern layout and narrow strakes of the restoration planking are an anachronism.  Quality teak in sizes suitable for "old school" deck planking is virtually unobtainable today, which probably explains the decision not to replicate the original teak decking. 

Thanks for the back story, Roger! I was unaware that McNeil had died. (I've yet to get to my copy of the latest WoodenBoat ) Looking at the photos and unaware of your post until I reached it, I kept wondering why Cangarda wasn't being properly maintained, at least considering what had been put into her restoration. (The Harken stainless steel and plastic racing blocks on the anchor cranes really blew my mind.) Somebody's going to have to put some bucks into refinishing a lot of that brightwork. Once the seams open up and water gets under the varnish, it's toast. It's a crime, really. The cost of regular routine maintenance was probably peanuts in the context of McNeil's overall estate. 

I'm a "woodie," too. I also followed Gerald's build and was in awe of his jigs. He must have spent a tremendous amount of time conceiving, designing, and building them. That man was a genius, for sure. His Techniques of Ship Modeling is one of the best books on the subject that I've ever seen. I go back for a re-read every so often, along with Underhill's modeling technique books, just to refresh my memory. Looking back on his build log, though, I see where all of his links to his own website are now dead. Apparently, nobody maintained them after his passing and all of it is probably lost, including things like the plans for his jigs. Sigh. 
 

That was Keith Black's question that I was answering, actually. Your answer raises another question: "Why plank the hull at all?" It's an iron ship, not a wooden one. A "bread and butter" hollowed out solid hull is entirely appropriate. It's your call, of course, but If I were building her and had your skills, I'd be thinking in terms of a metal hull. Carve a pattern and "tap, tap, tap" to get the plates shaped as laid out in the plating schedule, if you have the plans. The late Gerald Wingrove, MBE, undertook as his magnum opus an exact sectional model of the Falls of Clyde in brass (I believe.) (His website, which contained something of a log on his Falls of Clyde build, seems to be no more. The below photo is from https://www.modelengineeringwebsite.com/Gerald_Wingrove.html ) 
 

Being as Cangarda is blind-riveted, there would be little point in not painting it, would there? Then again, there were some pretty spectacular builder's models of early 1900's metal steamships which were built of wood and finished "bright" with all hardware of yellow metal (sometimes even gold-plated.)
 

 

 
https://www.shipsnostalgia.com/media/cangarda-as-found.97579/
 
Or, build it all of copper and brass and leave unfinished:
 

 
 
 
 
 

One thing's for sure, they need to brush up on their flag etiquette and strike that yacht signal from the stern staff. That place of honor is reserved for the national ensign only.
 

 
Then, later, here she is flying the British "Blue Duster" in Canadian waters.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ensign
 

 
And in 2011 in Brockville, Canada, flying an outdated (of 1957-1965) Canadian ensign, the "Blue Duster" with  Canadian of defacement. (As of 1965, the Canadian ensign is the red and white "maple leaf" national flag.)
 

 
So, as for a home port, perhaps she has none and sails hither and yon under false "flags of convenience." (See: https://naylorlaw.com/blog/flag-of-convenience/) Might she be switching national registries to keep one step ahead of the taxman? That could arguably make her a pirate, raising the question of whether MSW would condone a build log for a model of a pirated ship or whether its prohibition only extends to pirated models of ships.     

Back when her restoration was completed, she was reportedly going to be homeported at Mystic Seaport, CT. I didn't find her on a quick search of the USCG vessel information database, but I'd be quite surprised if she were not a US flagged vessel with USCG documentation. That would require a hailing port on the transom (or stern quarters) expressed as a city and state. That requirement isn't unique to the US, but rather is required by international law. A Liberian flagged vessel would, for example, carry the hailing port of "Monrovia." A British flagged vessel would carry a hailing port like "Liverpool," and so on. The hailing port has to be written in clear block lettering of no less than a 4" high font. It could be that she was pending transfer of ownership and the new owners intended to register her with a new hailing port. In the US, at least, a registered home port can expose the vessel owner to incurring sales and/or ongoing annual property taxes. (In California we see a lot of Oregon hailing ports on large yachts because, unlike California, Oregon has no sales tax. Just a guess, though.)

A great subject to model in the old "builder's model" style of her time. It will be interesting to see what you do with this one!
 
BTW, does anyone know why she doesn't have a hailing port on her transom?

Thank you all for taking an interest in my minor operation. I decided to make hay while the sun shines so I cut some wood
 
I printed and cut out the frame templates and then glued them to the 1/8" birch ply sheets. I glue them using Pritt Stick which I find adequately secures the paper while making removal acceptably easy. The sheets are 12" x 48". I did a few arrangements to try and minimise the wastage. There are 41 frames plus the stern keel piece. I didn't print the bow keel piece because my short term memory failed.

I then separated all the frames using the hand held jig saw. 

So now I have 42 pieces of wood ready for the scroll saw. I get to use the scroll saw in anger about every 4 years and I have to go through the learning curve each time. It isn't worth making a start however because all the lines a fuzzy. Hopefully they will become much clearer in due course.
 
Tomorrow my daughter is taking me Christmas shopping to ensure that Santa has an adequate pile my wife. Hopefully I will buy the right things and as a result I will make it through to the New Year without too much grief.
 
 
 
 

Chartpak graphic tape is still readily available. Good stuff, but not specificially designed for masking. https://www.staples.com/chartpak-graphic-chart-tape-glossy-black-1-16-x-648-bg6201/product_909815?cid=PS:MS:SBD:PLA:OS&msclkid=31dd847c9edb12ca8a61e08eaf6a5f95&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=%23PLA%2F_(1)_BNG_(2)_US_(7)_GEN_(9)_Office Supplies|&utm_term=4581252648129840&utm_content=All Products&dclid=CMmJpfiJioEDFWXArQAdoK0E5A
 
I've found Tamiya a bit pricey and often wider than needed, which makes taping curved edges somewhat more difficult. My "go to" for masking fine lines is 3M (Scotch) Fine Line masking tape sold primarily for auto painting jobs. It comes in varying widths: 1/8", 1/4", 3/8", and 1/2".  Not cheap, either, but a roll will last practically forever for modeling purposes. Most auto body and fender supply shops have it on hand.  https://www.amazon.com/3M-06302-Fine-Line-Masking/dp/B00HSCMCL8/ref=sr_1_10?adgrpid=1337006711851222&hvadid=83563242241651&hvbmt=be&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=43893&hvnetw=o&hvqmt=e&hvtargid=kwd-83563282543041%3Aloc-190&hydadcr=2082_13504107&keywords=3m+fine+line+masking+tape&qid=1693594490&sr=8-10
 
There's also another brand similar to 3M's that looks the same and may be less costly, although I haven't tried it. It's called "Lime Line." https://www.amazon.com/s?k=3m+fine+line+masking+tape&adgrpid=1337006711851222&hvadid=83563242241651&hvbmt=be&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=43893&hvnetw=o&hvqmt=e&hvtargid=kwd-83563282543041%3Aloc-190&hydadcr=2082_13504107&tag=mh0b-20&ref=pd_sl_1c1kh9zkry_e
 
I'll add the reminder that all masking tapes, and particularly the expensive fine line stuff, should be kept in a ziplock plastic bag at all times when not being used to prevent the adhesive from drying out. Also, tape rolls should never be laid down flat so that their sides can pick up dust and grit. If the side of the roll is contaminated with dirt, the edge of the tape will carry that dirt and grit to the work and you'll end up with ragged edges and dirt in your paint job. Always keep your tape in a zipped up plastic bag and don't lay it down anywhere except in the bag!  

I am unaware of and have no interest in the particulars of the above-referenced transgressions, but I do wish to address a related matter concerning the "twenty-five post sales rule" which you explain has occasioned this post. 
 
It is not uncommon for the heirs of both MSW members and "outlaw modelers" (to use a biker term) to join MSW for the purpose of posting an inquiry regarding how they should best dispose of the ship modeling effects of their recently deceased ship modeling relative. By the same token, it is likely that most of the MSW membership, particularly those "of a certain age," with varying levels of intensity are concerned about the disposition of our ship models, research library, and shop tools and materials once we "shuffle off this mortal coil." It is one thing to have subjected most of our "dearly beloveds" to the outrages imposed by cohabiting with a ship modeler's equipage during our lifetimes, but to leave it for them to dispose of prudently after we are gone seems particularly unkind.
 
The models built by a late ship modeler may be of some sentimental value to his heirs, though never to the degree the modeler imagined as the models were being built.  Other parts of a late ship modeler's detritus, however, may be of considerable value monetarily, although of limited marketability only to a relatively small niche group of ship modeling hobbyists. It is difficult to know what happens to a deceased modeler's shop tools and materials when the modeler's estate is distributed. Maybe some "big stuff" is sold at an estate or "garage" sale, or the heirs simply distribute it in kind, but it's not generally encountered thereafter in any form identifiable as belonging to a modeler. On the other hand, we do see large numbers of unbuilt kits and research library books which apparently seem to find their way to "pickers" and "flippers" in the resale market. The used book wholesalers buy up for below market value that which they know they can sell for a high premium on eBay and similar sites. Regrettably, from a modeler's perspective, financial advantage is taken both of the modelers' heirs who receive much less than the full value of what was left to them at one end of the transaction and advantage taken of the ship modelers who must purchase these used research volumes at often-inflated online auction prices at the other end.   It is in this fashion large ship modeling research libraries that have taken the previous owner decades to acquire, often at very substantial expense, are bought cheaply, broken up, and the books sold piecemeal because the trade considers this the most profitable way to move merchandise. (And no disrespect is directed to used book dealers who are some of my favorite tradespeople, but if "middleman markups" can be avoided, so be it.) For the reasons previously mentioned, we'll never know the cost to the hobby of breaking up deceased ship modelers' workshops, but surely, the economics of the used tool market is no different than the used book market: "buy cheap and sell dear."  Neither will we ever know how many cords of prized modeling wood stock have been used for firewood by those who knew not what they did! 
 
Although it is true that some ship modelers' modeling effects are distributed through the auspices of their local ship modeling club, in the "information age" the reality is that local clubs are fewer and farther between than they once were and the likelihood that a club is sufficiently large to provide a viable "customer base" for the marketing of a modeler's estate is not as great as it may have once been. For these reasons, it's not at all uncommon that a deceased ship modeler's heirs or estate administrator has no idea what to do with "his ship modeling stuff."
 
Often, when ship modeler's estate liquidation inquiries come MSW's way, they are in the form of a first post by a new member. This is to be expected because anyone who doesn't know what to do with a ship modeler's models, books, and tools and materials isn't likely to be a ship modeler themselves at all and so not a previous MSW member. And, of course, this is where they run into the "twenty-five post sales rule" that often terminates any further exchanges with them beyond a polite suggestion to try to donate the models to a local library or yacht club or sell it all on eBay.  While the "twenty-five post sales rule" serves the sound purpose of preventing unwanted (and possibly untrustworthy) commercial vendors from advertising on MSW without paying sponsorship advertising charges and limiting the use of the "Buying and Selling" forum section to genuine forum participants, in the case of ship modelers' estate sales, it operates to the disadvantage of the MSW membership and the heirs of serious ship modelers because it causes the estate to pay more to sell the property and ship modelers more to buy it. 
 
I propose that the Administrators consider making an exception to the "twenty-five post sales rule" in the case of deceased ship modelers' estate sales. This exception would, on a case-by-case basis, waive the rule in the case of a deceased modeler's heir, heirs, or estate agent, who wishes to offer for disposition to the MSW membership ship modeling related items from a deceased modeler's estate.  Additionally, I propose that MSW could establish a policy that MSW members could dependably advise their future heirs that their models, books, tools, and materials could be disposed of through such an MSW "Buy and Sell" "Estate Sale Provision" if they wished, thereby providing the membership with a valuable benefit to assist their survivors in disposing of their modeling detritus fairly and at a reasonable return when they "join the Choir Invisible" and providing their heirs with the benefit of disposing of their modeling gear without having to pay the sales commissions charged by sites such as eBay.  It might even be arranged that a local MSW member might make themselves available to personally inventory the deceased modeler's modeling things and advise a deceased modeler's heir or estate representative regarding their sale. Surely, making such forum resources available to our heirs and estate administrators would provide peace of mind to many of us who hope that their modeling hobby will not continue to be as cursed by our "significant others" after we are gone as it may be now while we're still here!  It would also provide MSW with the additional competitive edge in the "internet membership sweepstakes" as a tangible membership benefit that cannot be underestimated.
 
Some may express concern that to the extent MSW enables the sale of used modeling items, it negatively impacts the interests of its ship modeling retailer sponsors. While it may be true in theory that if someone buys an unbuilt ship model kit second hand from a ship modeler's widow, that's one ship model kit that isn't going to be sold by a ship model kit retailer. However, some retailer already sold it once, so it is not in any way unfair to the retailers if their previously purchased products are resold on the second-hand market. In fact, in the instance of hobby products, it's to the retailers' benefit that their unbuilt models are resold because they can then expect to sell other products to that same modeler, who often may be just coming into the hobby, and who will be a customer for years to come.   
 
Anyway, that's just my two cents' worth and I suppose advice is worth what you pay for it. I'd just hate to see some other ship modeling forum think of the same thing and beat MSW to it.
 
 
 
 

Sounds like you're a heavy coffee drinker. I've broken a lot of mugs over the years, but I've yet to wear one out!  

I am unaware of and have no interest in the particulars of the above-referenced transgressions, but I do wish to address a related matter concerning the "twenty-five post sales rule" which you explain has occasioned this post. 
 
It is not uncommon for the heirs of both MSW members and "outlaw modelers" (to use a biker term) to join MSW for the purpose of posting an inquiry regarding how they should best dispose of the ship modeling effects of their recently deceased ship modeling relative. By the same token, it is likely that most of the MSW membership, particularly those "of a certain age," with varying levels of intensity are concerned about the disposition of our ship models, research library, and shop tools and materials once we "shuffle off this mortal coil." It is one thing to have subjected most of our "dearly beloveds" to the outrages imposed by cohabiting with a ship modeler's equipage during our lifetimes, but to leave it for them to dispose of prudently after we are gone seems particularly unkind.
 
The models built by a late ship modeler may be of some sentimental value to his heirs, though never to the degree the modeler imagined as the models were being built.  Other parts of a late ship modeler's detritus, however, may be of considerable value monetarily, although of limited marketability only to a relatively small niche group of ship modeling hobbyists. It is difficult to know what happens to a deceased modeler's shop tools and materials when the modeler's estate is distributed. Maybe some "big stuff" is sold at an estate or "garage" sale, or the heirs simply distribute it in kind, but it's not generally encountered thereafter in any form identifiable as belonging to a modeler. On the other hand, we do see large numbers of unbuilt kits and research library books which apparently seem to find their way to "pickers" and "flippers" in the resale market. The used book wholesalers buy up for below market value that which they know they can sell for a high premium on eBay and similar sites. Regrettably, from a modeler's perspective, financial advantage is taken both of the modelers' heirs who receive much less than the full value of what was left to them at one end of the transaction and advantage taken of the ship modelers who must purchase these used research volumes at often-inflated online auction prices at the other end.   It is in this fashion large ship modeling research libraries that have taken the previous owner decades to acquire, often at very substantial expense, are bought cheaply, broken up, and the books sold piecemeal because the trade considers this the most profitable way to move merchandise. (And no disrespect is directed to used book dealers who are some of my favorite tradespeople, but if "middleman markups" can be avoided, so be it.) For the reasons previously mentioned, we'll never know the cost to the hobby of breaking up deceased ship modelers' workshops, but surely, the economics of the used tool market is no different than the used book market: "buy cheap and sell dear."  Neither will we ever know how many cords of prized modeling wood stock have been used for firewood by those who knew not what they did! 
 
Although it is true that some ship modelers' modeling effects are distributed through the auspices of their local ship modeling club, in the "information age" the reality is that local clubs are fewer and farther between than they once were and the likelihood that a club is sufficiently large to provide a viable "customer base" for the marketing of a modeler's estate is not as great as it may have once been. For these reasons, it's not at all uncommon that a deceased ship modeler's heirs or estate administrator has no idea what to do with "his ship modeling stuff."
 
Often, when ship modeler's estate liquidation inquiries come MSW's way, they are in the form of a first post by a new member. This is to be expected because anyone who doesn't know what to do with a ship modeler's models, books, and tools and materials isn't likely to be a ship modeler themselves at all and so not a previous MSW member. And, of course, this is where they run into the "twenty-five post sales rule" that often terminates any further exchanges with them beyond a polite suggestion to try to donate the models to a local library or yacht club or sell it all on eBay.  While the "twenty-five post sales rule" serves the sound purpose of preventing unwanted (and possibly untrustworthy) commercial vendors from advertising on MSW without paying sponsorship advertising charges and limiting the use of the "Buying and Selling" forum section to genuine forum participants, in the case of ship modelers' estate sales, it operates to the disadvantage of the MSW membership and the heirs of serious ship modelers because it causes the estate to pay more to sell the property and ship modelers more to buy it. 
 
I propose that the Administrators consider making an exception to the "twenty-five post sales rule" in the case of deceased ship modelers' estate sales. This exception would, on a case-by-case basis, waive the rule in the case of a deceased modeler's heir, heirs, or estate agent, who wishes to offer for disposition to the MSW membership ship modeling related items from a deceased modeler's estate.  Additionally, I propose that MSW could establish a policy that MSW members could dependably advise their future heirs that their models, books, tools, and materials could be disposed of through such an MSW "Buy and Sell" "Estate Sale Provision" if they wished, thereby providing the membership with a valuable benefit to assist their survivors in disposing of their modeling detritus fairly and at a reasonable return when they "join the Choir Invisible" and providing their heirs with the benefit of disposing of their modeling gear without having to pay the sales commissions charged by sites such as eBay.  It might even be arranged that a local MSW member might make themselves available to personally inventory the deceased modeler's modeling things and advise a deceased modeler's heir or estate representative regarding their sale. Surely, making such forum resources available to our heirs and estate administrators would provide peace of mind to many of us who hope that their modeling hobby will not continue to be as cursed by our "significant others" after we are gone as it may be now while we're still here!  It would also provide MSW with the additional competitive edge in the "internet membership sweepstakes" as a tangible membership benefit that cannot be underestimated.
 
Some may express concern that to the extent MSW enables the sale of used modeling items, it negatively impacts the interests of its ship modeling retailer sponsors. While it may be true in theory that if someone buys an unbuilt ship model kit second hand from a ship modeler's widow, that's one ship model kit that isn't going to be sold by a ship model kit retailer. However, some retailer already sold it once, so it is not in any way unfair to the retailers if their previously purchased products are resold on the second-hand market. In fact, in the instance of hobby products, it's to the retailers' benefit that their unbuilt models are resold because they can then expect to sell other products to that same modeler, who often may be just coming into the hobby, and who will be a customer for years to come.   
 
Anyway, that's just my two cents' worth and I suppose advice is worth what you pay for it. I'd just hate to see some other ship modeling forum think of the same thing and beat MSW to it.