Bob Cleek

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.
 
 
 
 

I'm not getting into a public slanging match for enforcing our rules.
 
You do have fair reason to sell here, now you have furnished us with more information and not having staff here play guessing games as to whether something is legitimate or not. If I had to make the same decision again, I would, every time. Please let this be a lesson learned to those who wish to do the same. 
 
Maybe contact a staff member If this is on behalf of a deceased member, please let us know which member When registering an account on MSW, you have to state you understand the rules we have here. To plead ignorance after the fact, isn't an excuse. Topic locked.
 
 

Hello,
I corresponded with SueMac, he gave me the impression of being honest.
Michel

I can understand to a point.  I asked for advice on “WHERE” to “ donate or sell” the models, books and tools. As a non-ship model builder, I was at a complete loss. Is there a rule against asking for this advice? 
Also, before calling me out on a public forum and falsely accusing me of “intentionally circumventing “ your rules, it would have been more appropriate had you contacted me and I could have explained what took place so you would have the facts before publicly making accusations. I am sure you are busy as an administrator, but not everyone out there is a scammer, some just want advice. 

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.
 
 
 
 

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.
 
 
 
 

Part III: Adding reef points
 
Reef points add a lot of visual interest to sails, and they're easy to add in the paper-sail method.
 

The reef bands were glued on in Part I. Where to place the reef points is something of an uncertain topic; I found references for a variety of options, including one point on each seam, one point within each panel, and two points within each panel. I chose to use the first approach. Because the paper layers were extra thick here, due to the seam and reef bands, I used a small drill bit to open up a hole rather than trying to drive a needle through.
 
For the reef points, I cut a series of rigging rope a bit longer than I needed. I wanted my reef points 2 scale feet long, so I cut the rope 5' long to allow for trimming, then used a deadeye/block threader to run each line through the sail. The threader creates a strong crimp in the line, so I tried to center each line in the threader before pulling it back through; the crimp then becomes a natural reference point holding the line in place where it passes through the sail.
 

When all the lines for a given band were threaded, I clamped a piece of wood across the sail 2 scale feet below the reef band as a reference marker. You can get the length right here in two ways: either trim each line to the right length relative to the crimp, or don't worry about the crimp and pull each one back through the sail until only 2' are left on the side you're working on. I then used a fine brush to gently apply a bit of glue to a line, then pressed it into place on the sail with its tip against the wood. You only have to hold the line in place for maybe 10-15 seconds for the glue to take hold, before moving on to the next one. I like to get glue from the tip to about 2/3 to the sail, not all the way to the sail. This means the line naturally bows out a bit where it comes out of the sail, giving it some 3D texture. Don't overdo the glue or you'll get weird stains on the paper. Also, don't worry about trying to get each line perfectly straight; they're going to want to curve this way and that, and buckle a bit, and that's exactly what you want because that really makes them look like loose lines dangling down. You want just enough glue to hold them relatively flat so they look like gravity is working. If you glue them too flat or perfect, they'll look glued on and artificial.
 

Once one side is done, it looks something like the image above. Then you just turn the sail over, clamp the wood at 2' again, trim the remaining lines to length, and glue them in the same way.
 

If there is more than one reef band, do the upper one first, since you're overall working on the lower side. Above, you see the same process being repeated for a lower line of reef points.
 

And here are the two completed lines of reef points. They have a nice randomness that looks like loosely dangling lines. Note that, once again, I slightly messed up this demonstration by not cutting the upper line of reef points quite evenly (they're too short on the left). It figures that my demonstration sail would be the sloppiest of any I've made so far, but I hope the idea comes across. And, as above, this sort of things fades away when the sail is placed in the full context of a rigged model.
 
I'm quite happy with this method. I've now made all six of the sails for my topsail schooner this way and feel that they have a strong visual interest and a realistic (if not perfectly accurate) appearance. Moreover, the method uses cheap material that's easy to work with, and requires no special skills other than some patience and care when handling glued paper. It's easy to test on random scraps first before trying a full sail, and it's easy to customize. For example, you could skip the panels and just use a full sheet of paper, or skip the boltropes, and still use the rest of the approach to have a nice sail that holds it shape and can even be shaped to hold a curve. I hope others find some or all of this interesting and useful as a different way to produce interesting sails for nautical models. Thanks for reading.

You could also consider paper. Here's a thread I started years ago to share a method I developed that I personally think works well, looks good, and is much preferable to working with fabric of any kind.
 
Here's what the sails look like on one of my models:
 

Don't know if this would work for you, I haven't seen the movie so don't know exactly what look you're going for, but it's another option.
 

Keith,
that`s a good point, funny I was just thinking the same this morning.....
the common procedure is now to ask myself a) will the objection be looking at me for all times after ?
or b) can I live with it ? (nobody is perfect)
If the answer is "a" then it`s  a candidate for the bin, or to do it over again for a second run.
Much is stored in the box "experience", so that something likewise hopefully does`nt occur again, but I would`nt build the same ship twice.
 
Nils

I'm not sure if this has been said or covered before (sorry if it has).  Acrylic artist paints work great for airbrushing.  I don't thin my paints with water, I use windshield washer fluid (summer not winter kind).  I have had no problems with my airbrush with this and clean up is very easy.
 
Also, (sorry don't remember your name) but when they said to try artist colors and mix your own colors, I've done this and with the help from my wife (I'm color blind) I can match any color I choose.
 
Brush painting with acrylic artist colors are a joy to work with.  When finished, clean brushes with soap and water and you done.
 
I've used many paint brands over the years and the one I've used most for model buildings was Floquil paints and stains.  I've used Polly S in the past and back in my plastic car building days (70's) I used testors paints (spray cans and brush paints).
 
I'm sold on artist acrylic paints for the ease of use in an airbrush and for the easy clean up when brush painting.  I've even used them for some weathering but I still like my caulks better for this.
 
If you haven't tried these paints give it a try.

The Continental shipbuilders were English shipbuilders until they decided not to be.  They used the same books and same Establishments.
The properties of wood is a constant.  The ratio of the size of the timbering to the size of the ship is not a national value.  The species of wood used can be.  There are tables that have different sizes for timbers depending of the species of wood used.  Try not to obsess  about being exact.  Close enough is good enough.  It was wood.  They did not have sophisticated electronic rulers. 
I use Yedlinsky .   Find the ship's class and look up the scantlings.
I find that the Admiralty plans for captured ships are often fairly useless for determining R&S.  The stations are often arbitrary in location and distance.
Some of them are at variable locations.
With as designed plans,  The tables give floor thickness.  The lettering and numbering of the stations reflect the number of frames between each station.
The difference is the width of the space.
As for the moulded dimension,  tables from this era give minimal data for in and out.   You have to look closely.  Use what data there is and use an artist's eye to get the shape.  
I translate cutting down to be the thickness (deep) at the outer edge of the keel/keelson.
When I used a drawing board,  I used a compass to draw a half circle with the origin in the frame line.  A line that hits these arcs at a tangent is the moulded dimension.  Tedious at best.   Painter is easier.  Now I have a file with the range of frame moulded values - each value is a yellow filled circle that is the diameter - a faint black circumference helps -  on its own layer. 
Just kiss the frame line and connect the tangents on the inside.  I use as many as I need to get a line that looks good. Layers are easy to duplicate.  It is quick after some practice.
 
 
 

These are my favorites as well, but getting true boxwood (Buxus sempervirens) means remortgaging the house so I went to Castello boxwood (Calycophyllum multiflorum) years ago with no regrets.   Alaskan cedar gets rave reviews as being an excellent wood and can be seen on Chuck Passaro's builds.
Allan
 
 

I personally feel that unpainted models are overdone.  I agree that wood left naturally is  appropriate for true Dockyard style models with exposed framing built from the big three woods- boxwood, pear, holly.  On the other hand there is something about unpainted POB kit models that makes them look like either “gift shop specials” or toys.
 
My models are long term projects. They involve years of dreaming, mental construction and planning before I pick up a tool.  Part of this involves an artistic vision involving display of the model.  This includes selection of materials for baseboard rd and case.  All but one of my models are painted, except where the actual component on the real vessel was finished bright.
 
Roger.

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.     

The bulwark is welded from parts and its half is installed on the forecastle.

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!  

What the other guys said.  Don't waste your money on those "rigging tools." I can't imagine what they could be useful for either.
 
Particularly given your unsteady hands (a challenge many older modelers must overcome), you would do well to study, practice, master, and use surgeons' suture instrument knot tying techniques. YouTube has many instructional videos on the subject, most published by medical schools and surgical instrument companies for the medical profession. The use of surgical instruments and surgical technique will make model ship rigging much easier. If you can tie knots like a micro-surgeon, tying knots in rigging on a ship model becomes a piece of cake compared to trying to stich up aortic valves inside of a chest cavity! 
 
As for instruments essential to knot tying, the basics are:
 
A number of fairly good pairs of tweezers. There are a lot of cheap ones out there. Spend the money for at least a couple of not-so-cheap ones. Don't limit your selection to those short, stubby tweezers used by watchmakers and ladies plucking their eyebrows. For rigging tasks, long tweezers are far more useful and often essential for reaching hard-to-reach places. Get a few tweezers in the 6" to 12" long range. 
 
A selection of surgical forceps, hemostats, and needle holders, all of which are more or less the same thing for modeling purposes. As with tweezers, make sure you have some long-handled ones so you can reach "into" the rigging as you work. 
 
One or more "ear polypuses," buy the longer ones first and then expand your collection. The "ear polypus" is a unique forceps which permits you to reach into very confined spaces to grab line and tie knots. Surgeons use it to remove foreign objects inside patients' ear canals.
 
Ear polypus: Just the jaws on the tip open and close when the finger holes move:
 

 
There has recently come on the market a polypus that has a cutting scissor jaw on the end instread of a forceps jaw. I don't know how well these work, but they may be useful for cutting excess line in tight places after tying. I've never had any problem cutting rigging line in tight spaces with a sharp scalpel, though.
 
Dental and surgical instruments are some of the most valuable model-making tools, particularly for rigging. Some of these tools are offered for sale online by modeling and hobby supply houses such as MicroMark. Beware! The "hobby market" prices for inferior quality versions of these tools are generally far higher than medical instrument supply houses ask for the "medical quality" versions the medical professionals actually use. You will find an extensive range of dental and surgical instruments for sale on Amazon and, particularly, on eBay. The latter has a lot of listings for Indian and Pakistani-made instruments which aren't the highest quality but are certainly serviceable for modeling.  There are also many online retailers selling used surgical and dental instruments at perhaps the lowest price points for these often very well-made instruments. Many will correctly say that "you can't have too many clamps," and the hobby tool marketers offer a wide range of clamps for that reason, but keep in mind that you can often buy used hemostats and needle holders in lots on eBay for close to the same price as fancy clamps and have a much more versatile clamping and holding tool that is better suited for the shaky hands of old pharts like us!
 
 
 
 

Were this Japan,  Jim would qualify as a national treasure. His skill, craftsmanship, precision, and material selection has no competition.  His determination to do it right  harkens back  to a lost era and was rare even then. 
Would that he had trained up a group of apprentices.  His passing will leave an immense hole.

The last two weeks were spent travelling on business, to Stockholm (including a renewed visit to the Maritime Museum there 😉 ) and to Brussels. Friday and Saturday I spent at the information desk of Association des Amis du Musée de la Marine, which has been finally re-opened (see other thread on this). So, not much time in the workshop, but I still managed to complete the
 
Banisters
 
These banisters are flimsy matters so that I left them to the end as far as possible, still following the pattern to work ‘inside-out’ in order to not damage delicate items.
 
The information is somewhat patchy as to what the banisters actually looked like. They are represented in the lithographs and on one or the other photograph, one can see parts of them. Basically, there are two types: bend pipe-work and straight stanchions located in sockets that support a wooden rail.

As the metal parts are laid out in yellow on the lithography, they appear to have been made from brass (or bronze). One picture shows bare metal for the pipe-work. Hence, I decided to make them from bare 0.3 mm brass wire. At the moment this looks rather bright, but I assume that it will tarnish somewhat with time.

 The pipework ones were bent over a scale copy of the lithograph. The ends, where they attach to the stairs appear to have been flattened, which duly was represented on the model.
 
For the ones with wooden rail at the end of the deckhouse, I cheated a bit and instead of having individual stanchions, I flattened the wire in the area of the wooden rail to have a support for it and bent the stanchions down sharply. The sockets were cut from 0.5 mm OD brass tube, which is a sliding fit on the 0.3 mm wire. The ends were milled down to the appropriate angle. The wooden rail was fashioned from two laser-cut strips of paper laminated together with varnish. With hind-sight, fashioning all parts from brass and soldering them together in a jig might have given crispier results.

 All parts were cemented in place with clear varnish.
 
Overall, these quite simple parts took surprisingly long to produce.
 
To be continued ....

I have encountered the sort of issue pictured above with planking, but I've never ever seen any checking in major timbers like keels and deadwoods on a model. I have restored models of varying ages (all over 50 years old, at least) which did show cracking and splitting of larger thin solid sheets of wood such as were used as decks and cabin tops. In that instance, it appeared that the better course would have been to plank the surfaces individually, although the wood sheets in every instance I've encountered were solid wood and not thin laminated plywood. I would expect if a larger flat sheet of wood were required modernly, thin modeling plywood would be the preferred material.
 
There seems to continue to be a lot of misunderstanding and consequent misinformation persisting in the modeling community about bending wood, probably because the process is so often referred to as "steam bending." This has been discussed in great detail in previous posts. It's a matter of well-settled scientific fact and not opinion. In an attempt to set the record straight, 
 
1)   Wood doesn't need to be wet to bend.. In fact, it is better that it is not wet. Wetting the wood, if anything, causes it to absorb moisture and swell. To the extent it does that, fitted joints will open when the wood shrinks upon recovering equilibrium with the ambient humidity.
 
2)   The amount of movement dependent upon the wood's moisture content is a relative constant percentage depending upon the species of the wood and the direction of the grain. Wood swells more across the grain direction, and less, if at all, with the grain direction. Some species move more than others.
 
3)   Given these movement properties and the small size of the wood pieces used in ship modeling, under just about any circumstance, the amount of movement is so small as to be unnoticeable. That said, the cracking of the large thin wood sheets I've encountered before was not a result of the flat sheet shrinking or swelling alone, as the structure should shrink and swell at the same rate, or close to it in cases where different species are adjacent to one another, but rather more likely due to the movement of the entire hull structure which could not be incrementally accommodated by the single fixed flat sheet that cracked under the strain. Again, this should not be encountered with plywood, a much stronger engineered material.
 
4.   All that is needed to bend wood (understanding that the tolerance for bending varies from species to species,) is heat. Moisture enhances heat's ability to spread through the wood (which is why "green" higher-moisture-content wood is preferred for bending stock in full-size boatbuilding) but has nothing to do with making the wood more pliable for bending. In full-size boatbuilding, wood to be bent is steamed in a steam box not to make the wood wet, but simply because, given the available technology, the best way to transfer heat to a long plank is to stick into a box or pipe and fill the box or pipe with steam. For modeling purposes, any of the customary methods of applying heat to modeling wood without soaking it in water are just as effective, and a lot less messy, than steaming them. As noted in the previous post, wet wood does not glue as well. In fact, heat applied to dry wood glued with PVA glue with speed the drying and curing of the PVA such that spot-heated planks can actually be "tacked" in place with PVA.
 
5.   There is no reason to treat ship modeling wood with polyethylene glycol to retain moisture as is done with archaeological artifacts recovered from long periods of immersion.  This stabilizing agent is applicable to long-immersed wooden artifacts only. It wouldn't do anything for a ship model, unless, perhaps, the ship model was brought up from the bottom of the sea a few hundred years after it had been put there.
 
6.   Within normal ranges of humidity fluctuations, there is no need to artificially humidify ship models. If the model is displayed where it was built, it should be just fine indefinitely, at least from a humidity fluctuation standpoint. If one were to move a model from an extremely dry climate to an extremely humid climate or vice versa, there may be some concern regarding wood movement, but once the wood have reached a moisture content normal relative to the new humidity environment, no problems should be encountered. Obviously, displaying a ship model in a bathroom where people regularly take long hot steamy showers isn't the greatest idea. Wood reaches its moisture equilibrium at a relatively standard rate. The rule of thumb for this is that wood should after being felled and milled be allowed to dry in a covered area for a minimum of one year per inch of the stock's thinnest dimension. You can do the math, but assuming the wood was dry when milled into planking strips or other modeling wood, it is going to be so thin that it should be able to adjust to humidity fluctuations very rapidly so there's no reason to be concerned about its needing to be "acclimated" to the building environment. (Alternately, for example, hardwood flooring should be stacked and left in the area where it will be installed for a few days to ensure it has reached a moisture equilibrium equal to the room in which it will be laid.)
 
7.   No wood coating is entirely impermeable. The most effective moisture barrier is said to be shellac. In fact, it is better to allow a wooden structure to move evenly than to attempt to prevent if from moving in one place and not another.  The uniform movement of a wooden structure is always less stressful because any resulting stresses are evenly distributed.  
 
I have never encountered a sprung plank or a cracked plank seam on a model which did not appear to be the result of either poor adhesive fastening, incomplete bending before installation, or both. I see many instances of "edge setting" (bending a plank across it's wide dimension) in modeling. This practice would never occur in full-size boat and ship planking, were it even physically possible, because it builds stresses into the structure in a manner contrary to sound engineering practices. (Similarly, I see no reason why properly fitted planks should ever require any glue in their seams, another apparently common modeler's practice that seems to add a rigidity to the planking structure which prevents uniform movement, concentrates stresses, and thereby promotes structural damage.) The ability to heat-bend small dimension strip wood across its widest dimension and the availability of strong adhesives seems to make edge setting possible in scale modeling, but perhaps not entirely advisable. While the stresses are proportional to the scale, the stresses created by wood movement are relatively great. I cannot say for certain, but when I look to assign blame for cracked plank seams and started plank ends on ship models, I look to a failure of the fastening system to overcome otherwise normally-expected loads, rather than any excess of ordinary ambient humidity fluctuations, and that is generally a result of an improperly shaped and fitted plank.
 
With respect to shaping and bending planking, I would urge a close study of Chuck Passaro's planking tutorial materials. He makes it clear that a plank should be spiled and bent so that it fits perfectly in all dimensions when offered up to the frames, as is the case with full-size construction practices. He does bend planks across their wider dimension, but he does this with heat, resulting in a permanently bent curve without any spring-back. Planks should never be unduly forced into place because if they are, they will spend the rest of their days trying to find a way to return to the shape God gave them when they grew!
 
Just say'in. Your mileage may vary.  
 
 

As usual, your encouraging comments are much appreciated !
 
********

In the meantime, I had to make myself a list of all those tiny details that still need to be fabricated and installed. It is easy to forget them, when you are getting closer to the end …
 
Crane above the projectile hatch
 
Projectiles and powder bags were stored in different compartments for safety reasons below the barbette and in consequence, each had its own hatch. That for the powder bags was round, while the one for the projectiles was rectangular in order for them to lifted out on a trolley.
As discussed in a much earlier post, the lithographies from the early 1880s do not show any mechanical device to help the 330 kg heavy projectiles from their storage space to the floor of the barbette. Man-handling clearly is out of question. However, drawings related to a later re-fit show inside the deckhouse a winch marked as ‘winch for the hoisting of projectiles’ and a simple derrick-like wall-crane bolted to the rear wall of the barbette. In these drawings it is not shown how the runner rope would have been led from the crane to the winch, there most have been some sort of opening in the rear of the barbette. Also, not clear is, how the in the gun-crew in the barbette and the men in the projectile storage room would have communicated with the winch-men inside the deckhouse.
Interestingly, in the same drawing a simple wall-mounted crane for the powder-bags seems to be indicated, but no winch belonging to it. Perhaps the 45 kg bags were hoisted up with the help of a tackle.
 
The assembled and painted parts at their place, port view
 
The small detail (about 3 mm by 3 mm) of the projectile crane caused me a lot of aggravation and took a long time to fabricate. I drew it in several versions to be cut from Canson-paper on the laser-cutter until I arrived at a solution that worked. Assembly was also rather difficult and several parts jumped into the invisible black hole on the workbench, so that they had to be replaced. The pulley was turned from 1 mm steel rod.
 
The hook was fashioned from tinned copper-wire and the shape built up from Vallejo acrylic paint ‘oily steel’. A short piece of rope was spliced into the ring and the spherical weight built up from acrylic paint. 
 
Likewise, the powder-crane was cut from two layers of Canson-paper, soaked in varnish and painted. There is no information on what it may have looked like. I did not model the tackle, assuming that during the gun-drill in which the model will be presented, no charges were used and therefore, the tackle was not rigged. Only a shackle was fashioned from tinned copper wire.
 
Lamp-boards
Another small item on my to-do-list were the lamp-boards. According to the very first photograph of SMS WESPE these were placed at the front end of the deckhouse surrounding the barbette. In the lithograph and in later photographs they are shown on short poles towards the rear end of the deckhouse and raised above the rails.
 
These lamp-boards were laser-cut in three parts from Canson-paper and painted appropriately after assembly. The petroleum-lamps are not shown, as during day-time they would have been cleaned and then stored in deckhouse(?).
 
The assembled and painted parts at their place, starbord view
 
Not much to show actually for the amount time and effort spent on the parts …
 
 To be continued ....
 

Installation and soldering of sheets to bulwarks and bulkheads.

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!  

Thanks to fellow member Ron Thibault's work in preparing   3D drawings of the Armstrong Frederick pattern, a realistic barrel was easy to have made.   Details of the George III cypher and the flash pan as well as astragal rings can be seen below.
Allan
 

 

 

It will depend upon the thickness of the plank. Carvel plank should be 3/4" thick at a minimum, although an experienced caulker may be able to caulk 1/2" carvel plank. Carvel planks are hung flushly butted edge to edge with the inboard two-thirds to one-half of the plank thickness fully against the adjacent plank or rabbet edge. The outboard two-thirds to one-half half of the plank thickness is slightly beveled so that a narrow "vee" is produced in the plank seam when the two adjacent planks are hung butted against each other. The caulking material is hammered into the "vee" seam sufficiently deep to create a space for the stopping (traditionally pitch or "marine glue") to be poured into the seam. The width of the "vee" at the outboard faces of the planks will vary depending upon the depth of the "vee," but in most cases will be between 1/4" and 3/8" as may be consistent with the thickness of the plank. Stopping was faired to the level of the deck and so would show a black or very dark brown seam of that width. However, if the stopping was poured and stopping standing proud not faired, or repairs were made roughly, a considerable overlap of the "vee" seam edges could occur, leaving a wider dark line of stopping visible with a width of as much as 3/4" to 1". However, this would not be the case on naval vessels and sharp packets which were maintained "Bristol fashion" and had their decks regularly holystoned. 
 
The below is for illustrative purposes only. It depicts "yacht construction" of a small vessel with approximately 3/4" thick planking. The caulking seams on a ship-of-the-line would be correspondingly larger due to the man-o-war's thicker planking, but not in direct proportion. The thicker planking might just as easily be caulked with a "vee" chamfer that was not much deeper than a much less thick plank. The depth of the "vee" need be no more than that required to hold the caulking material to be hammered in and leave a trough for the stopping putty or pitch on top of it. There is little to be gained by a larger "vee" and oversized "vees" would waste caulking material and be more work to caulk.