Bob Cleek

Generally, smaller scale models are built with solid hulls, rather than planked. "Miniatures" can be built on frames, but that requires a very high level of skill few of us have. Those techniques are addressed in the books on the subject of miniature ship models. A couple of good ones are Donald McNarry's Shipbuilding in Miniature (https://www.amazon.com/Shipbuilding-Miniature-Donald-McNarry/dp/0668058005) and Lloyd McCaffery's Ships in Miniature (https://www.amazon.com/Ships-Miniature-New-Manual-Modelmakers/dp/0961502134) The problem isn't getting wood that thin. (Boxwood is frequently used.) It's having the skill to work at those scales!
 
  A millimeter is about 4/100ths of an inch. Stripwood that thin can be done with the right material and the right equipment (can you say "Byrnes saw?"), but don't expect to buy it off the shelf easily. You'll likely have to mill it yourself. Some plane off shavings, soak them and lay them out under glass to dry flat and work with that. As Dirty Harry said, "A man's got to know his limitations."  

I believe there was a destroyer named after Doris Miller previously. 
 
Since 1862, many changes in the naming conventions have occurred for a variety of reasons and many exceptions have been made to the existing rules. Since 1968, carriers have been named for presidents, beginning with the JFK, although exceptions have been the rule. From all indications in practice, the Secretary of the Navy makes the name call and, given the increasing politicizing of the DOD, a lot of names seem to be chosen to satisfy the dictates of the political party of the presidential administration that's in power at the time of the naming. Remarkably, we have in recent years seen ships, including the George H. W. Bush and Ronald Reagan, named for living persons, which previously was never done.         

I’m curious the backstory behind naming a super carrier after Miller.  Up until now, heroic and notable naval and marine corps personnel were honored by having destroyers and frigates named for them. Including more than a few Medal of Honor recipients and people of color.  Not sure how/why Miller was bumped to the top of the list of heroic figures, but it seems odd. On another site someone suggested it would have been more appropriate to name the lead ship of the new class of FFGs after Miller, I think I agree.
 
FWIW,
 
Keith

Eric,
 
She's really becoming a beautiful model.
 
I am by no means an expert on steamboats. Most of what I know I have learned from you, Kurt and many others in the discussions on this forum. However, during my reading of some of these builds, just about all of which you have contributed to in some sort of fashion, there have been many a discussion on the paddle wheel box size. All of which bring up great arguments for the differences in the sizes of the paddle boxes.
 
In Greg's build of the Heroine around post #544 there is an in depth discussion of the size of her paddle boxes in relation to the size of her paddle wheel. One of your comments in this build was the possibility the extra room was to allow for any debris picked up by the paddle wheel to pass through without causing too much destruction to the housings or as Bob said earlier (post # 342), the extra room could have been built in for ease of river maintenance. All good reasons for the over sizing of the paddle box.
 
On the other hand, as Bob also stated, would the owners have gone though the added expense to make them over sized and would they have built them so wide as to block passage from fore to aft as you stated. I know these were not luxury liners, but accommodations could have been made for the ease of paying customers to walk the length of the boat without having to go between decks to get there.
 
Even after studying the excavation pictures above there is truly no definitive answer other than the superstructure supporting the paddle wheels could have been used for the upper decks support as well as the support for the top of the paddle boxes. For what it's worth, my two cents is that I tend to believe that the paddle boxes on Arabia would have not been too much wider than the paddle wheels. Their inboard walls would have fell in line with the superstructure supports of the paddle wheels and that room would have been provided for passengers and crew to pass between the walls of the paddle box and the boiler deck walls.
 
I know this isn't much help with your conundrum, but either way you decide to build her I'm sure she will come out looking outstanding. 
 
-Brian

Perhaps you're joking. If not, actually, the fittings are bronze (always bronze, never brass) and, properly, they are left unpolished and left to weather and form a patina, as with bronze statues.
 

I've seen more "gold platers" in my day than most, having once worked for a classic yacht brokerage many years ago, and I thought I'd seen everything, but I have to say that I've never, ever, seen blocks with fitted leather covers sewn on them to keep them from getting nicked up! I guess they're the nautical equivalent of the old Porsche hood "bras." (That application generally is addressed by a "thump mat," a Turk's head spread flat and placed with the eye bolt passing through the middle.)
 
 

Yeah, but don't forget the last paper cut you got!
 

Yeah, but don't forget the last paper cut you got!
 

If I can add a bit of advise, one newbie to another here.
The first ship kit I intended to make was an early kit, that, like yours was printed on the wood and not laser cut.
I found it incredibly frustrating to build with many of the smaller parts breaking and also very very time consuming.
In the end I managed to get the hull planked and that’s where I left it. It was a poor kit with poor instructions and it would involve a lot of ‘kit bashing’ (making bits from scratch) to make it a presentable model.
Like you, I was no stranger to model making, and I am a carpenter by trade (with a vast array of tools) but I still found it a steep learning curve.
 
So, here is my advise. Put this kit to one side for now and start with something newer and more modern. Build your skills and then once you have a kit or two under your belt come back to this.
That way you will be able to do your Grandfathers kit justice and build it into a great model.
 
Just my $0.02

Those were the days!  I would recommend cutting and sawing until you get close, but not into the printed lines.  Then sand and file as needed to fit. Sand any left over ink off.  I never did figured out whether to finish to the line, middle of the line or all the line.  Any other opinions out here?   

Back in the mid 20th century many (most, all?) kits supplied sheets of wood with the part outlines printed on them. You had to cut out the pieces one by one. Looks like someone started cutting out the center/keel part.

Back then, they did things one of two ways as there was no laser cutting.  They either printed the parts or die cut them with metal die that usually went dull pretty quick.  As for cutting, it looks like you'll have to cut even the big pieces as they're not cut all the way through.  Sort of like scratch building except the parts already drawn on the wood.

Those rubber donut and springed sheet horses are quite common on larger top-end yachts of the "Golden Age," but I never really understood the point of them. I've never come across anything on them in the literature. Maybe they were a fad and wealthy owners commissioning their yachts came to expect them, so the architects satisfied their expectations. They are unquestionably impressive, but the springs I've seen have always been quite strong. You'd have a hard time compressing one by hand, and the rubber donuts were hard, like tire rubber, and no more "compressible" than the springs. (After a few decades in the weather, the old rubber was hard as a rock, too!) Maybe they served to remind helmsmen that in boats of that size an uncontrolled jibe was to be avoided at all costs, but in the event of one, those shock absorbers wouldn't have made much difference. Generally, the stretch in the sheets and the flexibility of the spars provide all the "shock absorbing" that's needed in regular operation. (The stresses aren't sharp shocks, like when tires hit potholes, but rather fluctuations in tension.) On the other hand, they may have been developed to compensate for the lack of stretch in more modern construction when wire cable standing rigging and better cordage with less stretch came into use (and certainly later, when synthetic cordage came along.) I do recall an old timer from the "Big Boat" ocean racing fraternity telling me how a lot of the large ocean racers suffered a lot of busted gear, broken frames, deck leaks, and such when everybody went to Dacron line and sailcloth and hydraulic backstay tensioners and big geared deck winches to squeeze a bit more speed out of their boats. They were then able to really crank down on the rigging far beyond what the boats had ever been engineered to handle. Those "buffered" sheet horses may have been some attempt to compensate for some of that. I don't know, but they are certainly an interesting and impressive fitting.

Good morning.

I'm sure that she did....however, records indicate she was only partially rigged when she went down from Boston to New York.....suggesting she would fill out her sail compliment once there. 
I took the liberty to remove the crossjack for better viewing of the mizzen rigging and that of the spanker.
Sail configurations were in part that of the privy of the captain........So I *Privied*.....
 
Thanks for noticing.
 
Rob 

Placed the spanker in the hull for some balance and measurements.  Making sure everything is correct before I finalize the stepping and glue the mast in place.
 
Rob

I them moved on to the spanker mast build..beginning with making the boom and gaff and the hoop rings.
I made the lift truck for the purchase block and mounted it to the spanker.

Yes Dan thank you. I think I am going to have to sort out a miniature table saw. 
 
Michael

Perhaps you're joking. If not, actually, the fittings are bronze (always bronze, never brass) and, properly, they are left unpolished and left to weather and form a patina, as with bronze statues.
 

Those rubber donut and springed sheet horses are quite common on larger top-end yachts of the "Golden Age," but I never really understood the point of them. I've never come across anything on them in the literature. Maybe they were a fad and wealthy owners commissioning their yachts came to expect them, so the architects satisfied their expectations. They are unquestionably impressive, but the springs I've seen have always been quite strong. You'd have a hard time compressing one by hand, and the rubber donuts were hard, like tire rubber, and no more "compressible" than the springs. (After a few decades in the weather, the old rubber was hard as a rock, too!) Maybe they served to remind helmsmen that in boats of that size an uncontrolled jibe was to be avoided at all costs, but in the event of one, those shock absorbers wouldn't have made much difference. Generally, the stretch in the sheets and the flexibility of the spars provide all the "shock absorbing" that's needed in regular operation. (The stresses aren't sharp shocks, like when tires hit potholes, but rather fluctuations in tension.) On the other hand, they may have been developed to compensate for the lack of stretch in more modern construction when wire cable standing rigging and better cordage with less stretch came into use (and certainly later, when synthetic cordage came along.) I do recall an old timer from the "Big Boat" ocean racing fraternity telling me how a lot of the large ocean racers suffered a lot of busted gear, broken frames, deck leaks, and such when everybody went to Dacron line and sailcloth and hydraulic backstay tensioners and big geared deck winches to squeeze a bit more speed out of their boats. They were then able to really crank down on the rigging far beyond what the boats had ever been engineered to handle. Those "buffered" sheet horses may have been some attempt to compensate for some of that. I don't know, but they are certainly an interesting and impressive fitting.

Bob - I would agree that these shock absorbers are unlikely to be of a lot of use in and uncontrolled jibe. I once sailed on Simon Le Bons yacht "Drum" (fortunately not at the time she lost her keel). At the time she had huge plates welded on to either side of the main boom to repair the damage caused by an uncontrolled jibe. According to there skipper the jibe had bent the boom through about 45 degrees - remarkable given its very ample section. However it is my experience that even a controlled jibe in inclement weather can lead to boom whipping across until restricted by the main sheet. Under these circumstances both rubber and spring types of absorber will act to mitigate / reduce the instantaneous impact load. The loads on a big yacht can be many tons and ones inability to compress springs by hand is understandable. I agree with you that age hardened rubber wont work and my assumption is that the donuts have a recommended replacement cycle.

Perhaps you're joking. If not, actually, the fittings are bronze (always bronze, never brass) and, properly, they are left unpolished and left to weather and form a patina, as with bronze statues.
 

Perhaps you're joking. If not, actually, the fittings are bronze (always bronze, never brass) and, properly, they are left unpolished and left to weather and form a patina, as with bronze statues.
 

Those rubber donut and springed sheet horses are quite common on larger top-end yachts of the "Golden Age," but I never really understood the point of them. I've never come across anything on them in the literature. Maybe they were a fad and wealthy owners commissioning their yachts came to expect them, so the architects satisfied their expectations. They are unquestionably impressive, but the springs I've seen have always been quite strong. You'd have a hard time compressing one by hand, and the rubber donuts were hard, like tire rubber, and no more "compressible" than the springs. (After a few decades in the weather, the old rubber was hard as a rock, too!) Maybe they served to remind helmsmen that in boats of that size an uncontrolled jibe was to be avoided at all costs, but in the event of one, those shock absorbers wouldn't have made much difference. Generally, the stretch in the sheets and the flexibility of the spars provide all the "shock absorbing" that's needed in regular operation. (The stresses aren't sharp shocks, like when tires hit potholes, but rather fluctuations in tension.) On the other hand, they may have been developed to compensate for the lack of stretch in more modern construction when wire cable standing rigging and better cordage with less stretch came into use (and certainly later, when synthetic cordage came along.) I do recall an old timer from the "Big Boat" ocean racing fraternity telling me how a lot of the large ocean racers suffered a lot of busted gear, broken frames, deck leaks, and such when everybody went to Dacron line and sailcloth and hydraulic backstay tensioners and big geared deck winches to squeeze a bit more speed out of their boats. They were then able to really crank down on the rigging far beyond what the boats had ever been engineered to handle. Those "buffered" sheet horses may have been some attempt to compensate for some of that. I don't know, but they are certainly an interesting and impressive fitting.

Here is Altair's shock absorber - about 1" long.

 
Bob / Druxey
 
Altair's leather covered blocks are the nicest i have ever seen -