Bob Cleek

Focusing on your comment that "I'm in the process of assessing this craft to see if its something I want to undertake; a decision I'm not taking lightly."
 
Begin with a quality kit that is designed for "beginners." This forum is full of evaluations on kits and you should review those. A "fore and aft" rigged vessel will be much less challenging than a square-rigged one. Bluejacket Shipcrafters offers a fine line of "Ensign" or beginner's level kits. http://www.bluejacketinc.com/kits/index.htm#ensign Model Shipways (MicroMark) has a British Admiralty longboat kit that is highly recommended for a serious beginner's project. This kit includes a basic tool kit and paints needed to complete the model for around $100. https://www.micromark.com/Model-Shipways-MS1457TL-Longboat-Ship-Kit-with-Tools-1-48 If you sign up for the MicroMark's catalog, you will get regular emails providing premium codes for significant discounts. (Presently, IIRC, MicroMark or a similar company, ModelExpo, are having a 20% off premium code sale.) This longboat model was designed by Chuck Passaro, a MSW forum moderator and his construction of the prototype model can be found at https://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/topic/629-18th-century-english-longboat-by-chuck-c1760/. It is incredibly well illustrated and contains full explanations of every process together with answers to the many questions asked by MSW members who are now building the kit.
 
An important point is that the "build logs" in this forum are very informative. (Some more than others, however, for whatever reason. I have no idea how the modelers who post the really fantastically photographed and instructively written logs have the time to build their model and photograph and write about it at the same time!) The detail and workmanship of some of the masters is breathtaking... and can easily scare off someone who lacks a lifetime of experience and a shop full of specialized power tools. Appreciate and learn from the masters, but realize that if you take care and don't rush your work, it is possible for anyone with patience, attention to detail, and perseverance to build a fine kit model which can deservedly be displayed with pride. It is easily possible to spend thousands of dollars on micro-scale machine tools, but it is also entirely possible to accomplish the same work with hand tools and a bit more time.
 
As for what tools are needed, follow this maxim: "Never buy a tool unless you need it and when you do, buy the best tool you can possibly afford." Properly cared for,  tools retain their value and, for those of us who appreciate them, are a joy to own.  Also, remember the corollary to the above maxim, as well: "A cheap tool will have to be bought twice."  I expect that every MSW member who's been building models for any length of time can give examples of the money we've wasted in our younger years buying seductively advertised "ship modeling tools" offered in the many catalogs that are available. I expect many bought the now-infamous "Loom-A-line" plastic frame that was touted as essential for tying ratlines to shrouds and is totally and completely useless for any purpose whatsoever!  (Fortunately, it wasn't that expensive.) Many of the ship modeling tools sold in the popular catalogs, even when useful, are liable to be of poor quality, fit, and finish. Far higher quality hand tools can usually be purchased from professional jewelry-making and medical surgical instrument supply houses, and often for the same price, if not less, than the modeling tool catalogs. (This applies to edged tools especially.) You will probably find that you already have a lot, if not most, of the tools you will need when starting out lying around the house. 
 
The specific tools you might need to get started are little more than a hobby knife, some decent tweezers, a sharp fine pointed pair of scissors, a set of small files, and a selection of sandpaper. (And, some of the top retailers like ModelExpo and MicroMark often package those tools along with their "introductory kits" at a large discount to get you "hooked.") Beyond that, the model you build will instruct you in what you need as you go along. This section of the MSW forum on Modeling Tools and Workshop Equipment provides invaluable information. (The "search" thingy in the upper right hand corner of the page is your friend.) You will find experienced modelers commenting at length on the merits of just about every tool and material known to man or beast. If, perchance, you can't find information on a tool or material already discussed, just post your question and somebody will surely have a good answer for you. If you limit yourself to acquiring fine tools you need, that too can become a hobby in itself! Spending twenty-five bucks or so on a good tool now and then is not likely to be noticed by the purser of the household and is a healthy way to treat yourself when you deserve it!
 
With something like the Model Shipways longboat kit, you will risk little money in finding out whether building model ships is something you enjoy doing and you won't end up being one of those people who spent a thousand bucks or more on a spectacular Seventeenth or Eighteenth Century warship model kit which might well be so intimidating that it is never started, let alone finished.
 
So before getting off into buying a lot of tools, I'd urge you to pick put a model that strikes your fancy, keeping the first one simple. Don't bite off more than you can chew. Then look it up in the "Kit Build Logs" index (at the top of the "Build Logs" section of the forum.) There is a build log, and often several, for just about every model kit worth building in that section. Those logs written by modelers, some building their first model, will give you an excellent idea of what is involved in building any given kit. That will give you the confidence to proceed with the particular model that interests you... or at least determine "if its something I want to undertake."
 
Lastly, stay away from eBay and only buy a kit from a retailer who will supply missing parts and plans if that comes to pass and never, ever, buy Chinese or Russian "knock off" counterfeit kits pirated from legitimate manufacturers. Not only do they rip off legitimate kit designers and manufacturers, but, simply put, they are not worth even the cut rate prices they charge for them.

Your work is a joy to behold! I've hung my share of full-size coiled falls on belaying pins in my day and I can confirm that your deciding to hang them as you have is correct.  It's done as pictured on the Joseph Conrad above, although it looks like in that picture a few more turns around the pin than is necessary (or properly shipshape) have been taken. Correctly, the fall is brought down and beneath the rail, behind the bottom of the pin, up and across and behind the top of the pin, back down and hitched over the top of the pin. More than one "figure eight" around the pin only makes for more work casting the line off the pin.

The 1870's picture of the Inuit kids on the deck also shows the coils correctly hung on the pins, although, as is clear from all the cargo and gear on deck, the vessel wasn't sailing and they were probably working on the rigging and not too particular about it at the moment, as things certainly aren't "shipshape." Still, any able seaman would automatically coil the fall into one hand, or on deck if it were too long to hold in one hand, starting at the pin end and leaving a length free from the pin, imparting a half-twist as each coil was measured out at arm's length, so the laid line would not kink, and when the fall was fully coiled, present it to the pin and reach through the center of the coil and grab the length of line between the coil and the pin, giving it a turn, or two, depending upon it's length, pulling the twisted line back through the center of the coil and up in front of the coil and over the top of the pin. (For lighter lines, one can take a longer length between the pin and coil and take a couple of turns around the coil with it to gather the coil together, and then bring it through the coil above the turn and place it over the pin. This will gather the coil of light line tightly and more neatly.) In this fashion, the loop over the top of the pin could be cast free and the coil fall to the deck, the side closest to the pin facing upwards, and the coiled fall will be ready to run free without fouling. Any seaman that failed to do it that way back in the day would likely get the bosun's start across his back! LOL
 
I don't know how many otherwise exquisite models I've seen with the coiled falls simply hung over the pins. It should be easy to imagine the consequence of that in heavy weather with decks awash... the deck would soon be a rat's nest of tangled cordage! Another frequently seen "faux pas" are coils that are the wrong size.  Each coil should be as long as is necessary for that part of the rigging to run as intended. If the line, such as a headsail halyard, runs to the top of a headstay, then the belayed coil when the sail is set should be made up of a length of line equal to the distance to the halyard block. Were it shorter, the bitter end of the halyard would run aloft and out of reach when the sail was struck. Coils on a pin rail if neatly done should all be about the same length, pin to deck, but of different girths, reflecting the amount of line properly needed. That detail is very frequently overlooked, even on otherwise very well-done models. Then there are the all-too-common "white" deadeye lanyards which in practice are always tarred "black," ... misplaced and oversized  trunnels, plank butts on frames, ... and overly long planks... but I digress.
 
I'd probably be a very unpopular model competition judge, but whether or not a model was built by a modeler with a command of full-sized shipbuilding practices and marlinspike seamanship is immediately obvious to the "sailor's eye." My obnoxious pontification isn't intended as a criticism, but rather to point out that you've illustrated here the correct way to do it and to offer the observation to those "landsmen" who otherwise must rely on instructions that come with a kit that learning to "think like a sailor" will avoid such pitfalls.

I can't say for sure how the spanker was stuck on the real ship, either, ("different ships, different long splices,") but given the snow mast, which would presumably carry luff hoops on a vessel that size (rather than a laced luff,) I suspect the rig you describe was intended to provide the option of some sort of brailing if desired. There are no "lazy jacks" on the spanker boom, although the topping life rigging appears if would offer the same control of the gaff boom, at least, but perhaps not the sail itself. The spanker is going to be close to, if not the largest sail on the ship and difficult to handle when coming down. This is particularly so, since the spanker boom extends outboard a fair distance, foot ropes or not. The task of "smothering" and lashing down a fore and aft sail is, IMHO, a lot more of a hassle than square sails.  The latter usually flutter outward away from the yard when the sheets are started and do not tend to interfere with the job of gathering them up and reefing or lashing them down. A gaff rigged sail comes down on top of you, and in this instance, on top of the helmsman and, in any kind of a blow, will flog all and sundry within range. (And the weight of wet canvas in a sail of that size is not to be underestimated.) I would think the best way to handle this spanker would be to simultaneously lower the gaff boom and haul the clew inboard and the the leech to the extent possible as she comes down, then beat whatever canvas isn't controlled by the clew inhaul, lazy jacks,  and brails into submission and stop her up.  Were she my ship, I'd be inclined to drop a couple of lazy jacks from the topping lift pendants down and under the spanker boom and back up again on the other side to control the canvas as the gaff boom was lowered. I don't know if that was common practice on ships of that size, though it's quite common in smaller gaff rigged vessels I've known.
 
As for the color of deadeye lanyards, it is indeed black, or dark brown, tending to black as additional pine tar is added as a matter of routine maintenance. All deadeye lanyards and other similar lashings were of tarred hemp (and still are, if you can find it!) There is rarely, if ever, any need to "adjust the tension" of standing rigging in ships such as this one and deadeye lanyards rarely, if ever, are "adjusted." The lanyards should be pre-stretched when new and, thus, should not stretch appreciably in use. Even if they did stretch when new, they'd only need to be taken up once and the problem would be solved for all time. The sort of rigging we are talking about here was designed to "give" so that the strain on the spars and hull would be minimized. (We're not talking about a "high strung" modern jib-headed Marconi racing rig here.) In fact, the friction generated by the lanyards against the deadeye holes makes them quite difficult to set up, let alone  "adjust." The deadeye holes are greased before the tarred hemp lanyard is tightened, but even so, the tightening requires that a purchase clapped onto the shroud be taken to the end of the lanyard in order to get sufficient tension on it. (I've actually had to attach a second purchase on the length of lanyard running from deadeye hole to hole in order to "sweat" the lanyard through all five of the running eyes so that each segment was uniformly tight.) The deadeyes do spread the line stresses in much the same manner as a block purchase, but the lanyards do not run freely as they do in a sheaved block... not by a long shot! When a whole gang of deadeyes and lanyards are made up and fastened with the sheer pole and lashings, all tarred and, modernly, often painted, they are essentially a permanent thing not meant to be untied to be adjusted regularly.
 
Here's all anybody building models could ever need to know about deadeyes and lanyards, from a website selling full-sized traditional rigging supplies: http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/articles/setting-up-shrouds.pdf Perhaps it will serve to eliminate those light-colored lanyards we see so often!
 
I don't want to sound inappropriately critical, but I'd suggest you take a close look at your spanker boom topping lift rigging. The distance between the pendant purchase tackle appears too short to be of much use. You might want to play with it a bit and see just how much the end of the boom will rise when the tackle is two-blocked. I can't tell for sure, but it looks to me like it would only raise the boom about five feet at most, which isn't much. You can't really know if it is "right" until you consider how high up off the deck  the end of the boom is going to be when the sail is set, and then the topping lift would need a bit more "lift" beyond that if it were to be effective. Also, note the forward mast band to which the forward topping lifts are attached. It appears to be too far aft to be of any use. Imagine that the topping lift is hauling up the boom. With the forward band where it is now, rather than further forward, the angle of the "pull" is really only pulling the boom forward against the gooseneck and not upwards, as a topping lift should. If the band were placed forward so that the direction of pull of the forward topping lift line were in the other direction, the pull of the pendants would be "up" instead of "forward."  If so, they would also better serve as lazy jacks to control the gaff as it came down.
 
Great modeling, BTW. I'm really enjoying following your build!

I can't say for sure how the spanker was stuck on the real ship, either, ("different ships, different long splices,") but given the snow mast, which would presumably carry luff hoops on a vessel that size (rather than a laced luff,) I suspect the rig you describe was intended to provide the option of some sort of brailing if desired. There are no "lazy jacks" on the spanker boom, although the topping life rigging appears if would offer the same control of the gaff boom, at least, but perhaps not the sail itself. The spanker is going to be close to, if not the largest sail on the ship and difficult to handle when coming down. This is particularly so, since the spanker boom extends outboard a fair distance, foot ropes or not. The task of "smothering" and lashing down a fore and aft sail is, IMHO, a lot more of a hassle than square sails.  The latter usually flutter outward away from the yard when the sheets are started and do not tend to interfere with the job of gathering them up and reefing or lashing them down. A gaff rigged sail comes down on top of you, and in this instance, on top of the helmsman and, in any kind of a blow, will flog all and sundry within range. (And the weight of wet canvas in a sail of that size is not to be underestimated.) I would think the best way to handle this spanker would be to simultaneously lower the gaff boom and haul the clew inboard and the the leech to the extent possible as she comes down, then beat whatever canvas isn't controlled by the clew inhaul, lazy jacks,  and brails into submission and stop her up.  Were she my ship, I'd be inclined to drop a couple of lazy jacks from the topping lift pendants down and under the spanker boom and back up again on the other side to control the canvas as the gaff boom was lowered. I don't know if that was common practice on ships of that size, though it's quite common in smaller gaff rigged vessels I've known.
 
As for the color of deadeye lanyards, it is indeed black, or dark brown, tending to black as additional pine tar is added as a matter of routine maintenance. All deadeye lanyards and other similar lashings were of tarred hemp (and still are, if you can find it!) There is rarely, if ever, any need to "adjust the tension" of standing rigging in ships such as this one and deadeye lanyards rarely, if ever, are "adjusted." The lanyards should be pre-stretched when new and, thus, should not stretch appreciably in use. Even if they did stretch when new, they'd only need to be taken up once and the problem would be solved for all time. The sort of rigging we are talking about here was designed to "give" so that the strain on the spars and hull would be minimized. (We're not talking about a "high strung" modern jib-headed Marconi racing rig here.) In fact, the friction generated by the lanyards against the deadeye holes makes them quite difficult to set up, let alone  "adjust." The deadeye holes are greased before the tarred hemp lanyard is tightened, but even so, the tightening requires that a purchase clapped onto the shroud be taken to the end of the lanyard in order to get sufficient tension on it. (I've actually had to attach a second purchase on the length of lanyard running from deadeye hole to hole in order to "sweat" the lanyard through all five of the running eyes so that each segment was uniformly tight.) The deadeyes do spread the line stresses in much the same manner as a block purchase, but the lanyards do not run freely as they do in a sheaved block... not by a long shot! When a whole gang of deadeyes and lanyards are made up and fastened with the sheer pole and lashings, all tarred and, modernly, often painted, they are essentially a permanent thing not meant to be untied to be adjusted regularly.
 
Here's all anybody building models could ever need to know about deadeyes and lanyards, from a website selling full-sized traditional rigging supplies: http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/articles/setting-up-shrouds.pdf Perhaps it will serve to eliminate those light-colored lanyards we see so often!
 
I don't want to sound inappropriately critical, but I'd suggest you take a close look at your spanker boom topping lift rigging. The distance between the pendant purchase tackle appears too short to be of much use. You might want to play with it a bit and see just how much the end of the boom will rise when the tackle is two-blocked. I can't tell for sure, but it looks to me like it would only raise the boom about five feet at most, which isn't much. You can't really know if it is "right" until you consider how high up off the deck  the end of the boom is going to be when the sail is set, and then the topping lift would need a bit more "lift" beyond that if it were to be effective. Also, note the forward mast band to which the forward topping lifts are attached. It appears to be too far aft to be of any use. Imagine that the topping lift is hauling up the boom. With the forward band where it is now, rather than further forward, the angle of the "pull" is really only pulling the boom forward against the gooseneck and not upwards, as a topping lift should. If the band were placed forward so that the direction of pull of the forward topping lift line were in the other direction, the pull of the pendants would be "up" instead of "forward."  If so, they would also better serve as lazy jacks to control the gaff as it came down.
 
Great modeling, BTW. I'm really enjoying following your build!

I can't say for sure how the spanker was stuck on the real ship, either, ("different ships, different long splices,") but given the snow mast, which would presumably carry luff hoops on a vessel that size (rather than a laced luff,) I suspect the rig you describe was intended to provide the option of some sort of brailing if desired. There are no "lazy jacks" on the spanker boom, although the topping life rigging appears if would offer the same control of the gaff boom, at least, but perhaps not the sail itself. The spanker is going to be close to, if not the largest sail on the ship and difficult to handle when coming down. This is particularly so, since the spanker boom extends outboard a fair distance, foot ropes or not. The task of "smothering" and lashing down a fore and aft sail is, IMHO, a lot more of a hassle than square sails.  The latter usually flutter outward away from the yard when the sheets are started and do not tend to interfere with the job of gathering them up and reefing or lashing them down. A gaff rigged sail comes down on top of you, and in this instance, on top of the helmsman and, in any kind of a blow, will flog all and sundry within range. (And the weight of wet canvas in a sail of that size is not to be underestimated.) I would think the best way to handle this spanker would be to simultaneously lower the gaff boom and haul the clew inboard and the the leech to the extent possible as she comes down, then beat whatever canvas isn't controlled by the clew inhaul, lazy jacks,  and brails into submission and stop her up.  Were she my ship, I'd be inclined to drop a couple of lazy jacks from the topping lift pendants down and under the spanker boom and back up again on the other side to control the canvas as the gaff boom was lowered. I don't know if that was common practice on ships of that size, though it's quite common in smaller gaff rigged vessels I've known.
 
As for the color of deadeye lanyards, it is indeed black, or dark brown, tending to black as additional pine tar is added as a matter of routine maintenance. All deadeye lanyards and other similar lashings were of tarred hemp (and still are, if you can find it!) There is rarely, if ever, any need to "adjust the tension" of standing rigging in ships such as this one and deadeye lanyards rarely, if ever, are "adjusted." The lanyards should be pre-stretched when new and, thus, should not stretch appreciably in use. Even if they did stretch when new, they'd only need to be taken up once and the problem would be solved for all time. The sort of rigging we are talking about here was designed to "give" so that the strain on the spars and hull would be minimized. (We're not talking about a "high strung" modern jib-headed Marconi racing rig here.) In fact, the friction generated by the lanyards against the deadeye holes makes them quite difficult to set up, let alone  "adjust." The deadeye holes are greased before the tarred hemp lanyard is tightened, but even so, the tightening requires that a purchase clapped onto the shroud be taken to the end of the lanyard in order to get sufficient tension on it. (I've actually had to attach a second purchase on the length of lanyard running from deadeye hole to hole in order to "sweat" the lanyard through all five of the running eyes so that each segment was uniformly tight.) The deadeyes do spread the line stresses in much the same manner as a block purchase, but the lanyards do not run freely as they do in a sheaved block... not by a long shot! When a whole gang of deadeyes and lanyards are made up and fastened with the sheer pole and lashings, all tarred and, modernly, often painted, they are essentially a permanent thing not meant to be untied to be adjusted regularly.
 
Here's all anybody building models could ever need to know about deadeyes and lanyards, from a website selling full-sized traditional rigging supplies: http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/articles/setting-up-shrouds.pdf Perhaps it will serve to eliminate those light-colored lanyards we see so often!
 
I don't want to sound inappropriately critical, but I'd suggest you take a close look at your spanker boom topping lift rigging. The distance between the pendant purchase tackle appears too short to be of much use. You might want to play with it a bit and see just how much the end of the boom will rise when the tackle is two-blocked. I can't tell for sure, but it looks to me like it would only raise the boom about five feet at most, which isn't much. You can't really know if it is "right" until you consider how high up off the deck  the end of the boom is going to be when the sail is set, and then the topping lift would need a bit more "lift" beyond that if it were to be effective. Also, note the forward mast band to which the forward topping lifts are attached. It appears to be too far aft to be of any use. Imagine that the topping lift is hauling up the boom. With the forward band where it is now, rather than further forward, the angle of the "pull" is really only pulling the boom forward against the gooseneck and not upwards, as a topping lift should. If the band were placed forward so that the direction of pull of the forward topping lift line were in the other direction, the pull of the pendants would be "up" instead of "forward."  If so, they would also better serve as lazy jacks to control the gaff as it came down.
 
Great modeling, BTW. I'm really enjoying following your build!

It may bear noting that Alaska yellow cedar is one of those wood species that is known by many different non-scientific names. Thus, sourcing is outside of its range may be made more difficult if you don't ask for it by the right name. First off, it's not a cedar at all, but rather a cypress. It's known as Nootka cypress, yellow cypress, Alaska cypress, Pacific Coast cedar, Nootka cedar, yellow cedar, Alaska cedar, and Alaska yellow cedar. If you are googling for it, you might try some of its other commercial names, although it is most popularly called Alaska yellow cedar.
 
Unfortunately, AYC is becoming harder to source for a variety of reasons. 1) Most of it that's commercially logged is sold locally in the Pacific Northwest, where it is still readily available. 2) It's often found in areas which are difficult (i.e. expensive) to access for logging operations. 3) It's dying off throughout much of its range due to climate change and is being considered for classification as endangered. 4) Asian demand for AYC for fine woodwork sends a lot of it off as export. 5) AYC plantation forestry has only just begun to be studied and it more of a challenge than commercial cultivation of other lumber species. 6) AYC is very slow-growing, with a lifespan of well over a thousand years.
 
It is the winter snowpack that insulates the shallow and fine root systems of AYC trees from freezing. With the snow pack becoming thinner each year, the tree roots are more exposed to cold snaps which freeze their fine root systems close to the surface and kill the trees. Photos of large stands of dead AYC would make you cry, but the good news is that the dead timber is as good for lumber as the fresh for at least 90 years, and perhaps more even. Again, AYC's growing terrain makes commercial harvesting less attractive than more accessible lumber species.
 

 
The good news is that while it is considered somewhat rare outside of its natural range, there is plenty of it available in the Pacific Northwest lumberyards. The bad news is that it will cost to ship it elsewhere. I've worked with AYC planking and decking wooden boats and I'm sad to say the offcuts went into the yard dumpster or home for the fireplace. (It's also one of the best fire woods known.) I wish I'd taken more of it for my own "lumberyard" than I did when I had the chance. 
 

 
http://patlbr.com/cedar/
 
 
 

It may bear noting that Alaska yellow cedar is one of those wood species that is known by many different non-scientific names. Thus, sourcing is outside of its range may be made more difficult if you don't ask for it by the right name. First off, it's not a cedar at all, but rather a cypress. It's known as Nootka cypress, yellow cypress, Alaska cypress, Pacific Coast cedar, Nootka cedar, yellow cedar, Alaska cedar, and Alaska yellow cedar. If you are googling for it, you might try some of its other commercial names, although it is most popularly called Alaska yellow cedar.
 
Unfortunately, AYC is becoming harder to source for a variety of reasons. 1) Most of it that's commercially logged is sold locally in the Pacific Northwest, where it is still readily available. 2) It's often found in areas which are difficult (i.e. expensive) to access for logging operations. 3) It's dying off throughout much of its range due to climate change and is being considered for classification as endangered. 4) Asian demand for AYC for fine woodwork sends a lot of it off as export. 5) AYC plantation forestry has only just begun to be studied and it more of a challenge than commercial cultivation of other lumber species. 6) AYC is very slow-growing, with a lifespan of well over a thousand years.
 
It is the winter snowpack that insulates the shallow and fine root systems of AYC trees from freezing. With the snow pack becoming thinner each year, the tree roots are more exposed to cold snaps which freeze their fine root systems close to the surface and kill the trees. Photos of large stands of dead AYC would make you cry, but the good news is that the dead timber is as good for lumber as the fresh for at least 90 years, and perhaps more even. Again, AYC's growing terrain makes commercial harvesting less attractive than more accessible lumber species.
 

 
The good news is that while it is considered somewhat rare outside of its natural range, there is plenty of it available in the Pacific Northwest lumberyards. The bad news is that it will cost to ship it elsewhere. I've worked with AYC planking and decking wooden boats and I'm sad to say the offcuts went into the yard dumpster or home for the fireplace. (It's also one of the best fire woods known.) I wish I'd taken more of it for my own "lumberyard" than I did when I had the chance. 
 

 
http://patlbr.com/cedar/
 
 
 

It may bear noting that Alaska yellow cedar is one of those wood species that is known by many different non-scientific names. Thus, sourcing is outside of its range may be made more difficult if you don't ask for it by the right name. First off, it's not a cedar at all, but rather a cypress. It's known as Nootka cypress, yellow cypress, Alaska cypress, Pacific Coast cedar, Nootka cedar, yellow cedar, Alaska cedar, and Alaska yellow cedar. If you are googling for it, you might try some of its other commercial names, although it is most popularly called Alaska yellow cedar.
 
Unfortunately, AYC is becoming harder to source for a variety of reasons. 1) Most of it that's commercially logged is sold locally in the Pacific Northwest, where it is still readily available. 2) It's often found in areas which are difficult (i.e. expensive) to access for logging operations. 3) It's dying off throughout much of its range due to climate change and is being considered for classification as endangered. 4) Asian demand for AYC for fine woodwork sends a lot of it off as export. 5) AYC plantation forestry has only just begun to be studied and it more of a challenge than commercial cultivation of other lumber species. 6) AYC is very slow-growing, with a lifespan of well over a thousand years.
 
It is the winter snowpack that insulates the shallow and fine root systems of AYC trees from freezing. With the snow pack becoming thinner each year, the tree roots are more exposed to cold snaps which freeze their fine root systems close to the surface and kill the trees. Photos of large stands of dead AYC would make you cry, but the good news is that the dead timber is as good for lumber as the fresh for at least 90 years, and perhaps more even. Again, AYC's growing terrain makes commercial harvesting less attractive than more accessible lumber species.
 

 
The good news is that while it is considered somewhat rare outside of its natural range, there is plenty of it available in the Pacific Northwest lumberyards. The bad news is that it will cost to ship it elsewhere. I've worked with AYC planking and decking wooden boats and I'm sad to say the offcuts went into the yard dumpster or home for the fireplace. (It's also one of the best fire woods known.) I wish I'd taken more of it for my own "lumberyard" than I did when I had the chance. 
 

 
http://patlbr.com/cedar/
 
 
 

It may bear noting that Alaska yellow cedar is one of those wood species that is known by many different non-scientific names. Thus, sourcing is outside of its range may be made more difficult if you don't ask for it by the right name. First off, it's not a cedar at all, but rather a cypress. It's known as Nootka cypress, yellow cypress, Alaska cypress, Pacific Coast cedar, Nootka cedar, yellow cedar, Alaska cedar, and Alaska yellow cedar. If you are googling for it, you might try some of its other commercial names, although it is most popularly called Alaska yellow cedar.
 
Unfortunately, AYC is becoming harder to source for a variety of reasons. 1) Most of it that's commercially logged is sold locally in the Pacific Northwest, where it is still readily available. 2) It's often found in areas which are difficult (i.e. expensive) to access for logging operations. 3) It's dying off throughout much of its range due to climate change and is being considered for classification as endangered. 4) Asian demand for AYC for fine woodwork sends a lot of it off as export. 5) AYC plantation forestry has only just begun to be studied and it more of a challenge than commercial cultivation of other lumber species. 6) AYC is very slow-growing, with a lifespan of well over a thousand years.
 
It is the winter snowpack that insulates the shallow and fine root systems of AYC trees from freezing. With the snow pack becoming thinner each year, the tree roots are more exposed to cold snaps which freeze their fine root systems close to the surface and kill the trees. Photos of large stands of dead AYC would make you cry, but the good news is that the dead timber is as good for lumber as the fresh for at least 90 years, and perhaps more even. Again, AYC's growing terrain makes commercial harvesting less attractive than more accessible lumber species.
 

 
The good news is that while it is considered somewhat rare outside of its natural range, there is plenty of it available in the Pacific Northwest lumberyards. The bad news is that it will cost to ship it elsewhere. I've worked with AYC planking and decking wooden boats and I'm sad to say the offcuts went into the yard dumpster or home for the fireplace. (It's also one of the best fire woods known.) I wish I'd taken more of it for my own "lumberyard" than I did when I had the chance. 
 

 
http://patlbr.com/cedar/
 
 
 

It may bear noting that Alaska yellow cedar is one of those wood species that is known by many different non-scientific names. Thus, sourcing is outside of its range may be made more difficult if you don't ask for it by the right name. First off, it's not a cedar at all, but rather a cypress. It's known as Nootka cypress, yellow cypress, Alaska cypress, Pacific Coast cedar, Nootka cedar, yellow cedar, Alaska cedar, and Alaska yellow cedar. If you are googling for it, you might try some of its other commercial names, although it is most popularly called Alaska yellow cedar.
 
Unfortunately, AYC is becoming harder to source for a variety of reasons. 1) Most of it that's commercially logged is sold locally in the Pacific Northwest, where it is still readily available. 2) It's often found in areas which are difficult (i.e. expensive) to access for logging operations. 3) It's dying off throughout much of its range due to climate change and is being considered for classification as endangered. 4) Asian demand for AYC for fine woodwork sends a lot of it off as export. 5) AYC plantation forestry has only just begun to be studied and it more of a challenge than commercial cultivation of other lumber species. 6) AYC is very slow-growing, with a lifespan of well over a thousand years.
 
It is the winter snowpack that insulates the shallow and fine root systems of AYC trees from freezing. With the snow pack becoming thinner each year, the tree roots are more exposed to cold snaps which freeze their fine root systems close to the surface and kill the trees. Photos of large stands of dead AYC would make you cry, but the good news is that the dead timber is as good for lumber as the fresh for at least 90 years, and perhaps more even. Again, AYC's growing terrain makes commercial harvesting less attractive than more accessible lumber species.
 

 
The good news is that while it is considered somewhat rare outside of its natural range, there is plenty of it available in the Pacific Northwest lumberyards. The bad news is that it will cost to ship it elsewhere. I've worked with AYC planking and decking wooden boats and I'm sad to say the offcuts went into the yard dumpster or home for the fireplace. (It's also one of the best fire woods known.) I wish I'd taken more of it for my own "lumberyard" than I did when I had the chance. 
 

 
http://patlbr.com/cedar/
 
 
 

It may bear noting that Alaska yellow cedar is one of those wood species that is known by many different non-scientific names. Thus, sourcing is outside of its range may be made more difficult if you don't ask for it by the right name. First off, it's not a cedar at all, but rather a cypress. It's known as Nootka cypress, yellow cypress, Alaska cypress, Pacific Coast cedar, Nootka cedar, yellow cedar, Alaska cedar, and Alaska yellow cedar. If you are googling for it, you might try some of its other commercial names, although it is most popularly called Alaska yellow cedar.
 
Unfortunately, AYC is becoming harder to source for a variety of reasons. 1) Most of it that's commercially logged is sold locally in the Pacific Northwest, where it is still readily available. 2) It's often found in areas which are difficult (i.e. expensive) to access for logging operations. 3) It's dying off throughout much of its range due to climate change and is being considered for classification as endangered. 4) Asian demand for AYC for fine woodwork sends a lot of it off as export. 5) AYC plantation forestry has only just begun to be studied and it more of a challenge than commercial cultivation of other lumber species. 6) AYC is very slow-growing, with a lifespan of well over a thousand years.
 
It is the winter snowpack that insulates the shallow and fine root systems of AYC trees from freezing. With the snow pack becoming thinner each year, the tree roots are more exposed to cold snaps which freeze their fine root systems close to the surface and kill the trees. Photos of large stands of dead AYC would make you cry, but the good news is that the dead timber is as good for lumber as the fresh for at least 90 years, and perhaps more even. Again, AYC's growing terrain makes commercial harvesting less attractive than more accessible lumber species.
 

 
The good news is that while it is considered somewhat rare outside of its natural range, there is plenty of it available in the Pacific Northwest lumberyards. The bad news is that it will cost to ship it elsewhere. I've worked with AYC planking and decking wooden boats and I'm sad to say the offcuts went into the yard dumpster or home for the fireplace. (It's also one of the best fire woods known.) I wish I'd taken more of it for my own "lumberyard" than I did when I had the chance. 
 

 
http://patlbr.com/cedar/
 
 
 

It may bear noting that Alaska yellow cedar is one of those wood species that is known by many different non-scientific names. Thus, sourcing is outside of its range may be made more difficult if you don't ask for it by the right name. First off, it's not a cedar at all, but rather a cypress. It's known as Nootka cypress, yellow cypress, Alaska cypress, Pacific Coast cedar, Nootka cedar, yellow cedar, Alaska cedar, and Alaska yellow cedar. If you are googling for it, you might try some of its other commercial names, although it is most popularly called Alaska yellow cedar.
 
Unfortunately, AYC is becoming harder to source for a variety of reasons. 1) Most of it that's commercially logged is sold locally in the Pacific Northwest, where it is still readily available. 2) It's often found in areas which are difficult (i.e. expensive) to access for logging operations. 3) It's dying off throughout much of its range due to climate change and is being considered for classification as endangered. 4) Asian demand for AYC for fine woodwork sends a lot of it off as export. 5) AYC plantation forestry has only just begun to be studied and it more of a challenge than commercial cultivation of other lumber species. 6) AYC is very slow-growing, with a lifespan of well over a thousand years.
 
It is the winter snowpack that insulates the shallow and fine root systems of AYC trees from freezing. With the snow pack becoming thinner each year, the tree roots are more exposed to cold snaps which freeze their fine root systems close to the surface and kill the trees. Photos of large stands of dead AYC would make you cry, but the good news is that the dead timber is as good for lumber as the fresh for at least 90 years, and perhaps more even. Again, AYC's growing terrain makes commercial harvesting less attractive than more accessible lumber species.
 

 
The good news is that while it is considered somewhat rare outside of its natural range, there is plenty of it available in the Pacific Northwest lumberyards. The bad news is that it will cost to ship it elsewhere. I've worked with AYC planking and decking wooden boats and I'm sad to say the offcuts went into the yard dumpster or home for the fireplace. (It's also one of the best fire woods known.) I wish I'd taken more of it for my own "lumberyard" than I did when I had the chance. 
 

 
http://patlbr.com/cedar/
 
 
 

It may bear noting that Alaska yellow cedar is one of those wood species that is known by many different non-scientific names. Thus, sourcing is outside of its range may be made more difficult if you don't ask for it by the right name. First off, it's not a cedar at all, but rather a cypress. It's known as Nootka cypress, yellow cypress, Alaska cypress, Pacific Coast cedar, Nootka cedar, yellow cedar, Alaska cedar, and Alaska yellow cedar. If you are googling for it, you might try some of its other commercial names, although it is most popularly called Alaska yellow cedar.
 
Unfortunately, AYC is becoming harder to source for a variety of reasons. 1) Most of it that's commercially logged is sold locally in the Pacific Northwest, where it is still readily available. 2) It's often found in areas which are difficult (i.e. expensive) to access for logging operations. 3) It's dying off throughout much of its range due to climate change and is being considered for classification as endangered. 4) Asian demand for AYC for fine woodwork sends a lot of it off as export. 5) AYC plantation forestry has only just begun to be studied and it more of a challenge than commercial cultivation of other lumber species. 6) AYC is very slow-growing, with a lifespan of well over a thousand years.
 
It is the winter snowpack that insulates the shallow and fine root systems of AYC trees from freezing. With the snow pack becoming thinner each year, the tree roots are more exposed to cold snaps which freeze their fine root systems close to the surface and kill the trees. Photos of large stands of dead AYC would make you cry, but the good news is that the dead timber is as good for lumber as the fresh for at least 90 years, and perhaps more even. Again, AYC's growing terrain makes commercial harvesting less attractive than more accessible lumber species.
 

 
The good news is that while it is considered somewhat rare outside of its natural range, there is plenty of it available in the Pacific Northwest lumberyards. The bad news is that it will cost to ship it elsewhere. I've worked with AYC planking and decking wooden boats and I'm sad to say the offcuts went into the yard dumpster or home for the fireplace. (It's also one of the best fire woods known.) I wish I'd taken more of it for my own "lumberyard" than I did when I had the chance. 
 

 
http://patlbr.com/cedar/
 
 
 

It may bear noting that Alaska yellow cedar is one of those wood species that is known by many different non-scientific names. Thus, sourcing is outside of its range may be made more difficult if you don't ask for it by the right name. First off, it's not a cedar at all, but rather a cypress. It's known as Nootka cypress, yellow cypress, Alaska cypress, Pacific Coast cedar, Nootka cedar, yellow cedar, Alaska cedar, and Alaska yellow cedar. If you are googling for it, you might try some of its other commercial names, although it is most popularly called Alaska yellow cedar.
 
Unfortunately, AYC is becoming harder to source for a variety of reasons. 1) Most of it that's commercially logged is sold locally in the Pacific Northwest, where it is still readily available. 2) It's often found in areas which are difficult (i.e. expensive) to access for logging operations. 3) It's dying off throughout much of its range due to climate change and is being considered for classification as endangered. 4) Asian demand for AYC for fine woodwork sends a lot of it off as export. 5) AYC plantation forestry has only just begun to be studied and it more of a challenge than commercial cultivation of other lumber species. 6) AYC is very slow-growing, with a lifespan of well over a thousand years.
 
It is the winter snowpack that insulates the shallow and fine root systems of AYC trees from freezing. With the snow pack becoming thinner each year, the tree roots are more exposed to cold snaps which freeze their fine root systems close to the surface and kill the trees. Photos of large stands of dead AYC would make you cry, but the good news is that the dead timber is as good for lumber as the fresh for at least 90 years, and perhaps more even. Again, AYC's growing terrain makes commercial harvesting less attractive than more accessible lumber species.
 

 
The good news is that while it is considered somewhat rare outside of its natural range, there is plenty of it available in the Pacific Northwest lumberyards. The bad news is that it will cost to ship it elsewhere. I've worked with AYC planking and decking wooden boats and I'm sad to say the offcuts went into the yard dumpster or home for the fireplace. (It's also one of the best fire woods known.) I wish I'd taken more of it for my own "lumberyard" than I did when I had the chance. 
 

 
http://patlbr.com/cedar/
 
 
 

Your work is a joy to behold! I've hung my share of full-size coiled falls on belaying pins in my day and I can confirm that your deciding to hang them as you have is correct.  It's done as pictured on the Joseph Conrad above, although it looks like in that picture a few more turns around the pin than is necessary (or properly shipshape) have been taken. Correctly, the fall is brought down and beneath the rail, behind the bottom of the pin, up and across and behind the top of the pin, back down and hitched over the top of the pin. More than one "figure eight" around the pin only makes for more work casting the line off the pin.

The 1870's picture of the Inuit kids on the deck also shows the coils correctly hung on the pins, although, as is clear from all the cargo and gear on deck, the vessel wasn't sailing and they were probably working on the rigging and not too particular about it at the moment, as things certainly aren't "shipshape." Still, any able seaman would automatically coil the fall into one hand, or on deck if it were too long to hold in one hand, starting at the pin end and leaving a length free from the pin, imparting a half-twist as each coil was measured out at arm's length, so the laid line would not kink, and when the fall was fully coiled, present it to the pin and reach through the center of the coil and grab the length of line between the coil and the pin, giving it a turn, or two, depending upon it's length, pulling the twisted line back through the center of the coil and up in front of the coil and over the top of the pin. (For lighter lines, one can take a longer length between the pin and coil and take a couple of turns around the coil with it to gather the coil together, and then bring it through the coil above the turn and place it over the pin. This will gather the coil of light line tightly and more neatly.) In this fashion, the loop over the top of the pin could be cast free and the coil fall to the deck, the side closest to the pin facing upwards, and the coiled fall will be ready to run free without fouling. Any seaman that failed to do it that way back in the day would likely get the bosun's start across his back! LOL
 
I don't know how many otherwise exquisite models I've seen with the coiled falls simply hung over the pins. It should be easy to imagine the consequence of that in heavy weather with decks awash... the deck would soon be a rat's nest of tangled cordage! Another frequently seen "faux pas" are coils that are the wrong size.  Each coil should be as long as is necessary for that part of the rigging to run as intended. If the line, such as a headsail halyard, runs to the top of a headstay, then the belayed coil when the sail is set should be made up of a length of line equal to the distance to the halyard block. Were it shorter, the bitter end of the halyard would run aloft and out of reach when the sail was struck. Coils on a pin rail if neatly done should all be about the same length, pin to deck, but of different girths, reflecting the amount of line properly needed. That detail is very frequently overlooked, even on otherwise very well-done models. Then there are the all-too-common "white" deadeye lanyards which in practice are always tarred "black," ... misplaced and oversized  trunnels, plank butts on frames, ... and overly long planks... but I digress.
 
I'd probably be a very unpopular model competition judge, but whether or not a model was built by a modeler with a command of full-sized shipbuilding practices and marlinspike seamanship is immediately obvious to the "sailor's eye." My obnoxious pontification isn't intended as a criticism, but rather to point out that you've illustrated here the correct way to do it and to offer the observation to those "landsmen" who otherwise must rely on instructions that come with a kit that learning to "think like a sailor" will avoid such pitfalls.

It may bear noting that Alaska yellow cedar is one of those wood species that is known by many different non-scientific names. Thus, sourcing is outside of its range may be made more difficult if you don't ask for it by the right name. First off, it's not a cedar at all, but rather a cypress. It's known as Nootka cypress, yellow cypress, Alaska cypress, Pacific Coast cedar, Nootka cedar, yellow cedar, Alaska cedar, and Alaska yellow cedar. If you are googling for it, you might try some of its other commercial names, although it is most popularly called Alaska yellow cedar.
 
Unfortunately, AYC is becoming harder to source for a variety of reasons. 1) Most of it that's commercially logged is sold locally in the Pacific Northwest, where it is still readily available. 2) It's often found in areas which are difficult (i.e. expensive) to access for logging operations. 3) It's dying off throughout much of its range due to climate change and is being considered for classification as endangered. 4) Asian demand for AYC for fine woodwork sends a lot of it off as export. 5) AYC plantation forestry has only just begun to be studied and it more of a challenge than commercial cultivation of other lumber species. 6) AYC is very slow-growing, with a lifespan of well over a thousand years.
 
It is the winter snowpack that insulates the shallow and fine root systems of AYC trees from freezing. With the snow pack becoming thinner each year, the tree roots are more exposed to cold snaps which freeze their fine root systems close to the surface and kill the trees. Photos of large stands of dead AYC would make you cry, but the good news is that the dead timber is as good for lumber as the fresh for at least 90 years, and perhaps more even. Again, AYC's growing terrain makes commercial harvesting less attractive than more accessible lumber species.
 

 
The good news is that while it is considered somewhat rare outside of its natural range, there is plenty of it available in the Pacific Northwest lumberyards. The bad news is that it will cost to ship it elsewhere. I've worked with AYC planking and decking wooden boats and I'm sad to say the offcuts went into the yard dumpster or home for the fireplace. (It's also one of the best fire woods known.) I wish I'd taken more of it for my own "lumberyard" than I did when I had the chance. 
 

 
http://patlbr.com/cedar/
 
 
 

You'd have some significant challenges making scale ring bolts that would withstand the recoil!
 

Doug, I'd hazard to guess that the odds of the two masts on Leon, or any other vessel her size, having differently designed steps is probably very slim unless we are talking about a vessel carrying masts of very different sizes, such as a yawl.  Once a vessel gets to a certain size, its heavier scantlings dictate certain construction conventions and Leon is certainly of that "certain size." (She's just over 100', IIRC.) As Leon was designed by Colin Archer, and intended to serve as a North Sea and Baltic cargo vessel, one would probably be safer presuming that the vessel was on the heavier built side than otherwise. Archer's design portfolio is relatively well-documented, I believe.  I'm familiar with his famous lifeboats and their derivatives, but not his larger designs. Naval architects being what they are, it's to be expected that their body of work will exhibit similarities in certain engineering features and mast steps would likely be one such feature. As a naval architect and ship builder rolled into one, Archer designed and built Leon in his own shipyard, so the likelihood of certain engineering features like mast steps being "stock features" repeated from build to build becomes even greater. However, the catch is that in the case of his smaller vessels, at least, there never were any construction details drawn. These were worked out on the loft floor and determined in situ, as it were. To make matters worse, reportedly, his draftsmanship is notoriously sloppy. Since he was running the yard, he didn't need to communicate with the shipwrights on paper as much as a naval architect whose drawings were going to have to be followed by a separately-managed and often remotely located yard would have. Copies of Archer's original drawings, such as they are, can be obtained from the Norwegian Maritime Museum's library in Oslo: Norsk Sjofartsmuseum, Bygdonesveien.  https://marmuseum.no/en/ 
 
A quick google search for plans of Archer's larger vessels on line turned up nothing, but I did come across one "for sale" listing of a yacht fairly recently built to Archer's plans as a replica of the original design. There were two photos of the mast step of this 23' Archer-designed sloop on line which clearly show what, for a boat that size, was quite a solid mast step designed to spread the load across the floors and frames as well as the keel itself. It appears to be of composite construction, with some of the knee structure of metal plate. Many other designers would opt for a mast step made of a mortised block fastened to the keel alone in a small sloop like this one.  Until you can finds the construction drawings for Leon, or at least for Fram, I'd say you'd be safest opting for the more complex, but more strongly engineered, type of mast step.  I wasn't able to copy the photos, which seem to be encrypted, but they can be found at https://www.woodenships.co.uk/sailing-yachts/colin-archer-yacht/  Conveniently, for our purposes, the mast step structure pictured is painted white.
 
 
 

I only referenced a comparison between Leon's size and what I would expect to be the scantlings and construction of a mainmast step of a vessel of her size, type, and "modern" build. Like a lot of things where "size matters," our assessments often differ because they are necessarily relative. Obviously, your mileage differs.  
 
In addressing the mainmast, I intended to signify nothing more than that it was presumably the largest mast step on the vessel. My reference to a "properly built step" wasn't artful. I meant to convey a "a proper built up step" without implying there was anything wrong with a mortise block on top a a keel or keelson in much smaller vessels than Leon.
 
My assessment was based on over fifty years of exposure to mast steps in full-sized wooden vessels of many types and the stresses mast steps are  designed to withstand.  In Leon's case, I'd expect to see something more than a mast simply stepped on a mortise block mounted on top of a keel or keelson.  Of course, if contemporary data on this specific vessel has become available since the time of Underhill's writing, that should resolve the question. I was being polite in giving Underhill the benefit of the doubt as to accuracy. In recent times, the historian's caveat that "scarce information isn't necessarily accurate information" has been proven time and time again. I think there are two factors at work in this respect. 1) In earlier times, the standards for accuracy and completeness probably weren't as high as now. A lot of blanks were filled in with assumptions and guesses. and 2) There were so few interested in recording and addressing the data that there was nobody to "proofread" their work product. For example, this is a big issue with the HAMMS data, much of which comprises of lines taken off or copied from earlier incomplete drafts by unemployed non-maritime surveyors and draftsmen in the course of a WPA "make-work" project the inaccuracies of which, at the time, were of far less interest, and certainly far less consequence, than now.
 
The original poster offers a drawing from Crothers' book, American Built Packet and Freighters in the 1850s,  noting that "A much more complicated arrangement shown in the attached diagram is given as the most common arrangement designed to spread both the weight of the mast and the stresses over a larger area."  I doubt that the fact that Crothers was addressing mid-Nineteenth Century American construction practices and that Leon was built in the late Nineteenth Century in Norway would make much difference. Crothers' report has been my observation as well, although my experience is negligibly authoritative compared to Mr. Crothers' academic research.

You'd have some significant challenges making scale ring bolts that would withstand the recoil!
 

You'd have some significant challenges making scale ring bolts that would withstand the recoil!
 

Your work is a joy to behold! I've hung my share of full-size coiled falls on belaying pins in my day and I can confirm that your deciding to hang them as you have is correct.  It's done as pictured on the Joseph Conrad above, although it looks like in that picture a few more turns around the pin than is necessary (or properly shipshape) have been taken. Correctly, the fall is brought down and beneath the rail, behind the bottom of the pin, up and across and behind the top of the pin, back down and hitched over the top of the pin. More than one "figure eight" around the pin only makes for more work casting the line off the pin.

The 1870's picture of the Inuit kids on the deck also shows the coils correctly hung on the pins, although, as is clear from all the cargo and gear on deck, the vessel wasn't sailing and they were probably working on the rigging and not too particular about it at the moment, as things certainly aren't "shipshape." Still, any able seaman would automatically coil the fall into one hand, or on deck if it were too long to hold in one hand, starting at the pin end and leaving a length free from the pin, imparting a half-twist as each coil was measured out at arm's length, so the laid line would not kink, and when the fall was fully coiled, present it to the pin and reach through the center of the coil and grab the length of line between the coil and the pin, giving it a turn, or two, depending upon it's length, pulling the twisted line back through the center of the coil and up in front of the coil and over the top of the pin. (For lighter lines, one can take a longer length between the pin and coil and take a couple of turns around the coil with it to gather the coil together, and then bring it through the coil above the turn and place it over the pin. This will gather the coil of light line tightly and more neatly.) In this fashion, the loop over the top of the pin could be cast free and the coil fall to the deck, the side closest to the pin facing upwards, and the coiled fall will be ready to run free without fouling. Any seaman that failed to do it that way back in the day would likely get the bosun's start across his back! LOL
 
I don't know how many otherwise exquisite models I've seen with the coiled falls simply hung over the pins. It should be easy to imagine the consequence of that in heavy weather with decks awash... the deck would soon be a rat's nest of tangled cordage! Another frequently seen "faux pas" are coils that are the wrong size.  Each coil should be as long as is necessary for that part of the rigging to run as intended. If the line, such as a headsail halyard, runs to the top of a headstay, then the belayed coil when the sail is set should be made up of a length of line equal to the distance to the halyard block. Were it shorter, the bitter end of the halyard would run aloft and out of reach when the sail was struck. Coils on a pin rail if neatly done should all be about the same length, pin to deck, but of different girths, reflecting the amount of line properly needed. That detail is very frequently overlooked, even on otherwise very well-done models. Then there are the all-too-common "white" deadeye lanyards which in practice are always tarred "black," ... misplaced and oversized  trunnels, plank butts on frames, ... and overly long planks... but I digress.
 
I'd probably be a very unpopular model competition judge, but whether or not a model was built by a modeler with a command of full-sized shipbuilding practices and marlinspike seamanship is immediately obvious to the "sailor's eye." My obnoxious pontification isn't intended as a criticism, but rather to point out that you've illustrated here the correct way to do it and to offer the observation to those "landsmen" who otherwise must rely on instructions that come with a kit that learning to "think like a sailor" will avoid such pitfalls.

I believe some of the Napoleonic bone prisoner of war models are rigged with human hair. As most probably know, sailors of that era let their hair grow out on long voyages and kept it tarred to keep it clean and under control. At the end of a voyage, they'd sell it to the wig makers, who'd wash the tar out and card it. (Hence the classic sailor's uniform "middie" back collar, which kept the tar off their shirts when their hair hung down in a braid and the custom of calling sailors "tars.")
 
Horsehair is more commonly used for many purposes similar to rigging line. It's readily obtainable in various thicknesses and degrees of stiffness and softness and comes in lengths up to around 48". The light colors take dye readily.. The "craft quality" ("cheap") stuff will run you around $900 a pound, though. The highest quality white horsehair, which is used for stringed instrument bows, is priced much higher. http://hairwork.com/horse_hair_for_sale.htm
 
If it's really fine thread you're looking for, my guess is your best bet would be surgical suture thread. (Just don't use the "absorbable" type!) The famous "miniaturist" ship modelers like Mc Nalley and Mc Caffery actually used very fine wire for their rigging.
 
Everybody uses the "tarred" nylon seine twine these days and it's great for full-sized rigging applications. Years ago, real tarred marline was available. It wasn't as strong and tended to be "lumpy," but there was nothing that smelled as good as real Stockholm tar. You can still get Stockholm tar, and regular pine tar (sold in feed stores for coating the sides of horses' hoofs.) You can thin pine tar and soak line in it to get tarred line. Pine tar used to be a shipboard staple in the days of sail, of course.

I'm surprised that Underhill, who I don't doubt, found that Leon only had a block on the keelson. Given her size, I'd have expected that she'd have had a properly built up step as pictured above, for the mainmast, at least. I also note that the drawing above omits the limber holes in the knees and the bottom of the mortise. That tenon isn't something you want rotting away on you!

I'm surprised that Underhill, who I don't doubt, found that Leon only had a block on the keelson. Given her size, I'd have expected that she'd have had a properly built up step as pictured above, for the mainmast, at least. I also note that the drawing above omits the limber holes in the knees and the bottom of the mortise. That tenon isn't something you want rotting away on you!