Bob Cleek

The truth of the matter is that there isn't a mini-table saw selling anywhere for around a hundred bucks that is suitable for the purposes you intend to use one for. This is because the two essentials in any small table saw are accuracy and torque. Each requires manufacturing costs directionally proportional to the degree of accuracy and the amount of torque the machine can produce. The $100 Chinese mini-table saws generally run 12 VDC high speed / low torque motors running around 5,000 RPM. A high speed motor is fine for lightweight work or for abrasive work. (e.g.: a ceramic cutting disk on a Dremel mototool for cutting brass tubing.) For cutting, torque, the twisting power of the motor shaft, is required. Less expensive powered tools trade speed for torque. In some applications, this is acceptable, but not where the motor lacks the torque to meet the demand of the job and "stalls out" or overheats. Simply put, high torque motors cost more to produce, which puts them outside the range of the $100 Chinese Amazon Specials.
 
Similarly, accuracy in any powered tool depends upon mass. The weight of a powered tool is generally the quickest way to judge its quality. In micro-table saws we're not talking forklift grade weight, but the principle still applies. "Fit and finish" is also critical to accuracy.  Saw fences that are adjusted with stamped metal wing nuts are a sure sign that the machine isn't going be capable of the accuracy one requires to do decent modeling work. Stamped metal parts instead of CNC-machined parts are another indicator of low quality and undependable accuracy tolerances.
 
If all you have to spend is a hundred bucks, I agree with Allen and Roger: you'd be better off tuning up your full-sized table saw with a finishing blade and dance with the girl you brought. Of course, a decent specialty table saw blade can cost you more than $100 these days, as well.  
 
It is worth noting that MicroMark and Proxxon, retailers of modeling tools and supplies, each also offer respectable micro-table saws. While they are in the same price range as the Byrnes table saw, the Byrnes machine is a much better built machine, more technologically advanced, and generally considered a better value for the money.
 
If I were you, which I'm not, I'd save my money until I could afford to buy a Byrnes Model Machines table saw. Byrnes Model Machines - Thickness Sander (Yeah, I know it says "thickness sander," but that's actually the saw page.) They are presently on vacation but are supposed to return the end of this month. The price of their saw isn't listed at the moment, I guess because they aren't shipping any until they return from vacation. One will probably run you six to eight hundred bucks, depending upon the cost of shipping and the options you elect to have on it. I know this is a lot of money for anybody, but for anyone who wants to even just cut their own strip wood for modeling, this saw will pay for itself in surprisingly short order. It will also hold its value and you will be able to readily sell it if you ever wish to do so. (Which, if the lack of eBay listings are any indication, isn't likely to happen.) I don't own stock in the Byrnes Model Machines company, but I hold Jim Byrnes and his products in high regard. The Byrnes "Jim Saw" is universally recognized as the finest micro-saw of its kind ever made and is an especially excellent machine that will afford you pride and joy of ownership and use for generations to come. It's worth skipping a few dinners out, shots at the local bar after work, or even a few hours of overtime on the job to acquire one! 
 
While it's advice that's ignored as often as it's offered, when you need a tool, buy the best tool you can afford. The most expensive tool is the one you have to buy more than once!
 
 

The truth of the matter is that there isn't a mini-table saw selling anywhere for around a hundred bucks that is suitable for the purposes you intend to use one for. This is because the two essentials in any small table saw are accuracy and torque. Each requires manufacturing costs directionally proportional to the degree of accuracy and the amount of torque the machine can produce. The $100 Chinese mini-table saws generally run 12 VDC high speed / low torque motors running around 5,000 RPM. A high speed motor is fine for lightweight work or for abrasive work. (e.g.: a ceramic cutting disk on a Dremel mototool for cutting brass tubing.) For cutting, torque, the twisting power of the motor shaft, is required. Less expensive powered tools trade speed for torque. In some applications, this is acceptable, but not where the motor lacks the torque to meet the demand of the job and "stalls out" or overheats. Simply put, high torque motors cost more to produce, which puts them outside the range of the $100 Chinese Amazon Specials.
 
Similarly, accuracy in any powered tool depends upon mass. The weight of a powered tool is generally the quickest way to judge its quality. In micro-table saws we're not talking forklift grade weight, but the principle still applies. "Fit and finish" is also critical to accuracy.  Saw fences that are adjusted with stamped metal wing nuts are a sure sign that the machine isn't going be capable of the accuracy one requires to do decent modeling work. Stamped metal parts instead of CNC-machined parts are another indicator of low quality and undependable accuracy tolerances.
 
If all you have to spend is a hundred bucks, I agree with Allen and Roger: you'd be better off tuning up your full-sized table saw with a finishing blade and dance with the girl you brought. Of course, a decent specialty table saw blade can cost you more than $100 these days, as well.  
 
It is worth noting that MicroMark and Proxxon, retailers of modeling tools and supplies, each also offer respectable micro-table saws. While they are in the same price range as the Byrnes table saw, the Byrnes machine is a much better built machine, more technologically advanced, and generally considered a better value for the money.
 
If I were you, which I'm not, I'd save my money until I could afford to buy a Byrnes Model Machines table saw. Byrnes Model Machines - Thickness Sander (Yeah, I know it says "thickness sander," but that's actually the saw page.) They are presently on vacation but are supposed to return the end of this month. The price of their saw isn't listed at the moment, I guess because they aren't shipping any until they return from vacation. One will probably run you six to eight hundred bucks, depending upon the cost of shipping and the options you elect to have on it. I know this is a lot of money for anybody, but for anyone who wants to even just cut their own strip wood for modeling, this saw will pay for itself in surprisingly short order. It will also hold its value and you will be able to readily sell it if you ever wish to do so. (Which, if the lack of eBay listings are any indication, isn't likely to happen.) I don't own stock in the Byrnes Model Machines company, but I hold Jim Byrnes and his products in high regard. The Byrnes "Jim Saw" is universally recognized as the finest micro-saw of its kind ever made and is an especially excellent machine that will afford you pride and joy of ownership and use for generations to come. It's worth skipping a few dinners out, shots at the local bar after work, or even a few hours of overtime on the job to acquire one! 
 
While it's advice that's ignored as often as it's offered, when you need a tool, buy the best tool you can afford. The most expensive tool is the one you have to buy more than once!
 
 

The truth of the matter is that there isn't a mini-table saw selling anywhere for around a hundred bucks that is suitable for the purposes you intend to use one for. This is because the two essentials in any small table saw are accuracy and torque. Each requires manufacturing costs directionally proportional to the degree of accuracy and the amount of torque the machine can produce. The $100 Chinese mini-table saws generally run 12 VDC high speed / low torque motors running around 5,000 RPM. A high speed motor is fine for lightweight work or for abrasive work. (e.g.: a ceramic cutting disk on a Dremel mototool for cutting brass tubing.) For cutting, torque, the twisting power of the motor shaft, is required. Less expensive powered tools trade speed for torque. In some applications, this is acceptable, but not where the motor lacks the torque to meet the demand of the job and "stalls out" or overheats. Simply put, high torque motors cost more to produce, which puts them outside the range of the $100 Chinese Amazon Specials.
 
Similarly, accuracy in any powered tool depends upon mass. The weight of a powered tool is generally the quickest way to judge its quality. In micro-table saws we're not talking forklift grade weight, but the principle still applies. "Fit and finish" is also critical to accuracy.  Saw fences that are adjusted with stamped metal wing nuts are a sure sign that the machine isn't going be capable of the accuracy one requires to do decent modeling work. Stamped metal parts instead of CNC-machined parts are another indicator of low quality and undependable accuracy tolerances.
 
If all you have to spend is a hundred bucks, I agree with Allen and Roger: you'd be better off tuning up your full-sized table saw with a finishing blade and dance with the girl you brought. Of course, a decent specialty table saw blade can cost you more than $100 these days, as well.  
 
It is worth noting that MicroMark and Proxxon, retailers of modeling tools and supplies, each also offer respectable micro-table saws. While they are in the same price range as the Byrnes table saw, the Byrnes machine is a much better built machine, more technologically advanced, and generally considered a better value for the money.
 
If I were you, which I'm not, I'd save my money until I could afford to buy a Byrnes Model Machines table saw. Byrnes Model Machines - Thickness Sander (Yeah, I know it says "thickness sander," but that's actually the saw page.) They are presently on vacation but are supposed to return the end of this month. The price of their saw isn't listed at the moment, I guess because they aren't shipping any until they return from vacation. One will probably run you six to eight hundred bucks, depending upon the cost of shipping and the options you elect to have on it. I know this is a lot of money for anybody, but for anyone who wants to even just cut their own strip wood for modeling, this saw will pay for itself in surprisingly short order. It will also hold its value and you will be able to readily sell it if you ever wish to do so. (Which, if the lack of eBay listings are any indication, isn't likely to happen.) I don't own stock in the Byrnes Model Machines company, but I hold Jim Byrnes and his products in high regard. The Byrnes "Jim Saw" is universally recognized as the finest micro-saw of its kind ever made and is an especially excellent machine that will afford you pride and joy of ownership and use for generations to come. It's worth skipping a few dinners out, shots at the local bar after work, or even a few hours of overtime on the job to acquire one! 
 
While it's advice that's ignored as often as it's offered, when you need a tool, buy the best tool you can afford. The most expensive tool is the one you have to buy more than once!
 
 

If you are willing to spend the time and effort to accurize the saw it MIGHT work.  There are two features integral with the saw that you should consider as you will not be able to change.
 
Arbor size:  As you obviously know this will determine the blades that you will be able to use.  High quality model makers saws use machinists slitting saw blades.  Cheaper mini table saws often come with  blades with very low tooth count and a lot of “set.”  Will you be able to replace the supplied blade with something better.
 
Power:  You can’t have enough.
 
When buying tools, Amazon is often poor at describing technical features that let you determine if they (the tools) will meet your needs.
 
Since you have a full sized table saw, have you checked the full range of blades that might be available?  A fine toothed blade without set to the teeth used in a full sized saw is a viable alternative to a mini saw.  Way back when, Sears used to sell a “Kromedge Thin Rip Veneer Blade.”  This was a fine tooth hollow ground blade, ideal for our purpose.  You can sometimes find them on EBay.  Make sure that they are new as re-sharpeners like to set the teeth.  You can also find larger diameter industrial slitting saws that will work. You will also need a zero clearance insert.  For common brand table saws blank resin insert castings are available from specialty woodworking suppliers.  Rockler also sells a well made Thin Rip Guide.  This is a big brother to the NRG guide, intended to fit full sized saws with a standard miter gage groove.  This eliminates the need for the piece being cut to be pinched between the blade and the fence.
 
You might also want to accurize your full sized saw.  The best way to do this is to hook up a dial indicator to your miter gage and run it back and forth against the fence. You can check the alignment of the arbor the same way against a blade mounted in it.  There should be machine screws that can be loosened.
 
I personally think that your $100 would be better spent outfitting the saw that you  already have.
 
Roger

Cheap table saws are not famous for accurate cuts, but for planking, if you have a thickness sander, then one these might work out for you even if the planks vary coming off the saw.   If you post some pics of the saws you are considering, hopefully some members have one or more of these and can make recommendations based on their own experience. 
 
The old adage probably applies, you get what you pay for.    If you plan to use this for a lifetime, consider investing in a Byrnes saw, it is likely the best available anywhere.
 
Allan

You certainly can. A bit of burnt umber, some yellow, and some white and you're good to go. No need to bother with the "flesh" color at all, actually. (You may want to save the bottle for posterity. It will be a collector's item some day. "Flesh color" has become a politically incorrect "Eurocentric" term these days.  
 
Mixing colors isn't rocket science, although there can be some surprises using synthetic paints where the base color wasn't a "pure" pigment. If you don't remember from grammar school, a "color wheel" indicates which primary colors when mixed together will yield secondary colors and so on. See: Color wheel - Wikipedia
 
For your purposes, however, I would suggest you go to a local artists' supply or crafts store and simply purchase a small bottle of acrylic craft paint of a suitable color, or colors. It's the same stuff and probably a lot less expensive than the "model paints. You can also purchase higher quality acrylic artists' oil paints sold in tubes. A few small tubes of basic ship modeling colors plus black and white and you should be able to mix whatever you'd need for a ship model. Find out what thinning solvent is required for whichever brand of acrylic oil color you purchase. It will be water or denatured alcohol. Use this thinner to thin the oil paint which will be the consistency of tooth paste as iti comes out of the tube. You will probably find that your thinned paint may still have somewhat of a gloss finish, and you can obtain "flattening solution" from the same retailer you buy your oil paint from that can be added to yield a matte finish. You may also wish to obtain some "accelerator," which can be added to your thinned paint to make it dry faster. (Artists' oils are made to dry slowly so an oil painter can work on a painting over a a span of days without the paint on the canvas drying overnight.) Follow the instructions on the containers for the use of such additives or ask for assistance at the store. They should be able to advise you about these "paint conditioners." 
 
You will find that if you carefully replace the caps on your tubes of oil colors and keep the cap threads clean when replacing the caps, your tubed acrylic artists' oil colors will last practically forever without drying out.  As a plastic modeler, you probably already know the versatility of painting acrylics on plastics. Obtaining very realistic wooden effects using various weathering techniques are possible. You might want to watch a few YouTube videos if you aren't already familiar with these tricks of the trade. The war gaming figure painters have developed this into a fine art and there's much to discover in their videos. The YouTube instructions on the use of acrylic artists' oils on plastic models will also be helpful. 
 
The learning curve isn''t steep. Once you become comfortable mixing your own colors and your own paint for brush or airbrush, you'll never pay those inflated "modeling colors" again. 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Exactly so. Eberhard's photo of the tug at the NMM shows clearly how it was done with the lantern hung on a flat back plate which actually carries the jackstay rings. Other lanterns have the jackstay rings attached the lamp itself which would be less convenient than leaving the jackstays permanently rigged and slipping the lantern on and off a carrier plate. It should be remembered, however, that the jackstay and running light halyard arrangement might be a bit messy on a sailing ship with all the attendant rigging already running down to the base of the mast and for this reason steam powered vessels carrying auxiliary sails (or sailing vessels with auxiliary steam power) might opt for the "portable" rig whcih was struck down when not in use . The picture below, showing what appears to be more permanent jackline and bracket arrangement is on a steam tug which would not be bothered by additional rigging on and about the mast. Indeed, the backplate seems a bit crudely made and it's possible it was fabricated by the tug's bosun to achieve the convenience it affords in servicing and lighting.
 
 
 
All the lanterns of this era were hung in the same fashion.... or at least all I've ever seen. The back of the lantern has a bent flat metal strap which slides over a "tongue" positioned as may be convenient, either on a flat plate as shown above, or on a light board port and starboard, or on a stern transom or rail as shown in another of Eberhard's photos below. (Interestingly, the stern light shown was originally an oil lamp; as indicated by the permanently mounted "tongue" and strap on the lantern, but the lantern has been electrified as seen by the power cord running into the back of the lantern next to the standing "tongue" bracket.
 

 
In the photo below, a "tongue," rather than a strap, is attached to the back of this port running light to the right of the red curved glass inside the body of the lamp. (The back of the lamp body is a right angle so it will fit neatly into the corner of the light board. This tongue would slide into a strap permanently attached to the light board in order to "hang" the lamp on the board. 
 

I probably should have put "collection" in quotation marks. It's not like "my collection" is all that impressive from any historical standpoint. It's just that after a lifetime of sailing, I've got a lot of "artifacts" in my shop and around the house. Whenever my wife starts grousing about my "old stuff you're never going to use again," I always tell her it's part of  one of "my collections."    Indeed, I do have real collections, and then there's just "stuff that I don't want to part with."
 
Forty years ago, I lived like an Ewok in a California coast redwood forest and we'd lose our power a half dozen times a winter, sometimes for a few days, so we'd always have oil lamps throughout the house, most not being nautical and what my ex-wife didn't take with her are still around. My marine oil lamp "collection" presently serves as bookends on my library shelves and at my age isn't likely to ever see sea duty again. 
 
I acquired the running lights back in the 1970's when I worked as a salesman for the premier classic yacht brokerage on San Francisco Bay. We brokered the sale of an Alden schooner and they were at the bottom of a pile of junk in the lazarette. The buyer didn't want them and they were on their way to the boatyard dumpster, so... Thank you very much! Picking up goodies like these was one of the perks of the job.
 
A few years back, I was puttering around and had a batch of "CLR" (Calcium-Lime-Rust remover - good stuff!) mixed up to clean out some showerheads, I impulsively tossed the starboard light into the bucket to see how it would do removing the rough copper patina built up on it. Obviously, it worked, but I never got around to doing the port one because I couldn't make up my mind whether I wanted to put the starboard one out to weather to a more even verdigris patina, or clean it up to match the "old penny" finish of the starboard light. The lamp bodies are made of copper. The bails, the "port" and "starboard" badges, and the lamp are made of brass.
 
Tung Woo - Hong Kong running lights:

 

The chimney tops open to access the oil lamp:  

The reflector slides off the lamp burner for ease of polishing:

Below is my anchor lamp made in the US by Perkins Lamp Co. (Later "Perko.") It has a Wedge burner, which was a common off-the-self wick burner. These were manufactured and sold by Perko, (which is still in business,) until, I believe, around 1975 or so. There's one on eBay at the moment that they want $300 bucks for. Some idiot drilled a hole through the oil font in order to electrify it, which ruined it for use as an oil lamp unless the font is patched. Unfortunately, a lot of nice brass and bronze marine lamps were turned into decorator table lamps over the years and you'll pay hell to find the right ones for a classic yacht restoration job these days. https://www.ebay.com/itm/374442771684?mkevt=1&mkcid=1&mkrid=711-53200-19255-0&campid=5338678874&toolid=20006%26customid%3Ds%3AGS%3Bgc%3A81e12fb7ba20160d1a064b8bd197e985%3Bpt%3A1%3Bchoc%3A1&customid=s%3AGS%3Bgc%3A81e12fb7ba20160d1a064b8bd197e985%3Bpt%3A1%3Bchoc%3A2&msclkid=81e12fb7ba20160d1a064b8bd197e985 There's no doubt that an LED lamp will put out more light than a oil lamp and you don't have to fiddle with cleaning, filling, and trimming the wicks, but it's quite remarkable how much light a correctly trimmed oil lamp can put out and I believe they still meet current navigational signal regulations. I always enjoyed the ritual of lighting my oil anchor lamp as the sun went down when I was spending the night "on the hook." I bought this lamp in the early seventies from a now-long gone chandlery that had then been in business on San Francisco's Fisherman's Wharf (before the wharf became a total tourist trap) for over a hundred years. A friend was the manager there and it was "new old stock" they wanted to get rid of. I think he gave it to me for around fifty bucks, which was at a good discount, but that was still real money in those days, for a kid like me, at least. I kept it and the saloon overhead trawler lamp when I passed my Giles Vertue to a new owner after having her for over 40 years. It's more of a "memento," than part of a "collection."
 
This is a 360 degree light hung in the forward rigging. On the bottom edge (clearly seen in the lower picture) were two bails for attaching a downhaul line. This lamp would be run up on the forestay with the headsail halyard. The downhaul line would be secured so that the lamp would remain vertical and not swing in the wind and also be used to pull the lamp and attached halyard back down to the deck when removing the lamp. The oil font holds enough oil to feed the flame for a night's worth of light while the boat was at anchor. It's about eight or nine inches tall and made entirely of brass. It's quite stunning when polished up, which I haven't done in years, obviously. It was always my practice to remove any lacquer that was applied to quality marine yellow metal to keep it bright and then to polish it regularly. There's quite a difference in appearance and the lacquer degrades after a time and tarnished spots and scratches appear all of the piece. A regular quick rubbing with Nev-R-Dull or Brasso keeps bare brass looking sharp.

 
 

I concur with the above posters. It's a particularly charming "decorator" model that may have some nominal value as an antique at this point, assuming someone has a place for it in their interior decoration scheme. It's probably of German or Spanish origin from the first quarter of the 20th dentury and made for the export market. It is decidedly not an "ex-voto," "church ship," or "votive model."  The very few authenticated votive models contemporary to the period of your model are much more simply crafted, if not downright crude when compared to than your model. Additionally, your model exhibits a significant number of obviously mass-produced parts made with tooling that would not have been available to the average sea-going builder-donor of an actual votive model. Note particularly the many accurately turned pieces that indicate the use of a lathe, metal castings, especially the anchors and figurehead that are of cast metal, and (brass?) nails and escutcheon pins. It's highly unkikely that a 15th century European seaman giving thanks for a safe voyage would have access to such tools and materials.
 
  The 15th century "Mataro" votive model in the Maritime Museum in Rotterdam, Holland. See: Model Making History; Matar� - the Oldest Museum Model (lifeinscale.net)

I concur with the above posters. It's a particularly charming "decorator" model that may have some nominal value as an antique at this point, assuming someone has a place for it in their interior decoration scheme. It's probably of German or Spanish origin from the first quarter of the 20th dentury and made for the export market. It is decidedly not an "ex-voto," "church ship," or "votive model."  The very few authenticated votive models contemporary to the period of your model are much more simply crafted, if not downright crude when compared to than your model. Additionally, your model exhibits a significant number of obviously mass-produced parts made with tooling that would not have been available to the average sea-going builder-donor of an actual votive model. Note particularly the many accurately turned pieces that indicate the use of a lathe, metal castings, especially the anchors and figurehead that are of cast metal, and (brass?) nails and escutcheon pins. It's highly unkikely that a 15th century European seaman giving thanks for a safe voyage would have access to such tools and materials.
 
  The 15th century "Mataro" votive model in the Maritime Museum in Rotterdam, Holland. See: Model Making History; Matar� - the Oldest Museum Model (lifeinscale.net)

I concur with the above posters. It's a particularly charming "decorator" model that may have some nominal value as an antique at this point, assuming someone has a place for it in their interior decoration scheme. It's probably of German or Spanish origin from the first quarter of the 20th dentury and made for the export market. It is decidedly not an "ex-voto," "church ship," or "votive model."  The very few authenticated votive models contemporary to the period of your model are much more simply crafted, if not downright crude when compared to than your model. Additionally, your model exhibits a significant number of obviously mass-produced parts made with tooling that would not have been available to the average sea-going builder-donor of an actual votive model. Note particularly the many accurately turned pieces that indicate the use of a lathe, metal castings, especially the anchors and figurehead that are of cast metal, and (brass?) nails and escutcheon pins. It's highly unkikely that a 15th century European seaman giving thanks for a safe voyage would have access to such tools and materials.
 
  The 15th century "Mataro" votive model in the Maritime Museum in Rotterdam, Holland. See: Model Making History; Matar� - the Oldest Museum Model (lifeinscale.net)

If a votive model, on would usually find hooks or rings for suspending it from in a church. Allan's assessment is, I think, correct. However, it is more charmingly done than most of the examples of decorative models that we see on this site.

Votive models were built, usually by one of a crew from a real ship, and hung in churches to give luck to their ship whilst at sea. They are not usually accurate as more symbolic.

If you do a search here at MSW you will see a lot of these old decorator models which have virtually no monetary value.  They are interesting as they are approaching 100 years old and if you like it, that is the most important thing.  It is not an accurate model of any real ship but the value is whatever owning it means to you, so enjoy it.
Allan

From Wiki:  http://wiki.hmssurprise.org/phase3/index.php/Cunt_splice
**** splice
  A '**** splice', often softened to 'cut splice' or 'bight splice' for publication and in genteel conversation, is formed by eye splicing two different pieces of line into each other the same distance from the bitter end of each piece, forming "a Collar or Eye...in the Bight of the Rope. It is used for Pendents, Jib-Guys, &c."[1] Because the Eye is in the middle of the resultant rope, tension in the rope will tighten the eye around a wooden collar or fairlead. In Master and Commander, the bosun, Mr. Watt, personally works a **** splice into the breeching for the twelve-pounder bow-chaser that Aubrey mounts in HMS Sophie.[2]


References
↑ Lever, Darcy. The Young Sea Officer's Sheet Anchor: or, A Key to the Leading of Rigging and to Practical Seamanship. (c)1998 by Dover Publications, Inc.: p.5 ↑ O'Brian, Patrick. Master and Commander. (c) 1969 by Patrick O'Brian. J. B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia and New York, First Edition: p. 63. What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced but, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel, q.v., this image of a carronade aboard HMS Victory. It is conceivable that the gun's cascabel knob would have been placed in the splice. In that case, as the gun recoiled, the increased tension in each side of the splice would have tightened it around the cascabel knob. ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
 
The repeated interruption of four asterisks redacting the well-recognized name of the subject splice in the article above are apparently artifacts of some sort of automated "net nanny" Bowdlerizing algorithm. The gymnastics employed by cunning linguists to avoid the use of a visually descriptive Anglo-Saxon nautical term is rather pretentious. 
 
Note at footnote 2. above that the editorial comment, "What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced, bur, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel." Is incorrect and misleading. Allanyed's explanation above of varying practices according to the period is correct. 
 
When a breaching rope was simply turned about the cascabel ball, it was commonly lashed together at the point where the rope crossed to form the loop in order to securely fasten the rope to the neck of the ball so it couldn't come adrift in use.
 
For modeling purposes, where scale renders actual splices impossible, faux splices can be created by tapering the bitter ends of the ropes by scraping the individual strands with the edge of a sharp blade or carefully trimming them at an angle with a sharp scissors. The tapered ends, rather than being tucked as in an actual splice, are then laid against the rope and secured with adhesive and a simple whipping applied over the area where the "splice" occurs. This creates the tapered appearance of a true whipped splice while avoiding an unsightly out-of-scale "lump" where the splices occur. 
 

From Wiki:  http://wiki.hmssurprise.org/phase3/index.php/Cunt_splice
**** splice
  A '**** splice', often softened to 'cut splice' or 'bight splice' for publication and in genteel conversation, is formed by eye splicing two different pieces of line into each other the same distance from the bitter end of each piece, forming "a Collar or Eye...in the Bight of the Rope. It is used for Pendents, Jib-Guys, &c."[1] Because the Eye is in the middle of the resultant rope, tension in the rope will tighten the eye around a wooden collar or fairlead. In Master and Commander, the bosun, Mr. Watt, personally works a **** splice into the breeching for the twelve-pounder bow-chaser that Aubrey mounts in HMS Sophie.[2]


References
↑ Lever, Darcy. The Young Sea Officer's Sheet Anchor: or, A Key to the Leading of Rigging and to Practical Seamanship. (c)1998 by Dover Publications, Inc.: p.5 ↑ O'Brian, Patrick. Master and Commander. (c) 1969 by Patrick O'Brian. J. B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia and New York, First Edition: p. 63. What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced but, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel, q.v., this image of a carronade aboard HMS Victory. It is conceivable that the gun's cascabel knob would have been placed in the splice. In that case, as the gun recoiled, the increased tension in each side of the splice would have tightened it around the cascabel knob. ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
 
The repeated interruption of four asterisks redacting the well-recognized name of the subject splice in the article above are apparently artifacts of some sort of automated "net nanny" Bowdlerizing algorithm. The gymnastics employed by cunning linguists to avoid the use of a visually descriptive Anglo-Saxon nautical term is rather pretentious. 
 
Note at footnote 2. above that the editorial comment, "What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced, bur, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel." Is incorrect and misleading. Allanyed's explanation above of varying practices according to the period is correct. 
 
When a breaching rope was simply turned about the cascabel ball, it was commonly lashed together at the point where the rope crossed to form the loop in order to securely fasten the rope to the neck of the ball so it couldn't come adrift in use.
 
For modeling purposes, where scale renders actual splices impossible, faux splices can be created by tapering the bitter ends of the ropes by scraping the individual strands with the edge of a sharp blade or carefully trimming them at an angle with a sharp scissors. The tapered ends, rather than being tucked as in an actual splice, are then laid against the rope and secured with adhesive and a simple whipping applied over the area where the "splice" occurs. This creates the tapered appearance of a true whipped splice while avoiding an unsightly out-of-scale "lump" where the splices occur. 
 

I can't say whether these models were made in Singapore, Vietnam, or Mauritius or not, but they are the sort of product that small ship model factories in countries with developing economies are now turning out for the mass export. Singapore and Vietnam seem to have well-established ship model building industries. Mauritius has been the most prolific exporter of ship models since the last quarter of the 20th Century. Selling ship models for export is apparently a significant segment of the economy of this tiny island nation. Their product quality range runs from the almost crude to the very well-done. It's quite fascinating to see how they build these models on an assembly line basis. It's even more amazing that they can turn a profit doing so! Certainly, the people working in these small factories can't be making much at all. I expect much of the profit goes to the middle men who import the product and resell it around the world, but still and all, the Mauritians must be making enough building them for it to be worth their while to do so.
 
Check out these websites. While we will all lament that we often can't even give away our completed models, there's a whole industry out there selling ship models to an apparently viable customer base. 
 
See: http://customwoodhandicrafts.com/custom-wood-model-ships/ 
       https://hoiancraftships.com/ 
       https://silhoutech.com/
       http://aemodels.com/AE-MODELS-TEAM-PTE-LTD.-Services-Ship-Rig-Models-Rig-model-supplier-Singapore-Model-makers-in-Singapore
       https://bobatoshipmodels.com/ 
       https://historic-marine.com/ 
       https://le-port-ship-model-factory-and-showroom.business.site/ 
       https://mautourco.com/model-ship-building-works-of-art/
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/business-43432017
 

Bare wood, especially softer woods like basswood, should be sealed before applying any other coating and particularly so when using water-based coatings which will raise the grain of the wood. The easiest sealer to use on models is plain old clear (sometimes called "white") shellac thinned to around a "two pound cut," (Which is the consistency of 
Zinsser's "Bullseye" brand canned shellac.) This dries very quickly, won't raise the grain, and sands easily. (It will eliminate the "fuzzies" that occur when trying to sand soft woods.)  
 
If painting, for minor imperfections and filling pores, use any good "sanding primer." As mentioned, there are several major brands. Interlux is a high-quality marine paint line with which I am quite familiar but there are other sanding primers on the market. This sanding primer, "basecoat," or "sealer, depending upon the manufacturer's nomenclature, contains additives which make sanding easy. The additive can be anything from "whiting" (chalk or talcum) to microspheres. ("micro-balloons.") (If you have microballoons on hand for mixing epoxy fairing compound, you might want to experiment with adding them to regular paint or shellac and see if that works for you. Always test any coating system on scrap wood before applying to finished work to make sure it will provide the results sought.) 
 
I have found using water-based acrylics are not as suitable for fine finishes because the water can raise the grain and the softer synthetic coatings are more difficult to sand. If one is seeking a matte clear wood finish, I'd simply use clear shellac which will fill fairly well if applied in multiple coats. A thick shellac coating will end up glossy, but the gloss will easily sand off in the end to as fine a finish as one might require using fine sandpaper (300 grit or finer) and/or hand-rubbing with rottenstone and pumice.

https://www.bottompaintstore.com/interlux-prekote-quart-p-33277.html?campaignid=283850993&adgroupid=1258941293687119&creative=&matchtype=e&network=o&device=c&keyword=&msclkid=ac4ac711ef191c683eefa323e6f0a1be&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Google Shopping 2020 January- Bing&utm_term=4582283435435465&utm_content=Shopping-Catch ALL
 
If you have some serious divots, surfacing putty is the necessary coating. It is a paste about the consistency of toothpaste that is thinned with acetone. It can be applied with a putty knife and can be thinned to a desired consistency. (It will harden in the can quickly if the lid is left off the can for appreciable periods. Adding a small amount of acetone to the can after use and storing the well-closed can upside down overnight will reconstitute the paste to a softer consistency without a lot of stirring. This material is sort of like drywall "mud." It hardens very quickly and can be sanded easily in a half hour or so. If a surfacing putty is used, the surfacing putty should be overcoated with the primer after it's been used. It's somewhat porous and if a gloss finish is applied directly over it, there is the tendency to create a 'flat spot" where the gloss topcoat was unevenly absorbed by the surfacing putty. 

 
 
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=interlux+surfacing+putty&adgrpid=1342504259915083&hvadid=83906731284955&hvbmt=be&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=43893&hvnetw=o&hvqmt=e&hvtargid=kwd-83906856471787%3Aloc-190&hydadcr=4123_13164389&tag=mh0b-20&ref=pd_sl_6qak90lgdy_e

From Wiki:  http://wiki.hmssurprise.org/phase3/index.php/Cunt_splice
**** splice
  A '**** splice', often softened to 'cut splice' or 'bight splice' for publication and in genteel conversation, is formed by eye splicing two different pieces of line into each other the same distance from the bitter end of each piece, forming "a Collar or Eye...in the Bight of the Rope. It is used for Pendents, Jib-Guys, &c."[1] Because the Eye is in the middle of the resultant rope, tension in the rope will tighten the eye around a wooden collar or fairlead. In Master and Commander, the bosun, Mr. Watt, personally works a **** splice into the breeching for the twelve-pounder bow-chaser that Aubrey mounts in HMS Sophie.[2]


References
↑ Lever, Darcy. The Young Sea Officer's Sheet Anchor: or, A Key to the Leading of Rigging and to Practical Seamanship. (c)1998 by Dover Publications, Inc.: p.5 ↑ O'Brian, Patrick. Master and Commander. (c) 1969 by Patrick O'Brian. J. B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia and New York, First Edition: p. 63. What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced but, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel, q.v., this image of a carronade aboard HMS Victory. It is conceivable that the gun's cascabel knob would have been placed in the splice. In that case, as the gun recoiled, the increased tension in each side of the splice would have tightened it around the cascabel knob. ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
 
The repeated interruption of four asterisks redacting the well-recognized name of the subject splice in the article above are apparently artifacts of some sort of automated "net nanny" Bowdlerizing algorithm. The gymnastics employed by cunning linguists to avoid the use of a visually descriptive Anglo-Saxon nautical term is rather pretentious. 
 
Note at footnote 2. above that the editorial comment, "What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced, bur, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel." Is incorrect and misleading. Allanyed's explanation above of varying practices according to the period is correct. 
 
When a breaching rope was simply turned about the cascabel ball, it was commonly lashed together at the point where the rope crossed to form the loop in order to securely fasten the rope to the neck of the ball so it couldn't come adrift in use.
 
For modeling purposes, where scale renders actual splices impossible, faux splices can be created by tapering the bitter ends of the ropes by scraping the individual strands with the edge of a sharp blade or carefully trimming them at an angle with a sharp scissors. The tapered ends, rather than being tucked as in an actual splice, are then laid against the rope and secured with adhesive and a simple whipping applied over the area where the "splice" occurs. This creates the tapered appearance of a true whipped splice while avoiding an unsightly out-of-scale "lump" where the splices occur. 
 

From Wiki:  http://wiki.hmssurprise.org/phase3/index.php/Cunt_splice
**** splice
  A '**** splice', often softened to 'cut splice' or 'bight splice' for publication and in genteel conversation, is formed by eye splicing two different pieces of line into each other the same distance from the bitter end of each piece, forming "a Collar or Eye...in the Bight of the Rope. It is used for Pendents, Jib-Guys, &c."[1] Because the Eye is in the middle of the resultant rope, tension in the rope will tighten the eye around a wooden collar or fairlead. In Master and Commander, the bosun, Mr. Watt, personally works a **** splice into the breeching for the twelve-pounder bow-chaser that Aubrey mounts in HMS Sophie.[2]


References
↑ Lever, Darcy. The Young Sea Officer's Sheet Anchor: or, A Key to the Leading of Rigging and to Practical Seamanship. (c)1998 by Dover Publications, Inc.: p.5 ↑ O'Brian, Patrick. Master and Commander. (c) 1969 by Patrick O'Brian. J. B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia and New York, First Edition: p. 63. What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced but, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel, q.v., this image of a carronade aboard HMS Victory. It is conceivable that the gun's cascabel knob would have been placed in the splice. In that case, as the gun recoiled, the increased tension in each side of the splice would have tightened it around the cascabel knob. ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
 
The repeated interruption of four asterisks redacting the well-recognized name of the subject splice in the article above are apparently artifacts of some sort of automated "net nanny" Bowdlerizing algorithm. The gymnastics employed by cunning linguists to avoid the use of a visually descriptive Anglo-Saxon nautical term is rather pretentious. 
 
Note at footnote 2. above that the editorial comment, "What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced, bur, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel." Is incorrect and misleading. Allanyed's explanation above of varying practices according to the period is correct. 
 
When a breaching rope was simply turned about the cascabel ball, it was commonly lashed together at the point where the rope crossed to form the loop in order to securely fasten the rope to the neck of the ball so it couldn't come adrift in use.
 
For modeling purposes, where scale renders actual splices impossible, faux splices can be created by tapering the bitter ends of the ropes by scraping the individual strands with the edge of a sharp blade or carefully trimming them at an angle with a sharp scissors. The tapered ends, rather than being tucked as in an actual splice, are then laid against the rope and secured with adhesive and a simple whipping applied over the area where the "splice" occurs. This creates the tapered appearance of a true whipped splice while avoiding an unsightly out-of-scale "lump" where the splices occur. 
 

A mask is still pretty much a necessity.  The cloud of fine particles is impressive.  You still want a shop vac sucking up the dust.  At least in a garden, the vac will not make you deaf.
I think that the sweet spot is ~1700 RPM for the drum.  Faster will probably char and slower will make an already tedious operation last much longer.  It would probably take  a motor of 1/2 HP or greater to avoid it getting hot.

From Wiki:  http://wiki.hmssurprise.org/phase3/index.php/Cunt_splice
**** splice
  A '**** splice', often softened to 'cut splice' or 'bight splice' for publication and in genteel conversation, is formed by eye splicing two different pieces of line into each other the same distance from the bitter end of each piece, forming "a Collar or Eye...in the Bight of the Rope. It is used for Pendents, Jib-Guys, &c."[1] Because the Eye is in the middle of the resultant rope, tension in the rope will tighten the eye around a wooden collar or fairlead. In Master and Commander, the bosun, Mr. Watt, personally works a **** splice into the breeching for the twelve-pounder bow-chaser that Aubrey mounts in HMS Sophie.[2]


References
↑ Lever, Darcy. The Young Sea Officer's Sheet Anchor: or, A Key to the Leading of Rigging and to Practical Seamanship. (c)1998 by Dover Publications, Inc.: p.5 ↑ O'Brian, Patrick. Master and Commander. (c) 1969 by Patrick O'Brian. J. B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia and New York, First Edition: p. 63. What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced but, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel, q.v., this image of a carronade aboard HMS Victory. It is conceivable that the gun's cascabel knob would have been placed in the splice. In that case, as the gun recoiled, the increased tension in each side of the splice would have tightened it around the cascabel knob. ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
 
The repeated interruption of four asterisks redacting the well-recognized name of the subject splice in the article above are apparently artifacts of some sort of automated "net nanny" Bowdlerizing algorithm. The gymnastics employed by cunning linguists to avoid the use of a visually descriptive Anglo-Saxon nautical term is rather pretentious. 
 
Note at footnote 2. above that the editorial comment, "What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced, bur, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel." Is incorrect and misleading. Allanyed's explanation above of varying practices according to the period is correct. 
 
When a breaching rope was simply turned about the cascabel ball, it was commonly lashed together at the point where the rope crossed to form the loop in order to securely fasten the rope to the neck of the ball so it couldn't come adrift in use.
 
For modeling purposes, where scale renders actual splices impossible, faux splices can be created by tapering the bitter ends of the ropes by scraping the individual strands with the edge of a sharp blade or carefully trimming them at an angle with a sharp scissors. The tapered ends, rather than being tucked as in an actual splice, are then laid against the rope and secured with adhesive and a simple whipping applied over the area where the "splice" occurs. This creates the tapered appearance of a true whipped splice while avoiding an unsightly out-of-scale "lump" where the splices occur. 
 

From Wiki:  http://wiki.hmssurprise.org/phase3/index.php/Cunt_splice
**** splice
  A '**** splice', often softened to 'cut splice' or 'bight splice' for publication and in genteel conversation, is formed by eye splicing two different pieces of line into each other the same distance from the bitter end of each piece, forming "a Collar or Eye...in the Bight of the Rope. It is used for Pendents, Jib-Guys, &c."[1] Because the Eye is in the middle of the resultant rope, tension in the rope will tighten the eye around a wooden collar or fairlead. In Master and Commander, the bosun, Mr. Watt, personally works a **** splice into the breeching for the twelve-pounder bow-chaser that Aubrey mounts in HMS Sophie.[2]


References
↑ Lever, Darcy. The Young Sea Officer's Sheet Anchor: or, A Key to the Leading of Rigging and to Practical Seamanship. (c)1998 by Dover Publications, Inc.: p.5 ↑ O'Brian, Patrick. Master and Commander. (c) 1969 by Patrick O'Brian. J. B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia and New York, First Edition: p. 63. What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced but, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel, q.v., this image of a carronade aboard HMS Victory. It is conceivable that the gun's cascabel knob would have been placed in the splice. In that case, as the gun recoiled, the increased tension in each side of the splice would have tightened it around the cascabel knob. ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
 
The repeated interruption of four asterisks redacting the well-recognized name of the subject splice in the article above are apparently artifacts of some sort of automated "net nanny" Bowdlerizing algorithm. The gymnastics employed by cunning linguists to avoid the use of a visually descriptive Anglo-Saxon nautical term is rather pretentious. 
 
Note at footnote 2. above that the editorial comment, "What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced, bur, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel." Is incorrect and misleading. Allanyed's explanation above of varying practices according to the period is correct. 
 
When a breaching rope was simply turned about the cascabel ball, it was commonly lashed together at the point where the rope crossed to form the loop in order to securely fasten the rope to the neck of the ball so it couldn't come adrift in use.
 
For modeling purposes, where scale renders actual splices impossible, faux splices can be created by tapering the bitter ends of the ropes by scraping the individual strands with the edge of a sharp blade or carefully trimming them at an angle with a sharp scissors. The tapered ends, rather than being tucked as in an actual splice, are then laid against the rope and secured with adhesive and a simple whipping applied over the area where the "splice" occurs. This creates the tapered appearance of a true whipped splice while avoiding an unsightly out-of-scale "lump" where the splices occur. 
 

I have a Vanda-Lay Dremel-powered drill press. Vanda-Lay makes some interesting tools and their quality is probably second only to Jim Byrnes' Model Machines tools. That said, there is no question that the Byrnes thickness sander is the better tool and the better buy, as well. I see from checking Jim's website that they are not taking orders for machines at the moment because they took time off for summer vacation, but will be back shipping machines in mid-August. I suppose this is why they don't have the prices for the machines listed on their website at the moment! As I recall, the Byrnes sander is about the same, or even less money than the Vanda-Lay thickness sander with the motor. I have to say, owning a Byrnes thickness sander, that it is the "better buy," even if it costs a bit more than the Vanda-Lay. 
 
These sanders require some power to work effectively. I don't doubt that you can power one with a hand drill motor as Vanda-Lay suggests and a few have noted above, but I would think that would put some serious power demands on a hand drill motor, particularly if you are using it for a prolonged period. I also don't think there are any hand drill motors that put out anything like the RPMs that either the Byrnes motor or the power tool motor Vanda-Lay sells for somewhere around $300 do.
 
The fact that the Byrnes' integral motor takes up far less bench space than the Vanda-Lay, regardless of how the Vanda-Lay is powered, is no small consideration, not to mention that the integral motor on the Byrnes machine is far more "elegant" than the cobbled-together power options for the Vanda-Lay.
 
There are two big differences that put the Byrnes head and shoulders over the Vanda-Lay. The first, but not the greatest, difference is that the Byrnes is exceptionally accurate and is easier to adjust. It has an indexed adjustment knob that allow adjustments in increments of .002". The Vanda-Lay may be just as accurate but I expect it is more fiddily to set. The second, and biggest... huge... difference in the two machines is that the Vanda-Lay has a three-inch wide drum. It will only sand wood three inches wide or less. The Byrnes machine has a six-inch wide drum! The Byrnes sander will handle twice the width capacity of the Vanda-Lay and the Byrnes offers the option of loading its six inch wide drum with two different grits of abrasive sheet, each three inches wide, on the six inch drum. This allows you to use half of the drum for coarser sanding and the other for finer sanding, should you desire to do so.
 
So, for the same price, all else considered, the Byrnes is twice the machine in my estimation.  
 
I realize that price is often a serious issue for all of us. All I can say in that regard here is that the difference in price isn't much to get twice the machine in the Byrnes. It can't be said enough that the cheapest tool in the end is often the most expensive one. You could buy any one of the Byrnes Model Machines, use it for ten years, and if you didn't beat it up, probably sell it easily for half or two thirds of what you paid for it. Not so with the Vanda-Lay. If it's a difference of even a couple of hundred bucks, how long will it really take for you to forget the "pain" of that? These days, where I live, at least, that's maybe three half-way decent dinners out with the Missus. If you get the Byrnes, you won't be sorry.
 
 
 

From Wiki:  http://wiki.hmssurprise.org/phase3/index.php/Cunt_splice
**** splice
  A '**** splice', often softened to 'cut splice' or 'bight splice' for publication and in genteel conversation, is formed by eye splicing two different pieces of line into each other the same distance from the bitter end of each piece, forming "a Collar or Eye...in the Bight of the Rope. It is used for Pendents, Jib-Guys, &c."[1] Because the Eye is in the middle of the resultant rope, tension in the rope will tighten the eye around a wooden collar or fairlead. In Master and Commander, the bosun, Mr. Watt, personally works a **** splice into the breeching for the twelve-pounder bow-chaser that Aubrey mounts in HMS Sophie.[2]


References
↑ Lever, Darcy. The Young Sea Officer's Sheet Anchor: or, A Key to the Leading of Rigging and to Practical Seamanship. (c)1998 by Dover Publications, Inc.: p.5 ↑ O'Brian, Patrick. Master and Commander. (c) 1969 by Patrick O'Brian. J. B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia and New York, First Edition: p. 63. What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced but, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel, q.v., this image of a carronade aboard HMS Victory. It is conceivable that the gun's cascabel knob would have been placed in the splice. In that case, as the gun recoiled, the increased tension in each side of the splice would have tightened it around the cascabel knob. ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
 
The repeated interruption of four asterisks redacting the well-recognized name of the subject splice in the article above are apparently artifacts of some sort of automated "net nanny" Bowdlerizing algorithm. The gymnastics employed by cunning linguists to avoid the use of a visually descriptive Anglo-Saxon nautical term is rather pretentious. 
 
Note at footnote 2. above that the editorial comment, "What purpose this splice would serve is unclear; breech ropes were not typically spliced, bur, rather, rove through an iron loop atop the cascabel." Is incorrect and misleading. Allanyed's explanation above of varying practices according to the period is correct. 
 
When a breaching rope was simply turned about the cascabel ball, it was commonly lashed together at the point where the rope crossed to form the loop in order to securely fasten the rope to the neck of the ball so it couldn't come adrift in use.
 
For modeling purposes, where scale renders actual splices impossible, faux splices can be created by tapering the bitter ends of the ropes by scraping the individual strands with the edge of a sharp blade or carefully trimming them at an angle with a sharp scissors. The tapered ends, rather than being tucked as in an actual splice, are then laid against the rope and secured with adhesive and a simple whipping applied over the area where the "splice" occurs. This creates the tapered appearance of a true whipped splice while avoiding an unsightly out-of-scale "lump" where the splices occur.