Jump to content
Supplies of the Ship Modeler's Handbook are running out. Get your copy NOW before they are gone! Click on photo to order. ×

mtaylor

Moderators
  • Posts

    26,270
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by mtaylor

  1. 4 hours ago, Landlubber Mike said:

     

    Sorry for using this log to record my thoughts, but I think I've worked through some of the trickier parts, which are:

     

    All in all, I think this might be a lot easier to accomplish than I first feared.  Thanks for bearing with me on my little build treatise!

    No worries on the thinking out loud.   Input from others is a valuable part of MSW.

  2. There are discussions in the tool area on this.  However, the caveat is to buy only what you need when you need it and go to for good quality.  There are many builders who have jumped in and spent a pile of money on tools that they never use or are worthless for model building.

     

    And by a "small frame" are you talking about a cross section?  There are kits of cross-section which would be a good start and also there's a group scratch build in the Triton area.

  3. 10 hours ago, allanyed said:

     

    Interesting video that obviously took a lot of effort to put together and as you point out, some terminology inaccuracies. 

     

    At time mark 2:48, Jake states there are wooden air ducts fore and aft.  This was a new one for me.  I have never seen or heard of this on any contemporary plans or written sources.  I suspect that if they are there, they are a modern contrivance.  Anyone know if these were really on the Victory or any other ship back in the day?

     

    Allan

    I wonder if he's talking about the gratings on the decks?

  4. 2 hours ago, CDW said:

     

    I watched a modeler on a YouTube video who literally dropped a cement block on top of his 1:32 scale aircraft model, smashing it to bits because he didn't like the way it sat on its landing gear. Don't know why he didn't just shorten or lengthen the gear to suit his taste.  

    I've heard of many doing this or similar....think Viking Funeral for one way.  Not sure why.  Maybe it's just frustration.

  5. 15 hours ago, Lieste said:

    3D printing can have its place - particularly with powdered metals, printing with a solid support matrix and sintered... allowing far more complex forms in fewer parts than machining or casting... but for building scale 'in place printing' you get poor coherence of a material which has better properties if not modified to allow extrusions. Perhaps 3d printed 'moulds' for regular cast concrete are a more sensible method for the 'organic' shapes, or just continuing with prefab elements or simple shuttering for rectangular pours make more sense.

    Finish and durability are poor for all of these 'amazing' projects that I've seen promoted. YMMV, and maybe there will be advantages to future methods, but I see no or few benefits of the technology demonstrated so far.

     

    So far, other than "demonstration" buildings, the only thing I've seen done with this method is for temporary structures..  It is a new developing tech and time and investment will determine if it's go or no-go.

  6. 4 hours ago, Snug Harbor Johnny said:

       I have an old Mantua kit (Golden Hind) that has many decent (and large) drawings to supplement their average, multilingual instructions.  Too bad there was that fire at Mantua, so my guess is that the 'old stock' (pre-fire production) that can sometimes be found  (Ebay, yard sales/flea markets) are pretty good.  'Not sure if Sergal is the 'successor' to Mantua (but have seen references to Sergal/Mantua as a supplier), and since I have not seen a Sergal kit I can't offer an opinion.  

     

    Fire at Mantua?  Mamoli had one back about 8 years ago or so and then Dusek bought the assets including the name.

×
×
  • Create New...