mtaylor

Beautiful work, Paul. I hope you're having a great birthday today.

As I recall from my Marine Corps history, the answer is: most likely US Marine Corps. The main reason for the Corps existence back then was for the protection of shipping. Often they were aboard merchant ships as well as privateers and of course, regular Navy ships.

One has to remember also, that a privateer was in the grey area of things. There's a good chance that crew would have been imprisoned, possibly tried as pirates. So they would fight harder not to be captured.

Rick, Those logs would be in the Kit log area. There are a couple of rather largish vessels including subs in the Scratch area.

Rick, Please open a build log. This is NOT the proper place to do one. Thanks.

This is just amazing to me. I fat-finger things at a larger scale and I can't imagine doing this quality of work at this scale.

Dave, If it's CA, acetone will dissolve the bond and save your fingers and the blade.

Johann, This is an amazing build you have going. I am surprised though that the quarter gallery only had one small window.

Nenad, I think that sometimes half the fun is figuring out how to do something. The portholes look great!

The short answer to your question about planking the stem... yes they do. I did a quick Google for images of the Corel Vic... and they all "factory" or "built OOB" show that funky planking on the stem/bow.

Mike, I picked up some artist's pigment (it's a powder) at an art supply shop. Mixed with a bit of water than PVA, it does a nice job on simulating the caulking. The more powder you use, the darker the glue line. It seems to work pretty nice and I'm debating it with myself. Ed Tosti (EdT) has mentioned it several times in his Niaid log. Here's a link: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/232-hms-naiad-by-edt-160-frigate-38-1797/page-5?hl=pigment#entry8075 and another one: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/3453-young-america-by-edt-extreme-clipper-1853/?p=119364

Mike, I've seen (I think it was a couple of build logs) where the top of the box had numerous holes drilled to pull the dust that doesn't get sucked in at the sanding drum. I have no idea about the rest of the system if it was a shop vac or high flow extractor.

Go for it, Dave. We're collectively holding our breaths.... ok.. maybe just me. We'll have to wait for the others.

Pat, Go ahead and post them in the Museum Ships area: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/forum/43-nautical-research-guild-news-model-ship-clubs-and-exhibitions-and-events-museums-and-museum-ships/ :)

And your name will be permanently engraved on the award once Dirk finds it.

AlexBeranov and Garward also use the bitumen so you might have a look that their logs.

Ah...we all do boneheaded things like that Denis. And you've got the right attitude... laugh and learn and hope we don't do it again.

I'm one who thinks the research is half the fun. And also half the frustration. Let's face it, with a kit, you either take the manufacturer's word for it, or you research and bash if you're going for accuracy. See my response below on one set of fun and games I had..... I did this kit. I visited the Constellation in 1977 and was convinced by the smooth BS of the tour guide that this really was the 1797 frigate and I was very impressed. Fast forward many years. I got the kit... oh boy!!!! Then I decided to check... oops... the kit isn't of the 1797 frigate. What I saw sitting in the harbor in Baltimore wasn't the 1797 frigate. Hit the internet and discover that many folks have been bamboozled over the years either by intention or those who did it, just didn't know any better. The plans in the Smithsonian were even "changed". So.. research indicated the kit had the hull lines of what sat in the harbor.... the 1854 sloop Constellation. The folks in Baltimore butchered the hull to produce the so-called frigate. Hmm.... what to do? I spread my wings and bashed the living daylights out of that kit. Jerry Todd is doing a scratch and I feel he has better research than I did, so don't take my build as gospel. AL apparently got suckered into believing that the ship model they have was the real frigate. But, the info is out there so why don't they change the kit? I'm suspecting they continue to sell the kit as is because people buy it because buyers believe that the manufacturer wouldn't lie to them. Besides, who wants the sloop... they want the frigate. And what of the 1797 frigate? Good question. Most tend to think that the plans went up in smoke when the British burned Washington. Anyway, my moral.. there's accuracy and there's art and sometimes there's both at once. I do think both have a place in model ship building. If nothing else, just make sure you have fun.

There should be a caveat here on finishing first... glue doesn't always stick to finishes. Test first. You may have to scrape or sand the areas where deck furniture will be glued down.

It just looks right at home at the beach. Very well done, Kees.

Oh... you asked about 3D printing... here in Trader's and Dealers: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/7030-high-precision-3d-printing-services/ I can't speak to the quality as different printing methods and printers yield different results.

Not so sure about checking the fittings for a match. Kit makers are notorious for putting stuff in the box that's either "close" or "no way close" A good example is ship's wheels. If it's round and with pointy things on it, they'll toss it in the box as size is umimportant.

Go here: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/forum/47-questionsinstructions-on-how-to-use-and-post-to-this-forumsite-problems-or-suggestions/ There's lots of useful info about MSW. There's one pinned post for attaching images to a post or PM.

tsurfing, Do a search on 3D printing. I there's stuff in the CAD area, but off the top of my head I'm not sure.

Have great time, one and all. I raise a glass to you on Thursday night.