Jump to content
HOLIDAY DONATION DRIVE - SUPPORT MSW - DO YOUR PART TO KEEP THIS GREAT FORUM GOING! (Only 72 donations so far out of 49,000 members - Can we at least get 100? C'mon guys!) ×

mtaylor

Moderators
  • Posts

    26,273
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mtaylor

  1. Borge, This is like watching it again for the first time. Just some super stunning work. I'm enjoying it.
  2. I moved them to the downloads area and removed them from here. Sorry 42rocker, Pete gets credit as I just moved his post. I can't begin to thank others for their finds. The reason we move them is so that visitors don't get the benefit of the drawings without signing up and doing a buid. Too darn many pirates.....
  3. Popeye, It would appear that the crowd is getting a tad unruly... and hungry. I thought this hobby was supposed to teach us patience. tsk tsk.... oh... make mine broiled not boiled. ahem... <cough> with a touch of butter please <cough>
  4. Very nicely done, Popeye. Thanks for reminding what is waiting in the wings....
  5. Crackers, Take the route you're taking. Give credit where credit is due. In the case of Wikipedia, for example, credit them. They do credit their sources so that's a good thing. Same for encyclopedias. One of the big issues is simply "intent". And around here, out "intent" is not to make money off of someone else's work.
  6. By all means Sam. do a writeup. Worst case is that we just pin it in the Wood Discussion area.
  7. There's clues in some other books. For example, mention is made in Dodd & Moore's Building the Wooden Fighting Ship discusses that there were firms that made models from draughts (no details as to who,though). Pepys and Pett had models but no mention of who made them.. Possibly they did.or didn't. Greg's posted reference seems to have the most info that I've seen
  8. The details will be what you decide to add. Maybe artillary tools? Barrels? Ciphers on the gun barrels? Etc.? The two most important details aren't ever shown in pictures. One is the fun. The other is the satisfaction, be it the learning curve, the workmanship, or just accomplishing.
  9. So your cutter model will have model of a cutter on it, I hope?
  10. Which (following on to Adam) is why certain companie's products are banned from the buildlogs. They pirated the plans and/or the kit. In one case, they pirated the kit and then had the temerity to pirate the photo's (from Harold Hahn) as being "what the kit makes"....
  11. Farawayman, The mere fact that you are able to post says you accept certain rules. We have no authority over a user's pics. They are his/hers. The onus is on the poster. We merely follow along and enforce it. As far as your pointing out the pictures... there is in copyright, something called "fair use". Loosely it means that you can use a copyrighted photo/article, etc. in reviews, etc. Also, using the image of a manufacturer's ship in the context of a buildlog would probably be considered "free advertising" by the company.
  12. Pete, If Russ agrees, put that treenail info into a new topic in the download area. I think it would be very useful to have.
  13. Peter, Basically the same way as posts. Except hit the "Use Full Editor" button. You'll see the "Attach Files" down to the left. Here's the discussion on PM's: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/topic/718-adding-photos-to-private-message/
  14. You can "blame" Russ and, as I recall, Don for the plans. You can blame Joss (Matrim) as he took over running this when Russ stepped down. I guess if blaming is there... I blame MSW for giving me the idea to settle on 1:64 for all full hull models. Had to buy a printer that could handle 11 X 17 paper. BTW, need I mention the power tools...? Maybe all the build logs did it? :D
  15. Treenails? Some folks do it your way. Some actually do treenails from bamboo or other woods. Others simulate with a pencil or even a hypodermic needle. and then there's those that don't do them. I'm one who prefers 1:64 and probably won't be treenailing.
  16. Let's hope he does. I've seen two ways, so far. Daniel's: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/topic/536-micro-blocks/ and Chuck's: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/topic/273-mass-producing-rigging-blocks-with-a-mill/
  17. Nice to see this one coming back, Chris. I've always liked your build of the Fly.
  18. Floyd, My only comments would be 1) the bell could be forward or aft. Check the spacing on the stove pipe. It could be behind the foremast as many time, there's no room in front of it below the weather deck. Otherwise, go for it!!!!
  19. Ray, If I were to get back into kits, I think this one would be near the top of my list. Although the two Chris Watton new kits should be tempting also. I'll just sit over here in the balcony and watch.
  20. Walt, I've had halts and pauses also here. I suspect that it's due to the heavy load of posts and users right now.
  21. Silkspan, maybe. Cotton isn't.
  22. There's also a stainable version. I haven't tried but I've heard good things. As always, your mileage may vary and test, test, test first.
  23. Daniel, I'm answering from the point of practicality as I've not seen a whole lot of authentic documentation. On the netting... I don't think they would have been tarred as the tarring would have transferred to the hammock. Where I've seen them bent is only on the short cranes. The taller ones, it would have been easier to have them unbent. Stacking would have easier by standing on end. What I have seen documented is that the hammocks were 18 inches wide by 6 feet long. They were provided with a "bag" for storage. The hammock was rolled such that the final dimension was 18 inches long (the width of the hammock) and about 7 inches in diameter. The bosun had a hoop that each hammock had to pass through before they could be stowed.
  24. It should be noted that coffee and tea are acidic and will rot the rigging (and sails) over time.
×
×
  • Create New...