georgeband

Deck planking I have now completed the planking of the mid section, above the captain's cabin, and the aft section by the transom. The fore section is currently work in progress. The mid section was quite easy and I did it first. I used the 4x0.5mm Tanganyika planks from the kit to lay down the partners either side of the centre line and binding strakes which are further outboard. I set the gap between the binding strakes at 20mm which is the width of the opening for the main hatch. I split some Tanganyika and Obechi to make narrower planks which fit between the partners and binding strakes. A gentle rub with a pencil along the edges of the planks simulates the caulking. There are no joins in the planks because they are not needed. Why add joints when the timbers are long enough? The waterways are a gentle exercise in spiling and I used 6x0.5mm Obechi. The outboard edges were trimmed to fit against the bulwarks and then I used dividers to mark a constant width of 4.5mm. Centre planks, binding strakes and waterways, with narrow planks filling the middle gaps I used tapered planks for the gaps between the binding strakes and waterways. They are 3.5mm wide tapering down to 2.5mm (approx.) and only the outer one has a curve to match the waterway. I decided that the shipwright in Bermuda took the easier option to make them straight and tapered rather than curved and tapered. Trimming the ends and light sanding and scraping finished the job. The aft section was tackled in a similar way. I laid down the partners, binding strakes and waterways (all in 4mm Tanganyika) then filled the gaps with a blend of straight and tapered planks. The aft ends are hidden in the pantry or necessary, or under a plank that runs along the bottom of the transom. This final plank, in two parts, did need some careful cutting to make it fit because the joins cannot be disguised. I could not sand the deck planks because my fingers are too big and used a knife blade instead to scrape them until the deck felt smooth to the touch. Aft section of the deck with the main planks fitted Aft section of decking complete George

Ian, You are off to a great start here with Sherbourne which is a good first kit. The plywood deck layer that you will be fitting soon comes as a single sheet in the kit but it needs to bend up fore-and-aft and bend down at the sides. This is simply not achievable by bending and stretching the plywood. One solution is to make narrow saw cuts that run above the bulkheads and which allow these double curves to be made. (I recently did this on my 'Ballahoo'.) The extra caution if you do this is to have pins ready to hold down the sides by the bulwarks and some arrangement to press down the centre of the ply piece while the glue sets. Small blocks of wood and elastic bands do the trick. George

Bob, Richard, You make excellent points and your timing is superb: I intend to 'copper' the hull of my 1/64 schooner in the coming months and have been thinking about this for some time. I am trying to make the model 'accurate' rather than conforming to model making conventions and this has faced me with some awkward decisions. A model is a representation of reality and will always have some compromises. Some are close to that reality, for example the thickness of a rigging line or the width of a plank. Some are conventions that we accept, for example a ship is stationary in a case and is not actually sailing. The many choices in between these extremes are a balance between accuracy, artisan skill, and art. All of these characteristics are subjective to some extent. Accuracy: In theory we follow Admiralty drawings or information from contemporary models, but we overlay this with our own imagination and desire to represent features that might not actually be visible at a scale distance. There are nails and dents on the edges and face of a copper plate and I would like to nod towards them rather than ignore them. Similarly, I include a few figures on my models to give an indication of scale and I paint the brass buttons on a jacket. Artisan skill: Many models are made to demonstrate the maker's skill and there is nothing wrong with this. It does affect the choice of wood and other materials and sometimes the result looks good but is far from simulating oak planks. Art: I put a few sails on a ship because I like the look, as does my wife. They are out of scale but in my mind the model is bare without them. We all make our own choices because we have different preferences. I have a pack of Amati etched copper plates and might still use them. Or I might make plates from paper in the way that Bob describes. Accuracy is important for me but is it the accuracy of a hull in the water (and the model is definitely dry) or a hull freshly coppered, or in dry dock... Do I want to include weed and barnacles or is that a step too far, for me? A diorama would be treated differently. This model making is something I do for relaxation so I will make my decision at some time soon, and I will not criticize others for their decisions if they happen to be different. George

Tony, Thanks for your reply. I think that you have identified a separate question which is about where along a strake you have the scarf joints. The issue of right or left handed, or A or B from my sketch, still remains. For the straight binding strake the position of a scarf is largely dictated by the length of the available wood but the direction of the joint could be at the whim or habit of the shipwright. I imagine that the shipwright would want to minimise the number of joints and so the positions were set by the available wood. If he has suitable compass timber to curve around the bow then he does not need scarf joints between shorter pieces. This results in a stronger structure and less work. For the waterway on my model of Whiting I plan to have a spiled piece around the bow, one scarf joint, and then a relatively straight piece back as far as the step in the deck. The binding strake will have one joint but I have more flexibility about where it goes. I have tried to put myself in the place of the shipwright who has access to local Bermudan cedar and is using his skill and experience to build a schooner. I know that my knowledge is meagre in comparison to the un-named shipwright but wood and engineering principles have not changed. I can claim that what I have is 'reasonable' even though there is little real evidence to justify it. Sod's law says that something will turn up after I have glued the wood down! George

Deck - first layer A little bit of progress to report on the deck for Whiting. I have now fitted the ply first layer which has been fairly straightforward though there were a few unexpected issues to deal with. I printed the Admiralty drawing (ZAZ6117), cut out the main deck plan and separated it into three sections. I glued these to the ply part from Caldercraft. The hatch openings all had to be adjusted. One surprise was that the rear mast did not align with the ply part and after a lot of measuring and rising worry I realised that ZAZ6117 (top view) does not entirely agree with ZAZ6116 (side view) and there are inconsistencies around the rear mast and entrance lobby. Who can you trust? My model so far is based on the side view so I chose to ignore the marked position of the rear mast on the deck plan. I cut slots in the fore section of the deck so that it could curve from side to side (rounding) to follow the top edges of the bulkheads and curve from fore to aft to follow the sheer on the spine. I don't see how the kit can allow any rounding. I stuck it down with wood glue and used pins in the sides and a block with elastic bands to hold it down. It needed more pressure between the two hatches and my thumb grew weary while I waited for the wood glue to grab and hold. One other issue is that the kit is designed for 6mm dowels for the masts, but they supplied quarter-inch 6.3mm dowel which does not fit. This and the similar issue with the spine and bulkheads suggests that someone at Caldercraft thinks that 6mm and 3mm are equivalent to quarter and eighth inch. Close but not the same. The mid and aft sections did not need saw cuts and were held down with pins while the glue set. I continue to ponder about the deck planking and have started another thread about scarf joints. Any help would be much appreciated. George

I am with Allan on the home made sanding tools. I have glued sandpaper to the handles of wooden cutlery and then trimmed the overlap. This gives an edge which can get into a corner and a flat area for flattening or reducing bumps. For concave surfaces I have a short length of plastic pipe with two grades of sandpaper stuck to it with double sided tape. It is excellent for work on a hull near the transom. One other tool is at the end of your arm! I do enjoy sanding a hull by hand and feeling the bumps and the force needed to cut through them and any irregularities that you can't quite see. George

Druxey, Thank you for your quick reply, appreciated as always. I did not explain my problem properly and have now added a sketch to illustrate the point. I should have done this at the start to make it clearer. The sketch is not an accurate depiction of a hooked scarf but represents the choices I have to make. For the waterway I will be joining an edge-bent plank (aft) to a spiled section (forward) and there is sufficient overlap between the pieces to make either option, A or B. If I choose on aesthetics alone then A looks better to me (at the moment). The join on the binding strake will be handed in the same way as the the one on the waterway just because it looks neater. I enjoy the research on these issues but it is possible to get so engrossed in a search to ensure accuracy that a model does not get finished. Perhaps the only model which can be perfect in all respects is one of a subject which still exists, and the model represents her as she is now. Victory, Cutty Sark and others form a small band but the vast majority of ship models are reconstructions based on best available evidence. Sometimes we rely on informed guesses. (I have just found and enjoyed the thread you started about research.) George

Many drawings and references show scarph (scarf) joints on the deck planking for the stronger, more important planks. The waterway by the bulwark is one, the binding strake outboard of the hatches is another. The shape of a hooked scarf joint is well known and the proportions for the lengths of different sides can vary. A paper by Karolak et al describes many of the variations on scarf joints Karolak scarf joints.pdf. Current use in boat building are described in a short article by Souppez https://www.woodenboat.com/strength-scarf-joints. I guess that around 1800 in the Royal Navy or elsewhere there was a conventional way to draw and cut the joint so that it is not too long or too short. Does anyone have a contemporary description of the relative sizes? I think back to learning how to make a mortise and tenon joint at school where the join is one third of the width of the wood. There must have been something similar, though more complicated, for a scarf joint. My second question is about left-handed or right-handed joints. Drawings in three books I have all show that the aft timber extends farther forward on its outboard edge; the fore timber that goes into the joint extends farther aft on its inboard edge. Was there a conventional way to align the scarfs or was it the choice of the shipwright? I have not yet found any contemporary evidence. I will continue my searches on Google and ask for advice from the wise people who have looked at this before. If there is no evidence anywhere then I will simply choose a joint shape that looks good. George

It all depends on what you mean by 'best'. Other similar discussions approach the subject from an aesthetic or artisan direction where the aim is to show your skills to advantage. There is nothing wrong with this and it can lead you to any number of hard woods that have a fine grain. It becomes a matter of personal preference as to how much grain you want to see; for me I like to see a boundary between parallel planks but not a huge difference. These woods also hold a corner so that when you want a sharp edge it can be achieved by cutting or sanding and you don't get rounded edges. The colour is also a matter of personal preference and there are some fine models with yellow or red or white tints to parts of the hull. An alternative aspect of 'best' is realistic. A model at a viewing distance of one foot is equivalent in some ways to a real vessel at 48 feet or 64 feet or more, depending on your scale. At this distance the grain becomes invisible and a painted finish could (whisper it) be just as 'good'. But the convention for ship modellers is to have a wood finish and we would only paint a surface to look like wood if the model was made of plastic. So what does a real, wood surface look like? I came to this issue and found this thread when considering the deck on a Bermuda built schooner from 1805. The deck would be holystoned every day so the surface would be fresh, sanded wood. On most Royal Navy ships the deck was, I think, fir or a similar softwood (help me here Allan or someone else). Even if it was oak the surface would be pale and a 'white' wood would be suitable on a model. Jotika in their kits supply Tankanyika for the deck or you could use obechi or lime/ bass or holly. The schooner I am making was built from the local wood in Bermuda which is variously called cedar or juniper. It is now rare from over exploitation but Eastern Red Cedar from the USA is meant to be very similar. Some might call me obsessive, but I have now bought some of this wood and the shipping and import costs equal the cost of the wood itself. (I will use the wood to make the base for a display cabinet.) It is pink. In the photo below it is resting on some white paper. It is most definitely pink with white sapwood. The deck on my model schooner will be pink. My plan is to use the Tanganyika planks from the kit and stain them with a pink dye. Leaving the deck we come to the rest of the hull which was not sanded every day and the wood would age with time and sun and salty water. Old wood in my garden or elsewhere tends to be grey unless it is varnished or treated. It does not seem to matter what variety of wood it is, it goes grey with age. The next photo shows four pieces of oak which have been in the open for three years. I would guess that a typical, oak built ship would be a similar colour unless you want to portray it as being wet in which case it would be much darker. I do not know how the Eastern Red Cedar will age but I have already built the hull in walnut which is a bit darker than this oak sample. A question for other modellers or sailors. Do you have photos of a real, untreated wooden hull that we can use as examples? George

Gary, That's a good point about a 'steam scuttle' which is a new term for me. I had not included the full drawings of Haddock and the cooking range or stove is forward of the ladder way; the chimney hole is next to the fore mast. The additional structure aft of the ladder way is, I would guess, just to support a sliding hatch. The deck drawing does not show ventilation holes there, or anything else for that matter, so we are back to speculation. I imagine that the cook would want to keep the hatch at least partly open to let out the steam and to provide light so he could see what he was doing. George

Thank you Pat and Druxey for your comments and sharing your knowledge. The photo of Harriet shows a fine example of a sliding hatch which will certainly influence the design I eventually recreate on Whiting. I had hoped that the extensive drawings of Haddock, and her sister Cuckoo, and the precursors of the class would help with my build of Whiting. They do, but they also leave open other questions where I have to doubt the accuracy of the draughtsman. The companionway 'box' over the main ladder is another example where the drawing shows something that does not appear to be sensible: on the drawing the sides are perpendicular to the keel, which puts them at an angle to the waterline and deck. As I said in another thread, I do not like to assume that a drawing is wrong simply because it does not agree with my interpretation of what should be done. In the case of the cover over the fore ladder way my conclusion now is that the drawing does show a sliding cover and my previous engineering assessment was flawed and too cautious. Thanks again for your help. If anyone has more photos or drawings of sliding hatch covers I would be delighted to see them. George

I am now doing some detailed planning for the deck and hatches. I want to keep this topic as a build log and move wider discussions out of the way so I have opened a new topic about hatch covers over ladder ways. What an exciting life I lead! https://modelshipworld.com/topic/29209-hatch-over-a-ladderway/ George

I am modelling HM schooner Whiting which was built in 1805. The Admiralty drawings for the sister ship Haddock show some features around the fore ladderway which I find tricky to interpret and would appreciate comments and advice. The first picture is an extract from the plan view and shows the main hatch, fore ladderway. chimney hole, and fore mast. It all looks fairly conventional. The second picture is a side view that includes the ladderway and the area aft (to the left) of it. The hatch has a lid as we would expect but there is what looks like another, lower hatch that extends aft from it. This does not appear on the plan view and might just be some light structure or even something in the bulwarks. Marquardt in 'The Global Schooner' states that a hatch cover over a ladderway would usually be hinged so that it can be opened with one hand. He is usually very good at giving references but this time it appears to be a reasoned assertion and the drawing he provides looks reasonable. The extra structure on the Admiralty drawing could be a support for the lid to keep it off the deck when it is open. I have added a copy of Marquardt's drawing here. (Buy the book if you are building a schooner!). Goodwin in 'The Naval Cutter Alert' has drawings for a sliding hatch. In the extract below (5) is the sliding cover and (3) is a fixed cover, (13) is a rail for the sliding cover. This looks like a better match for the Admiralty drawing for Haddock and I would guess that it is based on other Admiralty drawings. (Buy this book too if you are making a small vessel from late 1700s to early 1800s!) My inclination is to use the sliding hatch but I have a couple of reservations. One is that a sliding cover jams easily if the force is not even on both sides. The other is that the fixed cover just goes over bare deck and does not serve a useful purpose. It has the appearance of a shallow box that cannot be opened. It could be to stop the crew tripping over the slide rails, but then it has to be strong enough for them to stand on it while working. It looks like a lot of effort to support the rails. Does anyone have information about sliding or hinged hatch covers? George

More optical fibres I have now fitted optical fibres through the front stand. I glued the cooking range in position then used the same methods as for the rear stand. Four fibres illuminate the area below the fore ladder way, between frames D and O. In the photos, two of them point upwards and will be bent down by the main deck when that is fitted. Three fibres are routed further aft and are angled up to shine through the grating over the main hatch. Fibres that enter through the forward stand illuminate two areas The photos also show where light leaks out of the sides of the fibres. In the cooking range this simulates a fire and I will leave it as it is, though I have considered putting black tape around the fibres to hide them. Fibres coming up through the cooking range George

This has been a lively discussion and I apologise unreservedly to James H and others who achieve wonders with an airbrush. As mentioned by Kurt it is not the airbrush itself which is the problem but the skill and ability of the user, and James's Typhoon shows what can be achieved. Unfortunately pictures like this give some people the idea that all they need is an airbrush and everything will become good, whereas it requires practice and experimenting and sound advice and an aptitude to get to that high level. There is a saying "all the gear but no idea" which applies to so many hobbies. Personally I enjoy painting with a hairy stick and occasionally I use a rattle-can of car paint for some jobs such as a 'silver' aircraft model. I realise that a feathered edge is much simpler with an airbrush, as is a graded dusting of dirt, but they are rare on the models I make. Perhaps I choose models which suit my style of work. I do enjoy adding fine details with a steady hand and shy away from masking which is a different skill that does not attract me. Each to his own, be happy with what you can achieve and make the next one better. George

Dry fitting before gluing is for me an essential step to make sure that the bits fit before they get sticky. However, I do not use the brass pins from the kit because they will cause splits unless you drill holes for them, in which case you will have holes to fill later. I use map pins which are thinner than the kit brass pins and have a head that you can grip easily. Push them in enough so that they do not fall out, and do it near the edge on the underside of the capping rail. The pins will now stop the rail from sliding to the side while you check the fit. When gluing I use large elastic bands to hold down the rail to the top of the bulwark while the PVA glue sets. Pull out the pins when the joint is secure and you are left with small holes where they cannot be seen. Other builders have their own preferred methods which you can sometimes see in build logs. The capping rail here is not the plywood kit part but strip wood that was bent to shape George

Phil, Bruce, The thesis makes many references to an article by Munday in "Ingrid and other studies" from 1978. Two websites claim to have pdf versions but a search suggests that the sites are scams and should be avoided. There are a few copies in Abebooks and various second-hand or charity shops for £15 - £20 but I do not have enough interest to increase my book collection on a minor topic. Do any of you have access to a copy? George

The Admiralty drawings for Haddock (1805) show two large cupboards at the stern, either side of the rudder. They are about 5 feet high, 2 feet wide and 2 feet front-to-back at the deck, more at the top. The one to starboard is labelled as a pantry while the one to port is called the 'necessary'. In the UK we now call the 'necessary' the toilet and in USA it is often called the bathroom. The drawing shows a door that opens forward so there was some privacy unlike the seats of ease in the heads. I have attached a pdf copy of a Masters thesis by Joe John Simmons about seats of ease. He wrote it in 1985 and it has plenty of detail for those who want to know including line drawingsSeats of Ease Simmons-MA1985.pdf. It's a good read while you are sitting at your leisure... George

Sziggy, The PVA glue works with wood and paper and I would not use it for metal unless it is just to seal over a mechanical joint. The CA glues are much better for fixing pins into holes though they are not very good at filling gaps, so a pin should be a snug fit in the hole. If the pintles on your rudder do not fit into the eyelets then it could be that the wire is too thick, or that the pins and eyes are not properly aligned. Try a length of unused wire and see if that fits into an eyelet; if it does then the problem is alignment. A solution in this case is to leave one of the eyelets (or pintles) loose in its mounting hole and fit the rudder to the hull. You will need tweezers or fine pliers to get all the joints to couple but it can be done. When the rudder is hanging happily apply a drop of CA glue to the unglued pin (or eyelet) and the alignment is all sorted. If the wire does not fit into an eyelet then trying to reduce its thickness is possible. However, it is usually easier to find a replacement wire which does not have to be brass. Look in electrical cable, staples, paperclips, and so on and find a wire that does fit into the eyelet. George

Optical fibres I have fitted optical fibres through the aft stand (brass tube) and coaxed them into position. Basic geometry shows that seven 1mm diameter fibres should fit through a 3mm internal diameter tube but it all depends on manufacturing tolerances. My fallback position was to fit only five fibres if they were too tight. Fortunately all seven were a comfortable fit and slide without scraping bits of the sides. Initially there was a tree of fibres that poked up through the brass tube I have used as a stand. I allowed a 20cm / 8 inch tail from the bottom of the tube so that the ends of the fibres will be accessible when Whiting is on her display stand. I wrapped insulating tape around the fibres at both ends of the brass tube to stop the bundle from sliding. I will experiment with a few glues before I fully fix the fibres because I do not know how the plastic will react to the solvents. Tree of optical fibres fed in through the hollow stand The fibres were then routed through the holes I had pre-drilled in the bulkheads. The fibres will bend with a radius of about 2.5cm / 1 inch and there is little risk of them breaking. The bigger problem with tight bends is that light spills out of the sides of the fibres. I cut the ends of the fibres with a knife or scissors; a precise cut is not needed because I want the light to spread out in a broad pattern. The next photo shows the fibres in position and lit. Two at the aft end of the cabin shine near the candles, two point directly up and their light will reflect down off the ceiling, three are fed into the entrance lobby. Optical fibres in place and lit I used an amber LED to provide the light because it gives a colour that resembles candle light. A 'warm white' LED is too white for my taste though I might fit some to the display case to back light the sails. A 3mm diameter LED is a standard size and a short length of brass tube at the lower tail of the fibres is an easy way to make the connection. The power for the LED came from a simple constant current source (two transistors and two resistors) that I have to hand, but for the display model I will probably use a 5V USB supply and a simple resistor to limit the current. This gives plenty of options for mains electric supplies or battery power banks. I have now added some foil to the fore corners of the entrance lobby to better reflect the light back. I will also glue some foil to the underside of the main deck to illuminate the floor of the cabin. Next job is to fit the fibres in the fore stand. George

I'm not sure what you mean by PVC glue. PVA glue is the white stuff to fix wood and it usually takes an hour or so to set and turn clear. When my PVA glue gets too thick I just add a little water. A (plastic) bottle lasts me several years unless I have a big DIY project. Superglue or cyanoacrylate or CA glue is the one that grabs and sets instantly and will glue your fingers together if you take liberties with it. It also comes in thick and thin varieties. I find that it builds up around the nozzle which gives two problems: it will not dispense properly and the cap will not close properly. I chip away the dried glue with an old knife blade. A small plastic bottle of CA glue typically lasts about 3 to 6 months for me before it gets too thick and sets. The little foil tubes of glue are good for one application and, in my experience, go solid or empty after that. George

Sziggy, I was wondering if I had been too harsh and you had given up with the build, but the photos show that your planking is now something that you can look at with pride. The double-plank method is good for beginners because it lets you hide earlier mistakes as your technique improves. Keep at it! With regard to your question about drilling, I use a pin chuck and twist it with simple finger power. I slip a drawing pin into the end so that I can apply pressure from my palm to the end of the pin chuck without it making a hole in my skin. There are plenty of low cost mini-drills available and Dremel is probably the brand leader. Personally I don't like the high pitched whine they make and accept that hand tools are slower. George

I agree with what Ben says. I usually paint with acrylics and have used up to 6 thin coats for a large area. The drying time for acrylics is short so the method does not add a huge amount of delay. The other suggestion I would make is to use a larger brush. The typical small modelling brush is fine for little things like cannon but does not provide enough coverage for a larger area such as a hull bottom. Go to an artists' supplies shop and buy something there. People at a modelling club near me (mostly aircraft and tanks) split between those who use an airbrush and those who prefer a hairy stick. The airbrush users seem to spend much of their time masking which is a different skill. Personally I do not much like an airbrush finish which to me looks speckled and toy-like, but an airbrush can achieve things which a brush cannot, and vice versa. George

Interior details below the fore hatch. There was a cooking range just aft of the fore mast and its front face is visible through the hatch. Peter Goodwin in his book on Alert has detailed drawings but his range is too big for Whiting. I used his drawings as inspiration to create my own range, and took the liberty of moving it aft by 4mm in comparison to the Admiralty drawing. The reason for the shift in location is so that the optical fibres will be hidden inside the range. I built the range from scrap materials - 1mm thick wood, paper and wire. The photo below shows the basic structure with a grate at the bottom, an open space above it, and then a tapered area that leads to the chimney. There is also a swinging arm that carried a cooking pot which I made from bamboo and wire. The base below the range is painted burnt umber to represent brick and has a contrasting wood lip around it. There is a slot in the base that fits around the optical fibres and the spine which projects aft of frame D. Cooking range. Unpainted except for the brick floor beneath it. I painted the inside of the range black and the outside in dark grey with flecks of silver along exposed edges. I also painted frame D in black behind the range. Cooking range, painted and with the cooking pot in place The third photo shows the range in position though it has not been glued yet. I want to bring the optical fibres into the hold and secure them before fixing the range. The angle of the photo gives a view similar to what I will have on the finished model. The hatch is right over frame B which I have cut back. Cooking range in position The second (and final) item for the fore hatch is a ladder. The Admiralty drawing labels the hatch as a ladder way but there is no drawing of a ladder. I assume that the ladder was easily demountable since its feet rested on hatch covers in the lower deck. I made mine using the same template as for the ladder in the entrance lobby though of much lighter construction: the sides and treads are 0.5x2mm tanganyika which I split down from the deck planks in the kit. As with the main ladder, this one will be trimmed and fitted after the deck has been laid. I intend to provide hooks at the top of the ladder to stop it from sliding and falling but will position them when the lip around the ladder way is finished. I might yet paint or stain the little ladder because its wood is a bit bright for me and not right for Bermudan cedar. I could claim it is newly made from fir during Whiting's refit at Portsmouth. Both ladders. The pointy ends to the left are the tops I think that optical fibres will come next and feel that I am delaying starting this job. If the weather clears then I prefer to be outside while it is possible. If it stays wet and miserable then I might have to find my soldering iron (for the LEDs and wiring, not to melt the fibres). George

Eamonn, Thank you for your kind comments. I have made models where later research shows that I followed a convention or made a mistake and got something wrong. My Sherbourne is one example where I would now do some things differently. I now look at Sherbourne with more critical eyes but family and visitors are still impressed by the look of her with sails set and activity on the deck. One thing I have learned over the years is that kit manufacturers are not omniscient and they make mistakes. It is a leap of faith for a newcomer to trust their own research when it contradicts the kit instructions. My Sherbourne and, I think, your Ballahoo are examples where we have built a kit and added details and features to enhance it. I (we?) assumed that the kit was basically correct and that some simplified areas could be improved. It is disappointing to learn afterwards that elements of the kit are wrong and we did not correct them. But, we still have a fine model and should focus on what went well and the overall look. There is a similar issue with DIY projects such as wallpapering; my eyes are drawn to a mistake I made where the edges do not meet properly but others see the big picture and like the pattern/ colour/ smoothness. The workmanship on your Ballahoo is outstanding and displays your skill as a model maker. So a few bits are in the wrong place but who apart from you (and people on this forum...) will ever know? Visitors to your house will be amazed by your model so keep quiet about what you found in later research. And don't invite anyone who has an intimate knowledge of the Haddock drawings. George