Captain Al

Here's a few snapshots of work in process.  For whatever they're worth.  This is one instance where a picture does not tell 1000 words. 

All the bulkheads are now glued in and the fillers (bow, main, mizzen and foremast) as well.  All except for the two foremast fillers on port side which are a story in themselves.
Putting these in was pretty straightforward and easy.  Not much explanation needed other than to get them oriented correctly so the top edges match the slope of the bulkhead former.  There is a slant to the BF which will create the slope of the decks from the bow and stern towards the center.  Its not a huge angle but its possible to ignore it and think that the mismatch between the fillers' shape and the BF is just something that can be sanded down later.  I guess it could.  Probably wouldn't be any harm done; just alot of work and dust.  So here's my work for today, starting with the completed bulkheads and running through the several fillers.
 

Going on with the build.  After the rabbet strip was on it was time to taper the stern.  Instructions said to taper from the bearding line to the rabbet and to taper from the 3/16th inch nominal thickness of the PF to 3/32nds.  This meant take a bit off the rabbet that was just glued on.  A little math therefore indicated to taper the rabbet 1/64th on each side.  This is getting pretty tough to visualize so its important to just take small amounts of wood off each side of the stern in multiple passes, giving it the eye test frequently, and then dig into the rabbet just a little more on each of its sides to complete the job.  I used a flat file for most of the job and a 320 grit paper to finish it.  I think this is one area where perfection isn't required on this first pass cause later on when planking this area will be faired into the contour of the hull anyway.
 
The first pic below shows the area to be tapered.  Second is work in process.  Third is my method of double checking my eye test.
 

Still can't get the hang of how to insert pix where I really want them or to caption them.  Best I can do is do a write up and add the photos at the end.
 
With this issue out of the way there are two more operations to do before gluing the bulkheads in.  First the rabbet strip is to be glued to the bottom of the PF, and its to be placed precisely in the center of the PF along its entire length.  The rabbet has to curve up the bow and I didn't think it could be done without first soaking the wood and pre-bending it on a jig.  Cutting the jig from balsa on a Dremel scroll saw was a breeze.  I've found that a trick to making small curved drying jigs is to cut notches at 90 degrees from where you will want to clamp down the wet strip, allowing a clamp to close squared up to the jig and not slip.  I soaked the 3/16th rabbet strip for half hour in boiling water and put it on the jig.  Let it dry overnight.  Conformed perfectly to the bow's curve and glued on nicely.
 
 

Continuing on where the last reply left off -- I've not yet learned how to insert a photo and then continue with the text.  All my pix seem to end up at the bottom of the reply.
 
I mentioned in my first comments that the PF was perfectly flat; no warpage.  So the test fitting did not have any issues with that sort of thing.  It was all a matter of sanding the notches a bit to get the pieces to slide into each other and still be snug.  I found that sometimes it also helps to sand the surface of the bulkhead on both sides.  This tiny bit of wood removal is usually enough to get the open notch to slide down the face of the bulkhead.  Nerve racking when in the process you can't get the bulkhead out.  Don't want to break that keel in half.  Finger pressure is the only answer.  Hands acting like one of those tools auto mechanics use to pull out gears and bearings.
 
Now my big question was:  Are you supposed to slide the two grooves together ALL THE WAY so the bottoms of the notches bang up against each other?  Because if you do, I was seeing that in some cases the tops of the bulkheads stood proud of the top edge of the PF, and sometimes the tops ended up lower than the PF.  I sensed that it is important that the tops all lie flush.  Here's a pic or two to illustrate.  Then I have to run to breakfast and get the day underway.  But, like McArthur, I shall return.  Note that photograph seems to magnify the problem.  In the first pic below it looks like the bulkhead is sitting a half inch below the PF.  In fact, the worst case was 1.5 mm.
 

SUNDAY MORNING UPDATE 4-9-17
Nice time to sit quietly, sip a steaming latte and contemplate and report on what's been accomplished over the weekend.  I'm now in the process of gluing in the 14 bulkheads (completed 8 of them and hope to do the final 6 before going to bed tonight).  Here's a brief run down on how the process has gone....
 
To begin with, the first step is always popping the parts out of their templates.  To me this is the most onorous, boring, time consuming and even fatiguing process there is in kit building.  For the PF and bulkheads its always the thickest plywood (in this case 3/8ths) and I've always got the fear of snapping one of these off.  I use a #11 blade which I know to be quite sharp (just purchased 100 new ones from MicroMark for $21) but my handle is just an aluminium tube that I've had for 40 years.  Probably a good handle would reduce the fatigue.   So this step took quite a while but in the end, with new found patience, I broke nothing and got all the pieces removed.
 
Next was to remove the 'char.'  I noted to RichieG that all the pieces and the template itself looked like it had gone through the London Fire.  Seriously discolored.  Not just the cut edges but even the flat surfaces (not however the one good side of the plywood with reference marks).  So began the sanding off of char process.  Question then became how much to sand off?  I've learned from the past that I can get pretty aggressive and actually take off so much wood that I later have to compensate for it.  I wanted to be sure I left the shape and dimensions of these bulkheads exactly as cut.  Its important to visualize that the top edge of the bulkhead becomes the cross beams for each of the decks. 
So they have a slight concave shape that needs to be maintained.  I decided after consultation that removing char does nothing more than prep the wood for gluing (I'll stand corrected if this conclusion is wrong), so it only needs to rough up any "shine" or slick areas -- in other words, open up the pores so glue can adhere better.  No need to sand darkened areas down to new wood.  That would be far too much. 
 
TEST FITTINGS
 
So now my PF and bulkheads are ready for test fitting.  I've never thought it worthwhile to invest in one of those thingies that hold the PF (or false keel) in place and purport to guarantee that the bulkheads are squared up.  Instead I use the vise that I have from my full size Delta 15" drill press.  It can be seen in some of the pix I'll attach. 
 
 

As is my wont to do, I agree with everyone.  This subject is too complicated and full of unknown factors (life's little interventions) to think that anyone has the right way of doing it.  Almost 3 years ago i was gifted the A.L. Bounty kit by a gentleman who had bought it for his son (thinking it would help get him off the juice) who had never even opened it.  I, on the other hand, had a life long desire to build models but had never gotten around to it.  So I began what is now closing in on a 3 year project and if I decide to finish it completely, it'll be another year minimum.  I discovered this site and started a log.  Over time the log became harder to maintain than the model did to build.  My photography is not great and I'm a dunce when it comes to computers in general.  So my log fell off the table (am I one whose been counted as "given up"?).  But I have persevered through some trying personal times including a recent six month chemo therapy course.  I've learned a heck of alot about model building (its cost being one of the lessons learned), ship's construction, history and maybe most importantly, alot about myself.  I recently remarked to a friend that I've always been a dilettante and never got passionate about anything to stick with it long enough to really master it.  This is still true at age 70, and pertains to ship modeling in particular at this point in time.  But it doesn't mean i don't enjoy various aspects of the hobby and find reward and relaxation in it.  The trick going forward for me will be to identify those aspects of it that I don't enjoy (reading plans is one of them for sure) and take on projects that minimize them.  Or, forget ship modeling, having been there and done it, and start making boxes.

My pleasure Bob.  I often rely on the good graces and generosity of fellow modelers to bail me out.  And they usually come through with flying colors.  Glad to hear this thread helped you as well.

Well thanks to so many contributors I think I have gotten it right finally.  There are several different things to consider in order to make it perfect (such as to swivel the deadeyes or not, and certainly how to increase the tension more) but the reeving itself I think is now correct and most important, its now presentable and satisfactory to me as a first build.  So thanks again to everyone who added a comment and suggestion.

Tad, is that the same stuff as some call "dope"?  You thin it with lacquer thinner I would think.  What proportion?

I will take a look at it.  It seems we all eventually come to the conclusion that building a ship model is a lot like playing chess.  You gotta be looking several steps ahead.  Unfortunately I was never good at chess.  My skill at modeling is more on a level of checkers.

Thanks again Gunther (or is it Brian?).  Just in time to stop me from doing it wrong again.  I wasn't actually tying knots, I was looping 'underneath itself' as you say to do.  I just see that as a sort of half knot.  Anyway, your's look great even with the slight mistake.  I've been using a sewing needle to get the lanyard through.  Otherwise, no way.  I put a needle through even before I string the shroud up so to create the hole for when I do it with thread on the needle.  Easier to push the needle through on the bench than hanging from the mast.

You folks have been tremendously helpful.  Thank you so much.  The funny thing is that I've been aware of the inside to out, outside to in sequence but apparently just execute the process incorrectly.  (I never made my free throws either).  As for the final run and tie off, I had that totally wrong.  Its clear that the lanyard isn't put through first thing when it comes up and is then tied off, but rather it is wrapped around and tied (of sorts -- looks like just a simple granny knot or single hitch under itself) and then the end is secured through the stropping gap.
 
So its back to the bench for some more practice. 

I believe I am druxey.  I'm following the diagram in Peterson's rigging book.  But then again, I could be doing it perfectly; just backward.  I will give that a closer look.  If you picture the two deadeyes as facing you (like little smiley faces) and you are looking at their outboard face, I have the triangle of holes opposite each other -- the upper deadeye's top hole being up and the channel deadeye's being at the bottom.  So there is the maximum distance between these holes.  And the other two holes then line up straight up and down to their counterpart hole on the other channel.
 
Looking at it this way, I've started with a stopper knot on the inside of the upper deadeye's left hand hole, run the lanyard through it and through the lower deadeye's left hand hole from inside to out.  Then I've strung to the outside of the upper deadeye's center hole, back down to the lower center hole (coming in from the inside and out on the outside), then back up to the upper right hand hole (outside to in) and finally back to the lower right coming from inside to outside.  The rest of the lanyard is then strung back up and threaded through the stropping of the top deadeye, wrapped around the shroud two or three times and tied off. 
 
Like I said, I'm following Peterson's diagram but maybe its the inside outside sequence or the left to right sequence that is causing the twist cause maybe that's not in opposition to the lay of the shroud.  Or, as I've just realized while writing this, perhaps it comes down to which side of the boat you're looking at (or rigging).  What I've described here was facing the starboard side, with forward being on my right hand and aft being to the left.  So if I start by stringing the left hand holes first and finish with the right hand holes, I'm stringing aft most first and working the lanyard forward.  But if I do the same thing on port side, still starting with the left hand holes and finishing to my right, then I'm really stringing the lanyards different from the starboard side -- on port side this would mean I'm starting with the forward most holes and ending with the aft most holes.  Since the shroud's lay is the same whether port or starboard, this could mean something.  Or maybe it means nothing?
 
BTW, we talk a lot of the 'lay' of the rope (or thread) and I know its either right hand or left hand lay.  But how do you tell one from the other?  If you look at the rope it has lay lines running from the upper right to the lower left.  Is this right hand or left hand lay?  If you twist this same rope counter clockwise, it will open the strands.  If you twist it clockwise it tightens it.  Does this mean its right or left hand lay.  Is the vast majority of rope and thread now right hand lay? 

Second that Jud.  Thanks for the quick study.  I've redone the channel deadeyes to not only allow them to swivel but to put the deadeye holes in a more proper sequence (they were OK but not perfect).  I also closely inspected the deadeyes that I was using and found a few that were really bad; hardly any space at all between the holes.  I'm going to substitute the deadeyes that just arrived from Model Expo and look 100% better.  Also going to stretch the thread a bit and do everything else suggested.  So thanks to everyone who've contributed their thoughts.  Yes, only msw affords this kind of support.

BH, that sounds very clever.  So what you're saying is that if a single lanyard causes the line to twist once, then six falls of the lanyard would twist it six times.  So you reverse twist the shroud six rotations (could actually be six half rotations but that's yet to be determined on mine) and secure it temporarily in that position while you thread and tension the deadeyes.  When that's done you release whatever is holding the shroud and voila -- it spins back to a good lie.
 
Going to try that.  Thanks.

I suppose its cotton.  The kit's parts list says it is.  The shrouds are made with .5mm cotton thread.  Is there some way to take the stretch out of it before using it?  Maybe hang it with weights for a day or so?  Hang it wet?  Maybe a very light coat of watered down pva?

Well that's an interesting question because the lower deadeyes were secured when I started.  I had glued them into the channel slots so they would stay put while I glued on the cover to hold them.  After the twisting started I couldn't think of other reasons or cures so I broke the deadeyes and chains free to swivel.  This didn't fix the problem.  If both deadeyes were fixed I think it would be OK.  But you can't fix the deadeye on the shroud.  Maybe the shroud has to be prevented from twisting until the ratlines are tied on.  Maybe that holds them from spinning.  Does it make any sense that maybe the shrouds have been looped over the mast head upside down?  What I mean is that maybe if the lay of the tread was opposite to the tension being put on the deadeye it would hold it in position.

I'm having a heck of a time getting the lanyards between the deadeyes of shrouds from not twisting up.  They seem to want to go with the lay of the thread of the shroud above them.  I'm ok until I put the least bit of tension on the lanyards.  When I do, they spin around.  What are the possible causes of this and cures?  The deadeyes are starting out parallel to each other, and the lower ones (in the channel) are free to swivel.  Could it be that I just need to hold the shroud in place as I string the deadeyes?  It seems like this would just delay the twisting until I was done with the deadeyes and then whammo, it would twist up into the solid mass of 6 strands again.

I can see where it would or could be very satisfying and fun provided you are using the right tools and technique.  Where I'm at as far as possessing tools is that I have to use the exacto knife or the dremel.  There doesn't seem to be an in between.  And the exacto is very tiring (even with brand new blades) and the placement of my steel rule guide is very tricky and time consuming.  That's why I'm desperately seeking advice on the best tool to use. 

I've learned a thing or two about my camera, so I think I can upload these photos.

Guys, thank you both for your explanations.  I've been experimenting with Starbucks swizzle sticks and I think I understand.  These sticks are easy to cut with an exacto knife.  I am wondering though how best to cut the curve into a 5mm wide piece of African Walnut.  I've had decent luck with the knife in straight tapers using a clamped on steel rule as a guide,  but cutting a curve is another thing entirely.  What methods or tools work best?  If the planks were wider I might think about using my dremel attached to a router table with a sanding drum.  Maybe a straight bit but that's scary.  But at 5mm, shaping down to even less, its hard to think how I'll control the feed.  I'm finding that while model building uses a lot of the same techniques as cabinetry, the size requires a completely different approach.
 
To add another problem to the mix, I have already laid  6 planks up from the keel without doing any spiling.  And I probably waited a plank or two to start tapering.  But it is what it is.  And what it is is a nice looking hull but with a slightly wavy effect.  Its been recommended that I take off some planks and start over.  Even though I know this is the best way to fix things, I am against this for a lot of reasons which would take too long to explain. So I'm trying to see if I can gradually reduce the wave by tapering and now spilling.  Is that possible or is it in there permanently without removing them?  I've also thought that a way to just stop it in its tracks so to speak is to leave a gap between the last (wavy) plank and the next one, filling it with a shaped plank later.  Its still pretty far under the hull that it wouldn't be too visible.  I'm working on Bounty and its a tough planking job and I don't expect it to end perfectly.  I'm trying to use this build (my first) as a learning experience and it sure has been.  But like I said, I'm aiming to finish it within my lifetime and plank removal doesn't square with that objective.  I am going to try to attach a photo to give you an idea of where I stand.  I want to again thank you for your time.  Each increment of additional knowledge helps me along. Well it seems my files are too big to upload.  I now have to learn how to take pictures that don't use up so much space.

As is my wont to do, I agree with everyone.  This subject is too complicated and full of unknown factors (life's little interventions) to think that anyone has the right way of doing it.  Almost 3 years ago i was gifted the A.L. Bounty kit by a gentleman who had bought it for his son (thinking it would help get him off the juice) who had never even opened it.  I, on the other hand, had a life long desire to build models but had never gotten around to it.  So I began what is now closing in on a 3 year project and if I decide to finish it completely, it'll be another year minimum.  I discovered this site and started a log.  Over time the log became harder to maintain than the model did to build.  My photography is not great and I'm a dunce when it comes to computers in general.  So my log fell off the table (am I one whose been counted as "given up"?).  But I have persevered through some trying personal times including a recent six month chemo therapy course.  I've learned a heck of alot about model building (its cost being one of the lessons learned), ship's construction, history and maybe most importantly, alot about myself.  I recently remarked to a friend that I've always been a dilettante and never got passionate about anything to stick with it long enough to really master it.  This is still true at age 70, and pertains to ship modeling in particular at this point in time.  But it doesn't mean i don't enjoy various aspects of the hobby and find reward and relaxation in it.  The trick going forward for me will be to identify those aspects of it that I don't enjoy (reading plans is one of them for sure) and take on projects that minimize them.  Or, forget ship modeling, having been there and done it, and start making boxes.

I've been looking at your pictures and I guess what is happening is that you did the "easy" ones and now are going at the bendy ones. The work on the first few look great. I'm impressed. If I get that far and it looks that good I might quit while I'm ahead. What's the difference between a half open hull and an 80% open hull? I'm surprised your strakes are 2mm. Mine are only 1mm. That is a big difference which will make my bending much easier. Still I think I will get some type of tool or use a soldering iron or my wife's hair curling set. Will your second planking also be 2 mm? That'll be one solid hull -- compared to mine it'll be like a man o war. You haven't mentioned or shown the use of pins or clamps to hold the wet planks in place while they dry. Recalling many of the posts here on planking, if I'm not mistaken almost all are using clamps (a lot are using the modified paper clamps). I may be wrong that they are using them to hold on wet wood before gluing. Maybe they are used only when the planks are being glued on. But I don't see why clamping wouldn't be good in both processes.

Dom, I looked carefully at the pictures and here's what I can make of them (re the hawse pipes)....the anchor rode (be it all chain or chain and rope) runs through the hawse pipes in the bulwarks to the windlass.  The excess then runs down through the main and lower decks and is coiled in the bilge between the forward and aft holding platforms.  Two things seem curious to me in this.  One, I can't see the hawse pipes for the main deck (not the bulwark pipes, but the pipes for the excess to run through) and I can't locate a part for them in the parts list.  Two, I would find it strange to stow anchor rode in the bilge.  Yet this is what the picture on the box shows pretty clearly.  More on this I guess when I get there.  Right now I'm just going to  stick parts 93 ("anchor hawse pipes") in their designated holes in the lower deck.