Dutch yacht by henry x - RESTORATION

[amateur]

The model looks like it is build to a very old kit: Amat's 'Stadt von Bremen'

at least, the side lleries, and the sternfittings do suggest so.

 

Jan

[Gregory]

You might browse some of the other restorations to get ideas about cleaning techniques.    

Remove as many loose parts as you can and clean them individually.  A mild soap solution is always a good start.

Alcohol and q-tips are another option.

 

For loosening old glue, you might try a hair dryer after you are sure there are no loose parts to go flying away.

[henry x]

Gregory

That's me into the wife's whisky again.

Jan

Do you know,you  are 100% correct have just been on a Russian site which confirms the parts I have removed and was going to post pics of them even the brass lion at the front which I first thought was a dog. Plans I believe are still avail 5 euros how it  has a  plaque with prince of orange on the stern well that's another question I knew I saw it somewhere before there is no question you are correct.

So it should be moved to the proper section but I did not join to argue with people as for being historical accurate people should have known if they had looked the links Graham provided from day 1 that it differed.

One small thing I have learned since joining if you want learn about Dutch ships you can do no better than trust a local

Jan really many thanks.

 

Henry x

Edited February 23, 2021 by henry x

[Roger Pellett]

Hide glues used before the advent of PVA glues are water soluble. Another old standby, the “Ambrose” type glues are soluble in acetone.  The more modern PVA glues are soluble in alcohol. 

 

If this were were mine I would make an effort to remove the gun carriages to thoroughly clean the deck.

[henry x]

Roger 

Thanks for that info I did manage to remove the gun carriages and the rings they were attached to, tomorrow I think I will try to remove the windlass if that's what you call it. Will try using water I did use the end of my 6"rule to scrape the deck and to some extent it worked tried lifting the loose stuff with a vacuum but that was not really successful so I lifted it with sellotape and that worked but really still a long way to go and so far I am enjoying it.

 

Henry x 

[Keith Black]

I've great success cleaning using Q-tips and paint thinner. Don't be stingy with the Q-tips but use the paint thinner sparingly. You don't want to saturate the Q-tip, just moisten it. Henry, it's a nice looking model (there is too much detail for this to be a decorative model IMHO) and deserves to be brought back to it's former glory. The best to you in your efforts. 

Edited February 23, 2021 by Keith Black

[henry x]

Well just an up date i used boiling water and it came off (windlass).

Getting back to what Roger said about glue my father who introduced me to hobbies had a glue pot which he put on a gas ring and heated the glue until it melted it was brown and had a distinct smell i don't know what it was made of i was still a young boy to busy trying to work out how to use my new found fret saw. When you see the young boy in the old hobbies ad sitting there holding his fret saw and wearing short trousers it could have been me (yes that's what we wore then ) i'm going back to the mid 40's. How things have changed.

Keith

You can rest assured this is a KIT just by luck Jan manage to find it have posted one photo have others but i can't find them. In life there are people who cannot see the woods for the trees no matter what you or i say  to them i cannot understand them maybe it's done for their own reason.

Getting back to the model it's coming on still a lot of cleaning to do pity some parts are painted now i would have preferred to see the natural wood back then we painted things sat back and said that looks great.

 

Henry x

[Gregory]

Clean up is looking good.  Take your time.

 

You might consider using some paint stripper.   Just make  sure there is wood under the paint.  Use sparingly and maybe several light applications instead of a heavy one that sits for  while..

[Charles Green]

The glue you have described is "hide glue", made of animal hide.  The hide is processed into a granular form that when mixed 50 - 50 with water and then heated, produces a honey-like glue.  It has been in use for hundreds of years.  I am not sure of when its use started or when it was replaced with modern glues, but up to some date, the fantastic old models made by the Masters were assembled with hide glue as was all antique furniture.   Most hide glue is made from cattle hide but rabbit and fish-skins are also used.  The various types of hide have different strength characteristics.  The fish-skin glue is common to costal areas in Asia.  

 

Hide glue is water soluble/reversible, making it one of the glues preferred for archival restoration.  Its other archival advantage is, it does not out-gas acetic acid vapor as it cures - as do all of the common, modern wood glues.  This out-gassing never really stops.  For a model kept in a display case, with no provision for ventilation, the acidic vapor is death to lead fittings and cordage used for rigging. 

 

If kept fresh, hide glue is fairly odorless; the dry granules have no odor.

[Keith Black]

56 minutes ago, Gregory said:

You might consider using some paint stripper

 I wouldn't do that were it I, one doesn't know how the stripper might react with the glue.

 

 The level of restoration of any object falls to the current caretakers desires. That ole saw, "it's only original once" is an apt guide for all restorations. Repair the broken bits, by all means. Replace the missing bits, only if in doing so one does not try to pass off the replaced as original. Respect the original builders vision, paint and all. One should look beyond just today but also keep in mind fifty, a hundred, two hundred years in the future and how the then current caretakers decisions will be affected by what one does now. But then I do prattle on, sorry.........KB

[Gregory]

When I suggested stripper, it would be for small painted areas, with a lot of testing; say on an out of sight area, and definitely avoid glue joints.

 

Paint thinner and even water, if left to soak, might compromise glue joints.

Edited February 24, 2021 by Gregory

[Keith Black]

7 minutes ago, Gregory said:

definitely avoid glue joints

 Why take the chance?

 

 I've used paint thinner on many restoration projects and I have enough confidence to saturate the heck out of glued wood (including model ships) and have never had the glue fail due to it's use. Maybe I've been lucky? That's why I said, "use the paint thinner sparingly". Paint thinner is pretty mild, I'll wash my hands in paint thinner. But paint stripper on the other hand is by it's very caustic. Since my first experience using paint stripper eons ago as a kid and the resulting burned skin, now, I always glove up when using it. 

 

 A museum conservator/restoration expert probably blanches upon hearing paint thinner being used as a cleaner. They have to be very conservative in their restoration efforts as they should be when dealing with priceless and irreplaceable antiquities. I think most use nothing more than spit on a Q-tip and countless hours of gentle wiping. 

[Gregory]

22 minutes ago, Keith Black said:

Why take the chance?

Why?

 

Forgive if I sound contentious, just continuing the discussion;  but the worse that can happen is you have to re-glue, and it may have been a weak joint in need of strengthening..

[henry x]

Well I have done a little more cleaning and it's coming on fire buckets have been removed the only other thing I am going to remove from the deck is( don't no what they are called) is a guide each side where Lee board rope passes under then it's down to proper cleaning just like Master and Commander will need to get down on my hands and knee's.  Interesting what Charles says about glues I think my dad used it more on furniture. One problem that has arisen is there are splits opening up in the bottom of the hull I think due dryness of my room but I'm sure I all be able to cope when the time comes other than that it's onwards and up.

 

Henry x

[Keith Black]

The "kit" plans in post #37 clearly show fire buckets historically correct or not. I'm uncertain as to why folks want to attribute this model to anything other than a kit? 

[henry x]

Ab 

First point sorry to read a thread from such a person as your self who obviously has not read the full post I have never claimed for it to be historically correct from day 1  however I do claim it to be a kit, secondly the plan you just posted is not the same as the model I have and thirdly cannons? On a yacht? 

 

 

I think when people reply to a post they should be constructive  not derogatory as for value I'm not interested.

 

I'll just burn it after all it' not worth anything.

 

Henry x

[Keith Black]

3 minutes ago, henry x said:

I'll just burn it after all it' not worth anything.

 

 Oh, hold on there mate. Let's not be hasty lest you/we lose the opportunity to have a bit of merriment. Having said that, I'm a buyer of your worthless model should you tire of the steady rain. 

[henry x]

Keith

There is not a man more than i respect when it comes to knowledge of Dutch ships than Ab. I can not understand why he does not realize that we are talking about a KIT made by Amati who also made von Bremen and another yacht Utrecht . I  truly believe he has been put up to this by someone we know  but I will not name.

 

Henry x

[Ab Hoving]

Really Henry X, nobody put me up to do anything. I simply recognized the stupid design of this model, based on the book I mentioned. Of course the kit maker based his product on the  drawings in the book.

I never accused you of thinking the model was worth of anything, I just wanted to show you that models like this one may look interesting to a layman, but in fact they are simply rubbish. But as I told you, you can have a lot of fun  playing around with it. 

All I want is that the remains of the book I mentioned will disappear as soon as possible, because they create a false image of the sort of ships I love. This model is a bad example of how people can turn beautiful ships into lousy objects.

I refuse to believe that you really think I approached your thread with other intentions than doing right to history, whatever anyone else thinks about it. I did not.

Ab

[Gregory]

31 minutes ago, Ab Hoving said:

This model is a bad example of how people can turn beautiful ships into lousy objects.

Some models are good examples of how people can turn lousy kits into beautiful objects..  ( Eye of the beholder, and all that...)

 

You could spend all day for the next ten years pointing out the shortcomings in thousands of build logs.

I don't think that is what we are here for.

It's not very becoming to come into someone's log and lecture them about the futility  of their efforts based on your superior knowledge.

 

 

I'm looking forward to the piece of art that Henry makes out of this salvaged model..

It has been really interesting so far.

 

Perhaps a moderator can tidy up the log and get it back to the excellent subject it is..

Edited February 24, 2021 by Gregory

[Keith Black]

3 minutes ago, Gregory said:

I'm looking forward to the piece of art that Henry makes out of this salvaged model.

Amen.

[Bob Cleek]

3 hours ago, Ab Hoving said:

Really Henry X, nobody put me up to do anything. I simply recognized the stupid design of this model, based on the book I mentioned. Of course the kit maker based his product on the  drawings in the book.

I never accused you of thinking the model was worth of anything, I just wanted to show you that models like this one may look interesting to a layman, but in fact they are simply rubbish. But as I told you, you can have a lot of fun  playing around with it. 

All I want is that the remains of the book I mentioned will disappear as soon as possible, because they create a false image of the sort of ships I love. This model is a bad example of how people can turn beautiful ships into lousy objects.

I refuse to believe that you really think I approached your thread with other intentions than doing right to history, whatever anyone else thinks about it. I did not.

Ab

 

I didn't find anything objectionable about your posts, Ab. I understood you completely. Others were apparently looking for some other response. I share your graciously stated perspective: "... models like this one may look interesting to a layman, but in fact they are simply rubbish. But ...  you can have a lot of fun  playing around with it." I don't see much value in spending an inordinate amount of bandwidth on such models in what is essentially an academic-level forum about serious ship modeling and related maritime history. 

 

3 hours ago, Gregory said:

You could spend all day for the next ten years pointing out the shortcomings in thousands of build logs.

I don't think that is what we are here for.

It's not very becoming to come into someone's log and lecture them about the futility  of their efforts based on your superior knowledge.

 

I am sure Mr. Hoving has forgotten more about ship models and maritime history than I'll ever know after spending my entire life being interested in those subjects, but I do sometimes find myself compelled to comment when I see things posted which I know to be simply wrong. The endeavor of ship modeling is an exercise in the pursuit of excellence, if nothing else. Historical accuracy and technical craftsmanship and artistry are the metrics that define the efforts of serious modelers. This forum has distinguished itself in those respects. It's "where the big dogs run." One problem with social media is its inclusiveness. "Everybody's welcome" and the number of members is, for many, a measure of the quality of a site's content, which isn't necessarily true, except from the perspective of sponsors and advertisers who are primarilyi interested in the extent of their own exposure. Nevertheless, forums with high content do draw participants and there tends to be a "dumbing down" or dilution of the quality of the content as more and more less knowledgeable and experienced participants jump on the bandwagon. It seems that high quality forums tend to suffer from this phenomenon and sophisticated and experienced participants tend to drift off when they find that the time it takes them to read posts of diminishing quality and interest becomes less and less well spent. This degradation is exacerbated by the tendency of social media to increasingly attract those seeking attention and affirmation as well as those those seeking to learn and to contribute something worthwhile when they are able. 

 

So, when someone "comes into someone's log and lecture(s) them about the futility of their efforts based on... superior knowledge," they aren't doing anything "unbecoming," they're just trying to contribute something of value. In large measure, constructive criticism serves to maintain the quality of a forum's content. The post which has been criticized in actuality provided a precise and complete response to the original query, albeit not what the poster was hoping to hear: the nature of the vessel, the source and quality of the plans upon which it was based, and a candid opinion as to the historic value of the model, plus encouragement to the original poster to continue to pursue working on it if they found doing so enjoyable. I learned something of value from Ab's post and I thank him for it. I now know something more about a particular book and am now able to avoid wasting money and shelf space on a worthless volume. I can't say the same of the other posts in this thread.  

 

For those who are seeking affirmation and pats on the back, there's another well-known ship modeling forum on the internet that operates on the Special Olympics "Everybody Gets a Prize" model. The best part of social media is that there's something for everyone on the internet. If, on the other hand, one wishes to learn from teachers who know more than  they do, they have to expect that their papers are going to be graded.

[Keith Black]

 Bob, with all due respect......please back up to post #45 when Ab said "This model was scratch-built from plans from the book 'Risse von Schiffe des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts' by (among others) Rolf Hoeckel." The model had clearly been identified as a kit in post #37.

 Ab then followed up in post #51 saying "I just wanted to show you that models like this one may look interesting to a layman, but in fact they are simply rubbish." Even I took exception to this because it smacked of being judgmental. 

 The purpose of the build logs as I understand them to be, is a place to show one's efforts on a given subject/project. Rookies like myself look over the shoulders of the master builders to learn and the master builders drop in occasionally to a rookies build log to offer sage advise and encouragement. I think MSW works extremely well in that regard.

 Everyone needs to be encouraged and taught the correct way to do something with respect, that applies to every builder here whatever the level of their talent might be. 

 Bob, an inordinate amount of MSW bandwidth is spent on projects that bore me to tears but I hope I'm booted out of MSW on my ear should I EVER drop into one of those build logs and say an unkind thing about that person's work. 

 "For those who are seeking affirmation and pats on the back, there's another well-known ship modeling forum on the internet that operates on the Special Olympics "Everybody Gets a Prize" model"....... Bob. we all need pats on the back. A son needs to be patted on the back by his father. A daughter by her mother. A novice by the master. This is what helps us grow to become good people, this is how we grow into becoming a good group, IMHO.  

[Jaager]

34 minutes ago, Keith Black said:

Even I took exception to this because it smacked of being judgmental. 

The judgment was about the original model, Nothing that Henry was doing was the target of criticism, except his choice to spend an extraordinary amount of time on an object that is not worthy of the effort.  GIGO is a rule that is difficult to break.  This subject is very unlikely to break it.  The grim color of the wood deck.... - but an "S" shape on the rail runs counter to every esthetic for the proper shape for a vessel hull that I have observed.   The time would be better expended on a new build.  A build with a subject that has a pedigree that is real and not originating in fantasy. 

I am grateful to Ab for defining a series of books, which I own, as total nonsense and are to be avoided. 

SeaWatch Books has an on going deal for a proper Dutch Yacht with plans and an illustrated building guide.

I had been wondering why yachts seemed to be so prominent in the low countries, then it came to me that they had water that went everywhere and roads that did not  A better transport all around if you had the wealth to afford it.

[Bob Cleek]

5 hours ago, Keith Black said:

Ab then followed up in post #51 saying "I just wanted to show you that models like this one may look interesting to a layman, but in fact they are simply rubbish." Even I took exception to this because it smacked of being judgmental. 

 

As Jaager pointed out, the comment was about the model. It was not an ad hominem judgment at all.

 

It didn't "smack of being judgmental," it was definitely judgmental and appropriately so."Judgmental" is good when based on objective facts. Here, the model in question was "of no socially redeeming value," as it were. Like "fake news," it was a "fake model," "... a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing." A model of a fantasy vessel that could never of existed and is not accurately representative of any particular type of vessel is something that is simply cluttering up the historical record, so to speak. The statement, "...models like this one may look interesting to a layman, but in fact they are simply rubbish." is a very true statement which can be said about many models and, where appropriate, should be said. If only the general public appreciated that fact, they wouldn't be continually defrauded by unscrupulous grifters who sell "rubbish" to unwitting buyers who think they are buying a ship model of considerable value. Most people can spot a "paint-by-numbers" Mona Lisa copy, but its ship model analog not so much.

Edited February 25, 2021 by Bob Cleek

[henry x]

Well I'm finding it difficult on how to really respond for me #55 says it all #52 is also interesting there seems to be two schools of thought there are people on this forum where every thing must be exact that is fine by me I respect that then there are others like me who simply such detail does not bother them that also has to be respected if I had known this site was only for Academics I would not have joined.  This site to me should be all about  modeling and the joy it brings to people I am not going to say to the little boy next door who builds model aeroplanes here son don't buy that because that rivet is in the wrong place and in 100 years time its worthless in fact it's rubbish don't waste your time building that what kind of society are living in. I could go further and say to Ab your models may be H.C. but they are rubbish why waste your time building them which he himself also admitted that in one of his posts but i won't say that.  I repeat this site should be about modeling not about pulling each other down I maybe not maybe I am getting old but I'm not stupid.

 

Henry x

[ccoyle]

Okay, everyone -- slow down! The problem here is that opinions were expressed, and then opinions were expressed about those opinions, and then ... well, you know how these things go. I think everyone agrees that this is Henry's model, and ultimately he can do with it whatever he wishes. So, let's leave the opinions aside for now and let Henry get on with his restoration.

 

Back to you, Henry!

[Keith Black]

16 minutes ago, ccoyle said:

opinions were expressed, and then opinions were expressed about those opinions, and then ... well, you know how these things go.

 A perfect example of how some of the discussions go between my dear wife and I. 

[Roger Pellett]

Ok, let me put my oar in the water.  I count my self as a serious ship model builder interested in advancing the state of the art.  I have been trying to do this my entire adult life, longer than I care to admit.  Unfortunately, I have no artistic ability, and struggle to produce the clean work of the masters that post on this site. In spite of this, I do have a collection of models that I am proud of.

 

What I am able to contribute to the mix are good research skills.  Over the years I have refined these to the point where I do know what ships being modeled should look like.  When I joined this forum, I was disappointed by the time and $$$ that forum members expended on ship model kits that don’t produce models that accurately portray the subject.   I continue to be amazed that modelers obsess over details such as the shade of paint when the model’s hull lines produced by the kit are obviously inaccurate.

 

In this case, Henry, has spent his money on something that he thinks that he might enjoy restoring.  He has asked for our help.  We have pointed out that this is not a priceless antique and never will be.  Henry could have spent a lot of money on a poorly engineered kit, become discouraged, and given up.

 

Why not help Henry learn what he can about our craft while he restores this model?  For example, to rig the model, he starts with a clean slate.  Let’s encourage him to rig it properly.  When he finishes, he’ll have a better appreciation of our craft.  Maybe he’ll be interested enough to buy the SeaWatch book/plans to build a proper Dutch Yacht.

 

Roger

[Keith Black]

 Roger, from the bottom of my heart, "thank you". I appreciate you taking the time to put into words what I feel is/or what should be the essence of the MSW experience...........Keith