NRG Capstan Project by Cathead - FINISHED - NRG - 1:24

[gjdale]

Eric,

 

Glad to hear you’re feeling better. I think your proposed solution might cause you problems with fitting the grating/hatch coaming. Is the capstan step actually glued to the deck beams yet? If not, I would suggest remaking the capstan step. A small setback for now, but you will be glad later on. As my wife often reminds me - the model is a long time finished…….

[Cathead]

Grant, good insight. A few clarifications: first, the portion to be cut off is on the side, not the fore edge that sits against the hatch coaming. So it wouldn't change the way they meet, other than being narrower (and as far as I can tell, that's purely visual). Second, I've already finished the hatch coaming, and can confirm that they'd sit together just fine. I'll just go ahead and share the process of making the hatch and grating, then you can all judge the result and how to fix the mistake in the capstan base.

 

The grating was very difficult for me. It took three attempts, and a fair amount of wasted wood, before I got something I was happy with. I didn't end up documenting the full process because by that point I was burned out. Basically, I followed the directions in cutting a bunch of ledges, gluing them together in a sandwich, then oh-so-carefully cutting all the batten notches out. The difficulty simply came in being accurate enough in my repetitive cutting, which I achieved by using the calipers to keep resetting the saw's fence. This took multiple passes since the saw blade's kerf (0.55) was thinner than the notch (0.104). I cut one pass in each notch, resetting the fence by 0.208 each time, then flipped the whole thing around and did it again from an adjusted starting point that widened the notches appropriately. These are at 1/24, not the suggested 1/16, so were smaller and more delicate than those done in other builds so far.

 

Finished ledges:

 

 

Ledge sandwich, grating battens (lower right), and other battens for assembly jig (upper right):

 

 

I made an assembly jig by gluing extra battens to a piece of scrap wood, using the ledges as spacers. This held them firmly in place while I adjusted the battens to get the whole thing square:

 

 

Finished grating before trimming the edges:

 

 

 

After this, cutting the hatch coaming pieces, with their simple overlap joint, felt like a piece of cake and went smoothly:

 

 

I glued this up using my magnetic jig, keeping the grating loose:

 

 

And here's the finished product with wood oil applied (not the greatest photo, will try to do better later):

 

 

Here are two shots of the assembly so far, showing the offset I'd need to do to counteract my misdrilled hole. Essentially I'd need to cut the capstan base to be almost flush with the hatch coaming:

 

 

 

The base has not been glued to the beams, I was smart enough to hold off on that (the coaming hasn't either, and the grating is also free). So remaking is an option, as is trimming it. Even as I wrote this, I realized that one potential problem is that the capstan brakes (the little metal pieces that catch the capstan as it turns) are set right out into the corners, and trimming off one side of the base would eliminate where one of them is supposed to go. So I have to decide if it's okay to relocate them a bit, or put all the work into remaking the base. Here's what I'm talking about (hope @tlevine will forgive me for marking up her beautiful photo):

 

Again, these would have to move a bit inward to accommodate the thinner capstan base, but I'm not sure it would be noticeable to anyone other than a very knowledgeable expert. I'll give it some thought.

 

[mbp521]

Eric, glad that you are feeling better.
 

I have not had a chance to read through the instructions on this project yet, but is the base supposed to completely cover the carlings? If so, you could cut the proposed amount off the left side enough to center the hole and be flush with the outside edge of the carping. Then you could add that same amount to the right side to cover the adjustment and I would think that everything would look symmetrical again. 
 

-Brian

[tlevine]

I think you could get away with trimming the base.  However, the brakes will be too long as drawn so you will need to shorten them.  Having said that, the base is one of the easiest parts to build.  I would make another one.  Soak your base in isopropanol and you will only need to remake the upper center piece.  I would "fudge" on the lower and simply shift it over so the holes align.

[Cathead]

Brian, funny you should ask. I was looking at the plans again, and found an issue that I've run across before, which is that the model image shown varies significantly from the actual plans. For example, the model grating has a grid of 6x6 holes while the plan is 6x7, and the model shows the capstan base being noticeably wider than the hatch coaming while the plan shows them being the same width. Compare:

 

 

 

 

Basically, it looks like the plans added an extra seventh row to the grating, making it as wide as the original capstan base. The hatch coamings are supposed to entirely cover their coamings, which my hatch does, so that's the baseline I should be working from:

 

 

The base is very much NOT supposed to cover the carlings, I assume because planking is laid over them in real life. So if anything, narrowing my base to match the width of the hatch coaming makes it match the plans more accurately. Not sure how I ended up with a base wider than the coaming in the first place, as I thought I was following the measurements carefully, but I didn't notice before because I was also consulting the model image which shows that a wider base, so I didn't think anything of it. The difference here would be that I'm narrowing the base rather than widening the hatch, but the visual effect seems like it'd be very similar?

 

[mbp521]

Eric, Good things to watch for. I’ll definitely keep the differences of the model and the plans in mind when I get around to my build. Glad things are working out with the off center hole. 
 

By the way, beautiful job on the grating! Everything looks like it fit together perfectly. I guess we were posting at the same time and I missed that update. 
 

-Brian

[tlevine]

I never noticed the discrepancy until you just pointed it out to me.  I would correct my mistake by moving the carlings out so that half of them are exposed.  Nobody will see the original mortice.  Again, my apologies.

[Cathead]

Reviewing the plans carefully made me even more confused. The plans clearly show that the deck (called the capstan step in the plans) and hatch coamings are supposed to be the same width, and that the capstan step should overlap its carlings just a bit while the hatch coaming entirely overlaps its carlings. Here I've marked up the image from above for clarity:

 

 

But now let's compare measurements. The hatch coaming is supposed to be 48" x 43" along its outer edge, with the wider side being that matched up with the capstan step:

 

 

The three pieces that make up the capstan step are supposed to measure 17", 19", and 17". In the intermediate version, these are edge-glued with no joinery, so the total width is 53":

 

And the interior space between the two carlings under the capstan step is supposed to be 48":

 

 

So please correct me if I'm being very dense, but none of these three measurements seems to work together, as summarized below. 

The outer hatch coaming (blue) and the interior space between the capstan set carlings (purple) are both individually marked as 48", but that's not what the overview plan shows; the hatch is noticeably wider. Similarly, the capstan step (red) is supposed to be 17+19+17=53", but is drawn as being the same width as the hatch coaming (blue), which is supposed to be 48". Very confusing, and possibly a factor in my messing up the drill hole at the center.

 

 

Perhaps @tlevine can clarify this for future builders? 

 

I tried the easiest fix to my own specific predicament (the misaligned hole) and simply cut off one side of the capstan step to recenter the hole. Depending on how one reads the plans, this is now more accurate than it was before, making the capstan step the same width as the hatch coaming, with a slight overlap of the carlings! In other words, this matches the plans visually, just not the conflicting dimensions given.

 

 

Personally, I see no reason not to keep this fix rather than the more complicated suggestions of re-making the entire step or moving the carlings (though the different ideas were welcome and helped me think through my solution). 

 

Working through all this gave me a headache, but I think I can move forward now. If I've misunderstood something, please explain! I'm also curious what it's "supposed" to look like (in terms of whether the step and hatch should be the same width or not), and whether that's based on a prototype or just designer preference.

[mtaylor]

The "fix" looks good from here, Eric.  If you hadn't told us, I don't think anyone would have known.   I do understand  your confusion and hope this gets fixed for future builders.

[mbp521]

I have to agree with Mark, your fix seems to have remedied your off-center capstan hole and looks great.
 

Since I am a creature of habit and tend to go by the pictures when I run into situations like this, and I would have matched the drawings. This is a habit that I need to get out of, given that it has bitten me in the backside more than once. Thanks for pointing it out so that I don’t get bit when I get to this point. 
 

-Brian

[tlevine]

If you think you have a headache, I am going crazy trying to figure out what I did wrong and where, as well as make up new drawings.  It looks great, regardless.

[tlevine]

I have figured out what I did wrong; have no idea why I messed up.  There should only be seven rows of grating battens, not eight.  Adjusting the length of the head ledges to 42" solves the problem.  I hope to have the corrected drawings finished this weekend.  

[Cathead]

I proceeded to making the capstan barrel, and immediately encountered what I believe to be more problems with the plans/instructions, though as always I'm happy to be corrected if I've misunderstood something. I puzzled over this for a long time and took quite a while to carefully make an explanatory drawing while double-checking my calculations and thought processes. 

 

The capstan barrel is made from two sets of five wedges having subtly different measurements. Here I'm focusing on the longer/narrower set (PN026) but everything I'm about to say also applies to the shorter/fatter set (PN027):

 

 

Here is the plan image for what the PN026 wedges. We have what appears to be an isosceles triangle with a base of 3.88, a peak angle of 32º, and two sides of 7.25:

 

 

Now the confusion starts. The instructions say to "Cut two strips of wood, one 7.25” square [for PN026] and the other 6.00” square [for PN027] and long enough to make at least five wedges.  Cut the strip into pieces a little longer than needed for the barrel and draw the shape of the wedge on both ends of the strips." Here is the relevant image provided:

 

 

And this is where I started getting confused/suspicious. First, if those strips are 7.25 square, then those wedges are far too wide (note how the drawn triangle extends all the way across the base of the piece), as the base of the triangle is only supposed to be 3.88. If the base there is indeed 3.88, the instructions are wrong in saying these blanks should be cut to 7.25 square, which is way too wide. The strips also shouldn't be 7.25 tall, as that's the dimension of the angled face of the triangle, not the outer face of the strip (which would be a bit shorter, again basic geometry). The way these pieces are marked, with a line down the top-center of the piece essentially dividing it into two equal right triangles extending down to the base, makes logical sense as the easiest way to lay out and cut these. All you have to do is shave away the upper-right and upper-left bits. But it doesn't match the plans or text. Moreover, the plans give a misleading and/or inconsistent view of how to lay these pieces out. Here's a to-scale diagram I spent considerable time assembling to try and clarify this:

 

 

Basic math tells us that the height of this isosceles triangle (a) should be 6.99, given the dimensions already provided. But when this triangle is laid out on its side (b), as shown in the plans, it creates a very strange relationship with a square 7.25x7.25 square block of wood that would be difficult to cut accurately and doesn't match the photo in the instructions. This photo seems to match (c) instead, but that's not what's written in the instructions or shown in the plans. It would make far more sense, at least to me, to cut a rectangular 3.88 x 6.99 strip and simply shave off each side equally, as seems to be shown in the photo above and in (c). But again, that conflicts with the written instructions, and may or may not be consistent with the plans, which at the very least are confusingly drawn with the triangle laid on its side rather than vertically as in (c).

 

Again, the same is true for the other set of wedges, just with different numbers. I don't know what's intended here, but the resulting confusion has cost me hours of puzzling, drafting, and writing. I've also started to check and recalculate every number in the plans given the multiple errors I've encountered, costing me more time. Getting a bit frustrated, to be honest.

 

My assumption is that I should proceed based on (c) and just ignore the strange instruction to cut a 7.25 x 7.25 block, but at this point I don't know what was intended and whether that would cause other problems later. For example, I can't know which of these numbers are right (given past errors already documented). I'm burned out on this for now, so I'm just going to set this aside and wait for @tlevine to clarify again. I need to clear my head in any case and move on to something more joy-sparking.

[tlevine]

First, new drawings have been made of the coamings, gratings and capstan step.  The original drawings will work; it simply will not look like the prototype.  I will be submitting them to the office so that they can be distributed to anyone who has purchased the project.  If you need them sooner, send me a pm.

 

Second, my directions describe how I made them.  You are right; pieces of wood 7" x 3 7/8" and 5 5/8" x 4 1/4" would work.  Feel free to use different sized wood to get the same result.  The extra 1/4" gives me a little "breathing room" to sand the wedges to the final dimensions.  It is much easier to take off wood than to put it back.  The whole idea is to have alternating wedges so that the whelps fit securely onto a flat surface and are evenly spaced.  The recesses made with the alternating wedges is only 1/16".

[Cathead]

Toni, with all respect, I think you're missing the point. I don't disagree that a little wiggle room is great, but the instructions clearly say to use a square strip (i.e. 7.25 x 7.25). That's a reasonable extra .25" in the vertical direction, but an extra 2.87" in the horizontal direction (3.88+0.25+0.25 = 4.48 < 7.25), which is a lot of unnecessary extra chiseling, especially since (as the instructions rightly note) it's best to take off just a bit at a time. Nowhere do the instructions talk about wiggle room or how the square strip dimensions relate to this. And as I noted above, the plans showing the triangle lying on its 7.25" side awkwardly imply that that's one of the cut sides of the initial strip (given the coincidentally matching dimension), which is apparently incorrect but rather confusing (it would be a lot clearer to show the triangle upright, as in my drawings here). Finally, the photo supplied clearly shows the triangle being drawn from the outside corners and top edge of what looks like a square strip, which would give quite inaccurate angles and side dimensions, as I diagrammed below:

 

 

This makes it very confusing for the builder to understand what's intended. You may know what you did and how it turned out, but someone who hasn't yet done the project can't easily tell which is correct: the text, the photo, or the plans, because none of them tell the same story consistently. 

 

I'm painfully aware that some of this may feel personal, and I am sorry for that. I know what it's like to receive criticism of a project I'm proud of. But as I seem to be the pioneer builder of the Intermediate project (at least on MSW), I don't see how I can avoid pointing out issues as I run across them, and doing my best to explain them so others can figure how out to approach them (or to show me where I'm wrong, where relevant). Doing so publicly allows for broader perspectives on working out the best solutions, and leaves a record for anyone who may use this build log as their guide in future. As this project is meant to be a guide to people relatively new to scratchbuilding, I feel it's especially important to be very aware of potential pitfalls in instructions and plans.

 

As a professional editor and educator, it's my job to think about how people interact with text and learning material and to see it through the eyes of those not already familiar with it so that I can better shape that material to be relatable and clear. That's what I'm doing here.

Edited January 31, 2022 by Cathead

[Cathead]

So I took a shot at carving a barrel wedge based on my best interpretation of how to go about it (essentially drawing (c) above). It was very difficult for me, especially at the smaller 1:24 scale, and using hard maple. It was a lot of work slowly chiseling down a consistent angular plane on a narrow piece only ~1.5" long, and the results were inconsistent with the need for a lot more sanding. Doing this nine more times didn't feel very inspiring. 

 

So I tried a different approach, based on the Advanced version of this project, in which the entire barrel is shaped from a single piece of wood using a power mill, rather than being assembled from 10 hand-carved blocks. I reasoned that I could probably hand-shape a ten-sided dowel at least as accurately as I could hand-carve 10 narrow wedges and fit them into a consistent circle.

 

The Advanced plans give a barrel diameter of 13" (0.542" at 1:24). This is close to a 5/8" dowel I happened to have on hand (0.625") and I knew I'd need to remove material to get the shape right, bringing the final diameter down. First I carefully marked the center using my caliper, then used a 72º template cut from cardstock to divide the barrel into ten more or less equal wedges. Interestingly, the Advanced and Intermediate plans diverge here; the Advanced plans simply use a consistent 72º angle while the Intermediates call for different angles in the different wedges. The former seems easier to me.

 

 

I used my Byrnes saw to cut a shallow notch marking the end of the barrel, to avoid tearout as I cut down the sides:

 

 

I then used a sharp model chisel to flatten each "panel" (representing the outer edge of a wedge), then finished each one with sandpaper and a file, creating a ten-sided barrel (in an ironic reversal of how round masts are shaped from square stock):

 

 

Now, these aren't supposed to be even like this; five should stand out while five should be recessed; the whelps fit into the recesses while the wide parts extend between them:

 

 

One solution would be to sand/carve every other panel down to make this recessed pattern, which I think would still be easier than making ten wedges. But here's the crafty part, in which I kill two birds with one stone. The first bird is the need for this recessed/extended surface. The second is that this dowel is not maple and so won't look like the rest of my wood where it's exposed between the whelps. 

 

Now, each whelp is 5" wide (0.208"), but with a small bevel on the inner face to fit in between the wedges. Based on the measurements given in the plans, that means the actual whelp face making contact with the wedge is 5" - 0.38" - 0.38" = 4.24" (matching the PN027 wedge faces marked as being 4.25").

 

 

This converts to 0.177" at 1:24. I measured my 10 faces and found that they were just right:

 

 

So this means I can glue accurately-sized whelps right to each alternating face of this dowel. But what about the extended wedge faces between each whelp? I simply plan to make very thin pieces of maple veneer to fit between each whelp after the latter are installed. This will create the illusion of whelps fitting into notches while making all the exposed surfaces maple.

 

I'm feeling pretty good about this solution. Some of it is luck (that a standard 5/8" dowel happens to be so close to the needed diameter at 1:24), but even in other scales I bet a dowel could be scraped down or built up to a ten-sided shape that would work pretty well, especially as most of it is hidden and is really just an internal mounting surface for other pieces. 

 

This is the third time that I've found it easier, or at least no harder, to follow the Advanced plans rather than the Intermediate ones even though I'm only using hand tools and a Byrnes saw. The first time was when I found it easier to cut square (rather than angled) mortises for the deck beams and carlings. The second was when I found it fairly easy to make the lap joints for the capstan base rather than simply edge-gluing them (the skills needed for that were far more basic than needed for the rest of the project, so why not make it look nicer?). And the third is now when I found it easier to hand-shape a solid ten-sided capstan barrel (without needing a mill) rather than making a ten-part structure. 

 

So going forward I'm going to make a habit of always reviewing both sets of instructions and drawings, looking for the best way to achieve any given step. It wouldn't be modeling without problem-solving!

[Cathead]

Next up, making the whelps, which turned out to be pretty straightforward even though I thought it would be more difficult because they have such a complex shape. The plans and instructions were clear and easy to follow, though I diverged from them in a few places. Here's what they're supposed to look like (from @tlevine's log):

 

 

There are five of these, but I cut six blanks to account for making a mistake somewhere along the way. This was the correct decision. The instructions suggest making a paper template and cutting each out separately, but I didn't trust myself to do this consistently enough (especially with hard maple at a small scale), so I spot-glued all six together and did the basic cut on a bandsaw. This violates the "only a small table saw" rule of the Intermediate build, but I had the tool on hand so I used it. The instruction's method would work fine. I used sandpaper and files to finish the basic shaping and get the whole block consistent:

 

 

Each whelp has two sets of angular grooves carved into either side, to accept some braces. I decided to think ahead and mark these across the block before I separated the whelps. So on the back (which won't be seen), I measured the grooves' locations and scribed them with a knife (one stroke went awry but this side is hidden so it doesn't matter):

 

 

I soaked the block in alcohol to separate the pieces. Apparently I used too much glue in one joint, because one whelp tore away some wood from the side of another. Instead of soaking myself in alcohol, I gave thanks that I'd started with six instead of the required five.

 

I cleaned up each piece using fine sandpaper, and in a fit of stupidity, sanded the back as well, mostly erasing my carefully scribed consistent marks. Once again I resisted soaking myself in alcohol, and clumped all six together on my magnetic board before rescribing the marks:

 

 

To cut the grooves, I transferred their location to either side using a knife, then made a top cut using a razor saw:

 

 

I then used a sharp hobby knife to cut the basic angle into the groove, and finished it with a triangular file. Below, the left-hand groove shows the initial saw cut, and the right-hand one has been carved out:

 

 

I used my damaged sixth piece as a test case before doing the rest. And here they all are together and separate:

 

 

 

 

You can see that the side grooves aren't perfect, which is entirely due to the limits of my skill set and the small scale of these pieces. Given that these are meant to accept side braces, I think it'll be ok as I can adjust both the grooves and braces as I assemble the whole thing. Also, the plans show the top grooves being ever so slightly smaller than the bottom grooves (1.75" x 0.75" vs. 2" x 1"). I'm not sure why this is, I assume something prototypical, but at 1:24 these differences measure in the hundredths of an inch range, and I just didn't think it was worth being that precise (or that I could rely on myself to be that precise consistently). So I made the grooves essentially equal and will adjust the braces to match.

 

I realized in writing this up that I haven't drilled the bolt holes shown in the plans, but that's a minor detail. The project is back on track and I can see it taking shape. Thanks for reading and sticking with me.

 

 

[tlevine]

For anyone who purchased this project, the revised plan set it available from the office.  Just drop Mary a note at info@thenauticalresearchguild.org.

[Cathead]

Assembly continues. With the whelps shaped, I glued them onto the barrel, using a square to get them as straight as I could:

 

 

Then it was time to make the chocks, which form the two rings that fit between the whelps (what the side notches were cut to hold). Since my assembly wasn't perfectly symmetrical, I made each of these by hand to fit its specific slot. For each chock, I traced the outline of the angle between the two whelps, then cut a wider version to allow for the angled edges that fit into the notches:

 

 

 

 

I then used a combination of knife and sandpaper to get the angled edges right, and test-fit the chocks. I made sure to label each chock and its corresponding location on the barrel:

 

 

By now, readers who have been following this very closely are jumping up and pounding on their desks, screaming "Wait, Cathead, you've forgotten something!" Indeed, as I realized just as I was applying glue to the first chock.

 

As you may recall, the plans show a barrel made out of wedges, creating alternating raised and lowered surfaces; the whelps fit into the recesses so there is a raised surface between them. Since I made my barrel by shaping a dowel instead, my plan was to simulate those raised surfaces with a thin veneer, which would also keep all the outer surface looking like maple. I came very, very close to forgetting this step because, of course, it wasn't in the instructions (being my own invention).

 

So I set my chocks aside and did the veneer by cutting five thin sheets of maple and custom-fitting them between the whelps:

 

 

With that done, I reshaped the chocks I'd already made (since they now needed to be smaller) and made the second ring. Once these were all glued in, I sanded them to shape, following the instructions in making the upper ring a bit convex and the lower ring a bit concave. Top view:

 

 

Bottom view:

 

 

You can see how the veneer simulates the raised wedges. I'm pretty pleased with this approach, it was much easier than making wedges (at least for me).

 

The next step was to get the barrel mounted properly on the platform. Here I discovered that the 3/8" hole I'd initially drilled wasn't perfectly straight, making the capstan sit at an angle. Sigh. So I fixed this by using a 3/8" plug to fill the hole and instead drilling a new, smaller hole within that and fitting a smaller dowel as the actual axle, which was also easy to drill into the capstan base:

 

 

So here's the raw capstan set on the base:

 

 

And here it is with a coat of wood oil, and with the bolt holes drilled and filled with small bits of wire:

 

 

You can see why I did the veneer; the dowel comes out a completely different color than the maple and I didn't want that showing through between the whelps, even if I didn't care about the raised surface (which I did):

 

 

And a final photo as a reminder of 1:24 scale:

 

 

On to making the drumhead...

 

Edited February 8, 2022 by Cathead

[mtaylor]

Beautiful work, Eric.  The veneer to match looks perfect.

[mbp521]

Very nice job Eric. Excellent way to adapt and overcome those obstacles. For some reason I was thinking that 1:24 scale was bigger than that, and I can now truly understand the struggles of the small bits. I’m thinking that I may go with 1:16 when I get to building this one. 
 

-Brian

[tlevine]

Looks great, Eric.  

[lraymo]

Wow! Incredible detail, and at such a small scale.  Beautiful!

[Cathead]

Thanks for the kind comments!

 

I just revised my earlier post for clarity, since I kept using "wedge" to mean "chock", which could be confusing as "wedge" means the pieces the initial capstan barrel was supposed to be made of.

 

Also, @Siggi52 has been finishing up the double capstans for his unbelievably beautiful HMS Tiger (seriously, I'm not being hyperbolic here), and I thought it was interesting that he, too, seems to have built his capstans by filing down a round dowel where necessary. Just thought I'd share these photo for anyone considering doing it this way. Otherwise it's neat how similar his capstans are to this project's (though not surprising given the research that's gone into both):

 

I hope he's ok with me sharing these, I think they're a great reference and if you're not already reading his log, you should be!

 

Coming soon, an update on building the capstan head.

[Cathead]

Time to make the drumhead. As you would expect by now, I deviated into my own way of doing things at various points. This is made from two circles of wood, which are themselves made by gluing together two halves. Here's what we're going for (photo from @tlevine's log):

 

 

 

The bottom half has a square cutout that's meant to sit on a matching block atop the capstan body. The upper half is solid. The instructions call for gluing the two halves of the bottom half together, then cutting out the square hole from within, but that seemed unnecessarily complicated to me. Instead, I used double-sided tape to stick the two halves together face-face, then used the Byrnes saw to cut out a half-square notch:

 

 

 

 

I then glued up both halves of the drumhead, resulting in a nice square hole that didn't need to be cut out later. I also felt this let me be more accurate than trying to cut this out with a hand saw within a solid block.

 

 

 

I'm honestly not sure why this square hole and its matching block mount are necessary. My guess is this is how the real thing was built, allowing the drumhead to be removable but locked to the capstan, but none of this is ever visible on the final model, and it would be a lot easier to just glue the drumhead directly to the capstan or at least just mount it directly to a smaller dowel if you want to ensure it's centered. The block just seems like extra work and an extra chance for something to go wrong.

 

Next, the instructions have you cut these halves out into circles before cutting the internal slots (which end up holding the capstan bars) using a razor saw. Again, I thought this was more complicated and difficult than necessary, as I don't trust myself to hand-cut perfect slots to a consistent depth using a razor saw on a round workpiece, or to cut two matching circles from two separate workpieces. So instead, I left the halves square and marked the slots at the proper 60º, then cut them out using the Byrnes saw (for reliable depth control) and its miter gage (for reliable angle control), just like other joinery in this project:

 

 

 

I then glued these squares together, and only then cut the single resulting piece into a circle, using a piece of PVC pipe close to the right diameter to draw a guide line:

 

 

The resulting cutout was rough and I intentionally made it too big:

 

 

To clean this up, I placed a square block (into which a dowel had been glued) into the square hole on the bottom of the drumhead, then chucked the dowel into a hand drill and used this setup to sand the drumhead down to a nice smooth circle. It would have been much harder to do this evenly by hand. This was also the step that made me question why the block was even necessary; gluing the dowel directly into the capstan would have been easier:

 

 

 

 

In summary:

 

Instruction order of operations: 

• Glue two sets of pieces together into two square halves
• Cut two halves separately into circles
• Cut slots across both circles
• Cut out internal square in lower half
• Join two circular halves into complete drumhead

 

My order of operations:

• Cut internal square before gluing up lower half (easier to do accurately on Byrnes saw)
• Cut slots while halves are still square (for easier use of miter gage)
• Glue square halves together
• Cut out into single circle (easier than cutting two equal circles, then gluing)

 

Despite all that, I still managed to make a few mistakes and not get my slots cut just right, so a few of the capstan bar holes didn't line up quite right. This is the worst one, I just didn't get the piece lined up properly on the miter gage, and cut the upper half too wide:

 

 

This one's more like it:

 

 

This is an indictment of my skill, not of any methodology. I just wasn't careful enough, and also should have cut the slots a bit narrower to better allow for final widening. Honestly, though, as you'll see in a future post, it's barely noticeable in the final product. I cleaned up the mismatched slot halves using a sharp nice and small files.

 

So that gave me a nice solid drumhead. Next, I proceeded to make the capstan bars and start adding final details, which I'll write up tomorrow. It's not done, but it's very close. Thanks for following along!

Edited February 12, 2022 by Cathead

[gjdale]

An elegant solution to a tricky part of the build Eric.

[Cathead]

I declare the capstan completed!

 

 

I didn't take photos of the final details and assembly, partly because I was excited to push through, partly because they were all pretty straightforward. A few notes on these:

• The capstan bars are just a basic shaping of square stock, easily followed from the plans. Because the slots in my drumhead were a little wonky, I custom-fit the insert end of each capstan bar to each hole, but this isn't noticeable in the final display. I used black walnut for the color contrast.
• I didn't try to add the nailing pattern in the grating, as I didn't think I could do this well at 1:24 and preferred to leave it out than do a bad job.
• I added the bolts to the drumhead and base by drilling holes, inserting black wire, and nipping it off just above the surface. The instructions call for making sure the bolt heads are flattened/widened, but at 1:24 I decided this wouldn't be worth the work, so just left the cut ends in place with a bit of filing.
• I made the iron ring atop the drumhead using fine black sandpaper rather than the regular paper (colored with ink) called for in the instructions. This was sturdier to cut out, had no danger of ink running, and had a nice rough texture that looked more iron-like to my eyes.
• I made the pawls out of walnut and just oiled them rather than painting them black to represent metal. This is less realistic but more aesthetically pleasing to me, matching the capstan bars and emphasizing the natural wood. 
• I left off the pins & chains that hold the capstan bars in place (photo below from @tlevine's log). I didn't have anything on hand to make these and wasn't sure I could do it right by hand at 1:24. The instructions say these are optional anyway. Maybe if I end up with some spare chain and tiny eyebolts from a future kit, I'll go back and add them, but didn't feel like ordering a tiny pack of chain and other material:

 

 

 

My model is essentially an artistic interpretation anyway, more than a perfectly accurate scale representation, so I decided I was pleased with it as it was.   Here are a few more photos:

 

 

 

Below is the worst drumhead hole; it's still barely noticeable except in closeup photos, so I'm ok with it. 

 

 

Closeup of the walnut pawls and black wire bolts:

 

 

So that's that. This project certainly achieved its goals of pushing me to try something new that I probably wouldn't have thought of otherwise, and exposing me to new skills that I will be able to put to good use in future. It was a challenge at times, and I strongly encourage other builders to think ahead to be sure you aren't led astray by confusion or inattention (a good practice in any build). I'd also say it's fine to make your own course; I deviated from the instructions quite often where I thought necessary, and in truth that's also part of the scratch-building skill set this is meant to teach (confidence to think for yourself and work out the best approach to a problem rather than blindly following instructions). 

 

Although I've been critical at times, I want to be absolutely clear how grateful I am to @tlevine and the NRG for developing this project. I wasn't at all sure I could produce something this nice, even if it isn't quite at the level of truly skilled builders, and I couldn't have done it without their development work. It's especially cool to display knowing that all the wood (except a few hidden dowels) was harvested, milled, and finished right here on-farm, making this particularly special to me. 

 

Here's the capstan in its final location within a bigger display case, staged with its companion 1:24 naval gun dioramas and various marine life collected primarily from my favorite coastline in the world, the Outer Banks of North Carolina. 

 

 

Thanks to all the readers who gave encouraging likes and helpful comments. Hopefully this log is of use to others.

 

Edited February 13, 2022 by Cathead

[kurtvd19]

Congratulations on finishing the project Eric.  I am especially pleased to read your evaluation of the Guild's efforts in developing this project and your opinion that we achieved our goal of getting members to try scratch building and you confirmed our opinion that this project would be satisfying the those who undertake the project.

Take care.

[usedtosail]

Really nice work Eric. Your capstan came out great and your approach was spot on.

[tlevine]

Looks great, Eric.  The concept behind the project was to help remove the fear of scratch building.  What's next?