Cutty Sark by Kevin-the-lubber - Revell - 1:96 - PLASTIC

[Ian_Grant]

Never heard of Belbin before.  Judging by the summaries, I'm more of a specialist/finisher.  Good traits for engineering. And model building. 😃

Edited November 20, 2022 by Ian_Grant

[Kevin-the-lubber]

7 hours ago, shipman said:

So, where can I buy the long micro drills, please?

Shipman,  https://www.pagesoftools.co.uk/

[Bruma]

Hi Kevin, nice job on your yard arm! 

If you don't mind, I have a question for you. 

The sheet block you modeled seems to be inspired by the Underhill drawing. However, both Campbell and Longridge, seems to agree that this was not the system used for the Cutty Sark. Their drawings show two metal blocks, one for each side, for the lower topsail sheets and not a single-double sided and centered block. And a similar arrangement for all the upper yards.

The configuration suggested by Campbell and Longridge is the same that is currently displayed on the real Cutty Sark. 

Do you have other sources? 

Lastly, about your question, once again I completely agree with Ian, but, in my understanding, there is only one fairlead for each side, not two. It is located in the back of the yard, and, in my understanding, it needs to stay on the segment that start from the lower side of the pulley on the tip of the mast (facing the poop) and ends on the sheets block close to the mast.

 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

6 hours ago, Bruma said:

The sheet block you modeled seems to be inspired by the Underhill drawing

Yes Marco, the whole yard is currently based on Underhill rather than Campbell, which is also why there are two fairleads. I find there isn’t enough detail in the Campbell plans to rely on these and I don’t think I have Longridge. I may change these details at the last minute. I would so like some proper engineering drawings! I still have a few weeks of designing, I think, and may try to fit in a quick visit to Greenwich to get some better photos of the rigging.

[ScottRC]

On 11/19/2022 at 7:48 AM, Kevin-the-lubber said:

Folks, there's a question/plea for help in this further down, which I'll underline

 

Second draft. The R&D department has been busy over the last two or three weeks and found a decent method of manufacturing the masts and yards as whole tubes, aided by some very nice, extra long micro drills; below, standard 1mm bit and 100mm long bit - you don't see many of those about, do you. By happy coincidence the lady who sells these on ebay is only a couple of miles away from me and has a veritable cornucopia of modelling tools, many of which will no doubt become mine over time. Anyway, these long drill bits allow me to bore out the barrels of tubes, which close up a little during printing, in order to slide in a CF stiffening rod.

The results, in terms of being able to make even the thinnest of yards, are really very, very good; this is a 3mm or 4mm stiffened resin-printed yard-arm taking the full weight of my vernier caliper. with this amount of weight it'll bend, but not break, and returns to shape instantly. The mast and lower yard simply don't bend or break, solid as a rock.

So we're in business from that perspective and here are a few detail photos of a 'dress rehearsal' of the lower foremast, largely so I can ask my questions! I find it is sometimes easier to see what changes are still needed if I do a quick'n'dirty paint up of the assembly, even though this iteration will end up in the scrap bin. Stiffeners are the magic ingredient here, well that and getting a resin mix that balances stiffness with flexibiity. You won't see it but I inserted two tiny brass pins in the truss that links the yard to the futtock band, which stops this weak point from breaking.

However, I am not confident in my interpretation of the fittings on the lower yard: in particular, I am not convinced that the orientation of the sheet block, fairleads and cheek blocks relative to each other are correct and would very much appreciate a steer on this. I'd also be grateful for any pointers around details I've missed - bear in mind I've treated both the lower mast and yard as steel rather than timber, though the yard-arms are treated as timber. Getting this right at this point is key, because this mast and yard will essentially be the template for most of the others.

 

Hopefully the two photos below show the current setup well enough. Looking at the yard from a side view, as per Underhill I've made the sheet block parallel to the mast. The cheek blocks are perpendicular to the mast. The fairleads (two on each side) are roughly halfway between parallel and perpendicular. I decided to orientate them like this because otherwise they would seem to foul the yard arms, or sit behind the same which seems illogical. My arrangement means the lower topsail sheets are going to slightly 'twist' their way around the yard as they pass from chain block through to sheet block. Is that correct? (Ignore the misalignment of the yard arms, they aren't glued in place)

 

Kevin,

Your mast bands, hoops and cheek blocks are outstanding.  I need to fabricate all new mast details on my Thermopylae rebuild, and have thought of 3D printing these details except my printer is FDM, so the detail tolerance is limited.  

[Kevin-the-lubber]

Thanks, Scott. I think you'd be quite hard-pressed to get a good result with FDM. Last year I tried printing cannons using FDM (in fact I think it might have been that which tipped the scales towards buying a resin printer) but I couldn't get at all close to something useful. If resin hadn't worked out so well I would have resorted to wooden dowels and metal, like Bruma's lovely examples. For me it's not so much the tolerance, more the hassle of cleanup - I can print to less than 0.2mm every time in FDM, but printing thin tubes vertically is almost impossible and split tubes horizontally on the plate will work, but you'd have to support the bore and then sand the outside smooth. With resin, I can print them vertically as tubes and with just a little external support (to keep them centred) do quite long lengths i.e. 150mm. But in practice I've found it's better to split them into 2 or 3 sections, using the fairlead bands as cut points so the joins don't show. 

 

I've half made a Cutty Sark hull in F360 and at some point will progress it to a stage where it's worth a first draft print. If it's any good I'll most likely use that, along with everything so far on the CS, as the basis for another clipper, quite possibly the Thermopylae. That said, while grazing some background material the other day I found a drawing of the 'Vision', which really appeals.

 

 

[rwiederrich]

On 11/20/2022 at 2:44 AM, Bruma said:

Hi Kevin, nice job on your yard arm! 

If you don't mind, I have a question for you. 

The sheet block you modeled seems to be inspired by the Underhill drawing. However, both Campbell and Longridge, seems to agree that this was not the system used for the Cutty Sark. Their drawings show two metal blocks, one for each side, for the lower topsail sheets and not a single-double sided and centered block. And a similar arrangement for all the upper yards.

The configuration suggested by Campbell and Longridge is the same that is currently displayed on the real Cutty Sark. 

Do you have other sources? 

Lastly, about your question, once again I completely agree with Ian, but, in my understanding, there is only one fairlead for each side, not two. It is located in the back of the yard, and, in my understanding, it needs to stay on the segment that start from the lower side of the pulley on the tip of the mast (facing the poop) and ends on the sheets block close to the mast.

 

You are correct Bruma.  Here is an image of KS yards.

 

Rob

 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

That's a very good shot Rob - do you  by any chance have a larger version? There's a lot of good detail in that shot that I haven't seen elsewhere.

[rwiederrich]

10 minutes ago, Kevin-the-lubber said:

That's a very good shot Rob - do you  by any chance have a larger version? There's a lot of good detail in that shot that I haven't seen elsewhere.

I have a better quality version that you can magnify.

 

Rob

 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

Thanks Rob, that gives these old eyes a better chance. I most likely will go with how it should be and say a fond goodbye to the double, centred block. I notice the fairleads are quite long as well.

 

Any idea what that rod, running down from the lower topsail yard truss to, it would seem, the foot of the topmast, is all about? I don't see this on any of my reference material. It looks like a bracing rod. I cant quite see, due to the black yard, what it connects to.

 

The cheeks are much thinner than I thought as well, I'd guess that they are nevertheless 1/4" plate which is more than thick enough for that job. I might have to take another look at modelling the trusses. On the real thing they are relatively fine, rather nicely wrought pieces and can be that way as the chains take most of the strain; on a resin model, at scale they are an accident waiting to happen. This might be where I get out the soldering iron.

 

I'll probably pause again for a bit now. I'm finding it painfully difficult to piece together enough knowledge to make progress, something I can probably address with a day trip up to Greenwich.

[Ian_Grant]

Kevin, that's a brace for the trussed LT yard - see Underhill pg 80 Plate 18 middle sketch. Also Plate 15 pg 72.

[Kevin-the-lubber]

I’ve been diligently following plates 5 & 6, steel lower masts! Now I see there’s even a very nice sketch on page 39 and narrative on p.40. I guess this is the danger of using something generic as a reference, coupled with not wanting to read the whole thing. I have a copy of Campbell on the way, hopefully that will be more definitive.

 

ps. And just to complete the 'idiot' look, I now also see it's there in the revell instructions - they are called cranes. I think it really is time to stand back and get my ducks in a row around these references, I'm getting in a right old muddle here!

Edited November 22, 2022 by Kevin-the-lubber

[rwiederrich]

4 hours ago, Kevin-the-lubber said:

I’ve been diligently following plates 5 & 6, steel lower masts! Now I see there’s even a very nice sketch on page 39 and narrative on p.40. I guess this is the danger of using something generic as a reference, coupled with not wanting to read the whole thing. I have a copy of Campbell on the way, hopefully that will be more definitive.

 

ps. And just to complete the 'idiot' look, I now also see it's there in the revell instructions - they are called cranes. I think it really is time to stand back and get my ducks in a row around these references, I'm getting in a right old muddle here!

Kevin.  It is prudent to more then vaguely familiarize yourself with CS structures.  The Howes design lower topsail yard is no movable(It does not have a tie or chain lift....so its weight needs to be supported with a *crane*.

My Glory of the Seas was built the same year as CS and it had a crane as well...though it was slightly different....it rested on an iron pedestal affixed to the topgallant mast doubling.

 

This is the best pic I have.

 

Rob

Edited November 22, 2022 by rwiederrich

[rwiederrich]

Here is the crane on my Revell CS.

 

 

Rob

 

 

Edited November 22, 2022 by rwiederrich

[Kevin-the-lubber]

10 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

It is prudent to more then vaguely familiarize yourself with CS structures.

Rob, I wouldn't at all disagree and I'm having to learn the mechanics whether I like it or not, as I always need to understand the 'why'. But it is a slow, piecemeal process of two steps forward one step back and, sometimes, the other way round. No matter, I'm a problem solver by nature and will plug away in my own way. I am just becoming a bit frustrated at having several other models that I would like to work on, having hoped to be finished with this one by now; whereas I realise I am probably not even halfway yet. And this isn't through some quest for perfection, just a need to have done as good a job as I reasonably could at this stage of the hobby. I know the next ship will be done much more quickly, and the one after that even more so, but there's always a need to feel tangible progress is being made. Anyway, enough whingeing, work to do and the CS can wait until the weekend.

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

   Is the bottom of the 'crane' mounted on a metal ring going around the base of the topmast? ... so it can pivot when the yard swings to either side?  Rob will know the answer.

[Kevin-the-lubber]

I made another visit to the Cutty Sark last week and took around 1000 photos. For obvious reasons these are all detail photos aimed at helping me wit aspects of the model. They are largely focussed on the masts, spars & rigging. I'm uploading these to dropbox for anyone to download and do with as you will. Due to free storage limitations I'll need to do this in three or four. The first tranche is accessible via this link 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/5xnj0nrvpfztcnj/AAAAgu-W1ZY5fpTL8c3hYcKHa?dl=0. I'm not at all au fait with dropbox so if that doesn't work I won't know how to fix it!

 

I'll delete these and upload the next load in about 2 weeks time, and so on. If anyone reads this, say next year, drop me a pm if you want them.

 

[LeoM]

Great! Many thanks, Kevin!

I was planning to travel to Greenwich to see the ship myself and take "some" pictures. 

[Bill97]

Kevin those are great photos you have now for reference as you continue your CS build. What an incredible luxury that is to have the actual ship available to you. Every time I read your blog to see updates I look at my Revell CS with disappointment. Of course at the time I built mine I was very ignorant of quality model ship building and bashing. I just did it almost 100% OOB. In retrospect seeing what could have been accomplished tempts me to consider building it again. Beautiful job my friend. 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

Hi Bill, thanks for looking in. I see you're still racing ahead on the SR, at this rate (and I'm serious when I say this) you'll complete the two most difficult ships in the heller series while I'm still plodding away on the relatively simple CS! Having both the CS and Victory so close is a huge luxury and I ought to make more of it. I've just bought  a new camera this weekend (well, second hand actually, but very good) and may do another visit to the CS very early in the new year. Now that I've worked on the foremast and yards in detail I have a much better idea of shots or areas that I missed. I don't think I'd visit Victory again now unless I really needed sight of some particular details. Without masts and rigging she's a sorry sight at present, but I guess it has to be done. I saw the most beautiful model of the 1765 (I think) Victory in the maritime museum while visiting the CS, but the area with the clipper models was shut that day.

 

I'm not so sure the average person would even notice the difference between OOB and kit bashed, apart from the rigging, but in any case, from the photos way back, you did a pretty good job on it. And remember a lot of the time this is the 4th or 5th time I've built this kit as that's how many goes it often takes to get to the 'final' parts. I'm able to learn from my mistakes on the fly and make improvements as I go. You don't get that luxury if you only have the one kit part! Honestly, you guys would be horrified if you saw my scrap bin, in fact here's just some of the CS tests. The wastage does get less and less as I progress, I hasten to add.

I've almost finished designing the foremast assembly now, it's taken a long time but the rest should be quicker as there's a lot of shared principles. I may take a little break or at least slow down even more after Christmas, as I may be getting a couple of 1;24 vintage car kits in my stocking and if one of them is a Tamiya I'll want to start on that straight away. I've wanted to try one of their kits for a while as I understand they are fantastic, and it looks like cars are much more 'paint and stick' than ships!

[Bill97]

Really enjoy reading your posts Kevin. I don’t know if you were ever told this in school but your writing style is smooth and relaxing while being very informative. It is much like I expect it would be if we were hanging out watching a soccer game. Speaking of that hasn’t this World Cup been full of surprises?

That is a good amount in your scrap bin. What is fun is I recognize the CS part you were attempting in almost every scrap piece. 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

That's very kind of you Bill. The world cup has been fun to watch, disappointing for England but, as I tell my colleagues, it's only a game 😁. One thing I never understand is this - when teams get knocked out, they pack up and go home. If it was me I think I'd quite want to stay and watch the rest of the competition!

 

 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

Photo set 2 is on dropbox, this is the link https://www.dropbox.com/s/qzgifbreac8850s/Set2.zip?dl=0

 

If you can't access/download I'm afraid there's nothing I can do about it, you just have to try again on another day. Dropbox temporarily stops allowing downloads after X many, then allows them again after a day or two. They would like me to buy lots of storage space to avoid this, but that's not happening!

[LeoM]

Fantastic!!! Thank you very much 😀

[VitusBering]

Beautifully done Kevin. I've just finished reading the log from stem to stern and it is quite informative and inspirational.

[Kevin-the-lubber]

1 hour ago, VitusBering said:

Beautifully done Kevin. I've just finished reading the log from stem to stern and it is quite informative and inspirational.

Thank you, I really appreciate the encouragement and interest.

 

 

 

 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

While waiting for the resin printing equivalent of paint to dry - a 10 hour print of the revised version of the lower topsail yard and topmast - I've been playing around with my recently purchased, second-hand Olympus OM-DE-M5ii. Trips off the tongue nicely, doesn't it, Olympus marketing staff definitely missed the memo about catchy names. Anyway, I thought I'd share these two pics to illustrate something which might be of interest to others. This camera has built-in focus stacking. That's a large part of the reason I bought it, as I also like taking macro shots of flowers, insects and whatnot, and it's always a little disappointing to have parts of the subject just out of focus, or a grainy (noisy in digital speak) result through stopping down too much. On the left is what stacking delivers - see how the yard is in focus for the entire length, without compromising the quality. On the right is the same shot without stacking. 

(The design of this yard has been re-done already, this one, with lots of errors, is just for illustration)

[Bill97]

Kevin that is a nice pickup of your new Olympus. Should really make your micro photography come alive. 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

 I haven't had much time for modelling stuff for the last two or three weeks. Set 3 of 4 is now posted. https://www.dropbox.com/s/pvovnu96bffc66k/set3.zip?dl=0. I may only leave this up there for a week as I'd like to be done with this now!

 

I'll re-post set1 at the end, probably in two halves as it was so problematic last time. 

[Kevin-the-lubber]

Fourth & final set uploaded.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hqbl3se9q96kwjl/set4.zip?dl=0