Gorch Fock I 1933 by Snug Harbor Johnny - 1:100 - RESTORATION

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  'Happened to be escorting the Admiral on an antiquing expedition July 2nd, and spied among a lot of old things, a dusty old ship model that (for all I knew) may or may not have been of a particular ship ... but despite its aged appearance had been put together with some care, and had at least one 'repair' at some point.  I wasn't able to spend too much time at that berth, so continued as pilot (and purser) for the journey.  Besides, I didn't want to commit to $195 for an unidentified vessel.

 

  By mere coincidence, there happened to be a post on MSW later that day on a clipper named Gorch Fock ... Lo and behold, it was the ship I'd perused earlier that day while antiquing.  Some quick research was done to find that an original of a German school ship launched in 1933 (ordered and mostly built in1932, before you-know who became Chancellor), ands surrendered at the end of WW 2 ... ultimately to be reacquired decades later.  The Gorch Fock 2 of 1958 is still a training ship (an improved version of the original with a number of differences), while the original is now a museum ship.

 

  I couldn't then get the idea out of my mind that I should go back to rescue the model for study and restoration - at least to revisit and inspect it more closely than I was able to do on the first go around.  An appeal to the Admiral (who had just acquired some choice items on said trip) brought acquiescence, so drove the gig back alone on the 3rd. to check it out.  A photo 'in situ' is below:

 

  It was placed on the store counter for a better examination, and it was a solid-hull, scratch built affair other than for some cast deck fittings that were available at the time of construction.  The aging, amount of dust and coloring on the sails suggested a 50 -70 year history.  With careful cleaning and a few repairs - perhaps replacement of the nails used as rail stanchions - the hull would be ready for re-rigging - and I knew that the Admiral has some techniques that could breath life into old, yellowed fabric, as she has done textile conservation before on antique garments in her collection.

 

 

 

  The object of the exercise, aside from respecting the unknown builder, would be to finally to get some experience rigging a clipper (something I'd like to build in the future, but the rigging of which has always seemed daunting). There are definite features that point to this being the original Gorch Fock: the lack of an Eagle figurehead that the GF 2 has; the green lines running full length that are seen in a 1930s photo - whereas on the second version (and also how the original is now painted) the lower line is only seen near the bow and stern with white in between - most likely because there is no 'rub rail' amid ships, but ribbing does stand proud from the hull near the ends; the lack of a largish oblong engine funnel - the original had a narrower round funnel, which appears to be among a few things broken-off/missing on this example.

 

  The age of the vintage model appears to predate the GF 2 anyway, and after the GF 2 was launched Mantua came out with a plank-on-frame model kit.  Now this will make three projects to 'juggle' going forward - with me hopping from one to another, but then I was always a 'browser' (or grazer).  I'll add 3 closer shots bow to stern as it now sits.

 

 

   

 

 

  Perhaps 'tough sledding in July', but this model surely meant something to somebody's dad ...  and the sails appear to be finely made with hand sewn edge rope that looks like 'Old Cuttyhunk' linen fishing line (used by 'old time' ship makers in the 30's, 40's and 50's - and there are reefing lines as well.  We shall see.

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  'Had to start somewhere, so the fore course was taken off the yard for examination.  BTW the model's hull length of 29" is the basis of the 1:100 scale with the 244' original.   There was definitely a lot of time put into the fabrication of the sails.  The cotton fabric has 50 threads to the inch, but is not a 'close weave' - in that there is a gap between weft and weave threads equal to one thread width.  This makes for a more supple and lighter fabric than if had been a close weave 100 count muslin.  I haven't yet seen anything as suitable for this to make cloth sails out of.

 

  

 

  Below are two closer shots showing the care and workmanship in every detail.  As mentioned, old style linen fishing line (true miniature rope) was had sewn around the edge of the sail using very fine thread hand sewn.  The stitching imitating the joined bolts of canvas 'mimic' hand sewing due to the slightly diagonal lay of the stitching (versus the 'dead straight' sewing of most 20th century machines).  I just have not seen machine stitching quite like this before (it is lockstitch, versus chain - like my Wilcox and Gibbs hatband sewer), and can't fathom which sort of machine did it ... perhaps a machine that was already quite old when these sails were made.

 

  The reefing lines are hand knotted on either side, and are of a fine thread (as is the sewing thread - possibly linen, but I'm not sure) ... and note how the ends are just cut off - but there has been virtually no un-raveling since the day it was made.  ... simply uncanny ...

 

 

 

 

  There is some 'body' evidenced by slight 'crinkle' when bending, perhaps a little starch applied back in the day to make them look like they were catching the wind.  That could explain some of the discoloration ... possibly being in an attic as well.   .... makes me sigh ...  A set of sails for the Mantua GF 2 retails for $150 (plus tax and shipping), but they are bulky and clumsy compared to the ones I'm working with ... with none of the fine features noted above !  And when I offered to pay cash for the model, there was a 10% discount bringing the price to $175.50 (+ 6% PA sales tax).  Just the sails alone are worth way more than that !

 

  So the Admiral gave me a tutorial for breathing new life in the sails.  The product name is clearly seen on the container, and consists of sodium percarbonate and sodium carbonate ... nothing else.  Now commercial products such as Oxyclean have these ingredients too, but the ALSO have other 'proprietary' stuff like surfactants, detergents, emollients, etc.   Museums don't want this 'extra' stuff, because 'less is more' and one has to know exactly what one is using on antiques.  There is a series of reactions where dilute hydrogen peroxide is generated, and then produces free oxygen - carrying away years of dirt and discoloration in the process.  Plant based fibers become naturally acidic over time, and the alkalinity of washing soda neutralizes this ... and actually needs 3 distilled water rinses to carry away excess alkalinity  to bring the Ph to near neutral.

 

 

  In theory, one should use distilled water throughout the process, but non-hard city water (or bottled water) is OK for all but the final rinses, which are dome with distilled water (and NOT the kind that say 'minerals added' for taste ... this is not for drinking, but the mineral free distilled water used for steam irons is required for the final rinses).  The first step is to thoroughly wet in hot tap water, and we could see the water becoming discolored almost immediately.

 

 

 

  Then hot tap water in a 2 quart Corning (or Corel or equivalent) cooking pot (a glass bowl would do, but if metal - only stainless steel) - the temp is what our water heater is set for, something like 110 degrees, and add a scoop (or heaping tablespoon) of product.

 

 

 

  Stir to dissolve before placing the item in with either stainless steel of rubber spatulas to keep it under the surface.  Note that there is some effervescence in the pot.

 

 

  The soak time was about 15 - 20 minutes, then I repeated the soak in fresh mixture.  Each time, the sail became less discolored.  For the THIRD soak, I heated the water in the pot on the range to about 160 degrees F before adding the Restoration product.  The higher heat is needed to assure that any added starch comes out of the cloth.  The product dissolved quite rapidly and the effervescence commenced almost immediately and with more vigor.  I let the sail stay in for 10 -15 minutes - and I saw that is was mostly clean.  I did not want to over treat, and very often, there is still just a little off-whiteness left on old cottons and linens (but I'm told that with enough treatments, a virtual white is possible ... I did not want to do this).  BTW, the spa test strips used on the solution showed it to be strongly alkaline.

 

  Then I did 3 rinses in DISTILLED WATER, and retested with spa strips to show that the Ph was now within the 7.2 - 7.6 range.  This is good, as over time it will inhibit the accumulation of acid over several decades.  (Protein based fibers - silk and wool - have their own problems, and require different cleaning methods.)  The still-wet, rinsed sail is shown below, and the difference from the initial state is stunning.  (When it dried it looked just the way I'd hoped it would turn out.

 

 

  Fair dinkum, mates !

 

 

[Javelin]

That's a stunning result on that sail. Quite a job to do all of them like that. 

 

Are you going to repaint the hull as well? The green looks quite authenthic, but its application isn't exactly what I'd call "sharp"... On the other side you are restoring, rather than rebuilding...

[druxey]

That is an excellent result, SHJ!

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

5 hours ago, Javelin said:

That's a stunning result on that sail. Quite a job to do all of them like that. 

 

Are you going to repaint the hull as well? The green looks quite authenthic, but its application isn't exactly what I'd call "sharp"... On the other side you are restoring, rather than rebuilding...

  Good questions ...  One thought is to gently go over the paint thats there with automotive rubbing compound to smooth it somewhat (no way would any sort of 'sandpaper' do - as the eyelets used for portholes stand slightly proud, as do 2 rub rails.  I don't want those eyelets to be bright, and perhaps they should be touched up with white paint.  I'll have to gather what early photographs I can of her before making any decisions. As a last resort, an overpainting could be done.

 

  Careful masking would allow a thin black line to be painted at the waterline for 'sharpness'.  The surface could then be made semi-gloss with a little wax.  A better screw should replace the thin, tin one cobbled at some point (whether original or not is unknown - the builder did use some cast metal fittings on the deck, and there were cast props available at the time.  The rudder is gone, so need replacing, as do many deck features.

 

  Restoration v/s Rebuilding ... I guess there will be a mix of each.  If 'only' restoring, the sails would be bent back on the yards (there are no jackstays or foot ropes on the model) and the very simplified rigging scheme would be used ... and the little nails with wrapped thread for railings would also remain (although re-strung).  There would be the antique 'charm', along with all the clumsiness and errors of the original.   If 'rebuilding', then almost everything would be re-done to try an improve accuracy (as much as possible for a 1930's configuration, v/s the ships present museum state as modified in the interim) ... but much of the 'charm' would be lost, without achieving top-notch accuracy (beyond my intermediate - at best - skill level).  Each of these options represent opposite sides of a pendulum swing.

 

  Perhaps I may do something 'in-between' the extremes.  The builder did not have the resources of the MSW, yet went to considerable lengths to do the best job at the time.  Repairing and restoring the hull and masting without too many changes (but those railing DO need upgrading) would respect the original work.  Augmenting/correcting the rigging (learning how to do reasonably proper rigging is my primary interest here) would be consistent with the care done on the sails themselves.  I'd like to consider jackstays and foot ropes for the yards (we'll see) , and bunt lines for the sails.  Bunt lines and halyards (where applicable - there are none presently) would be routed as typical to belaying pins at deck level.

 

  The solid hull does have a nice 'heft' to it.  An improved stand is needed, since the one its on new is very crude (likely not original).  Yes, cleaning all the sails will take time, but that becomes available amongst the various things I'm juggling in semi-retirement.

 

[Roger Pellett]

I wonder if this model was once displayed in a bar or another location where there was heavy tobacco smoke.  I agree with your restoration philosophy.  Too much improvement will just destroy the original builder’s work.  I would clean the hull and repair any damaged paint.  Matching colors should be interesting.  The Cuttyhunk Hard Twisted linen line is good stuff.  I have a couple of spools bought from Model Shipways back in the ‘70’s.  You can sometimes find it on EBay.  

 

Roger

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  A mental 'plan' is being formulated - perhaps one I should write down - on how to proceed.  First should be dismounting the yards and sails - cleaning the sails as already shown and keeping them together with (cleaned) yards in labeled envelopes so they don't get mixed up.

 

  I pondered the delicacy of working on the hull with the masts in place, then tested them carefully and ... I was able to turn each one a little, indicating that they likely were never glued in place - snug perhaps, but the rigging is holding them down.  This may be my lucky break, since after freeing all the lines it seems that the masts can be winkled out of the hull - making restoration much easier.  So I'm likely not to glue masts in on future projects, making life easier for some future restorer (if any).

 

  With a moistened corner of a flannel piece ... (BTW, I've been advised not to use the word 'moist' in mixed company unless it is to describe a cake: e.g., "Mrs. Johnson, you've baked a moist cake.") ... I tried cleaning the dirt off a small area on deck.  And again luck is on my side, since it was first marked (pencil?) for planking and then given a coating of regular (amber) shellac.  I've said on occasion that I'd rather be lucky than smart (although sometimes I'm neither).  This means that the dirt will be relatively easy to lift off without staining any wood underneath or working dust into the grain.  I love shellac, as it often makes a good 'spit coat' on woodwork to be painted.  Once can also apply shellac over wood after oiling or any water soluble colorant or markings are applied, since shellac is alcohol based.

 

  Once the grain is sealed, no worries mate.  So this is another 'note to self' that either amber or clear (blond) shellac on decking will keep out future dust/grime.

 

 

  One should note that things won't glue well after such a treatment, but then I've seen several models where items were just glued to bare wood and had failure.  If one is going to pin deck fixtures firmly wooden doweling may be preferable to metal pins for wooden items, since the wood-to-wood bond between the sides of the pin and the objects being glued will be strong (and a pinned object is often removable).  Either method is far better than relying on glue holding end grain.  So I 'tested' a miserable little wheel shed (perhaps not original) and it 'popped' off of the shellacked deck - perhaps since it looks like a 'Duco' type cement was used (acetone based).

 

  Now it is obvious why so many things were already off (or missing) due to mere surface gluing.  Something with a large surface area (like a deck house) could be glued to a deck prior to protecting with shellac.  

 

  The tops have lubber holes, but I'll have to drill fairleads for clue and bunt lines.  Having the masts off will make it easier to pre-attach the needed blocks.  The metal fittings (in lieu of deadeyes) may be reused since they don't look like dead eyes - which the GF may never have had, but turnbuckles.  What I'm seeing looks like something in-between.  I suppose that better looking turnbuckles could be made on a miniature lathe.

 

  Below is a cross tree - all the masting appears shellacked, and I may leave them that way - perhaps painting the very ends white.

 

 

  The image below shows the forecastle - lots to fix or replicate there.  The port side does indeed have the resting place for the traditional anchor, while the starboard anchor was the modern kind that was just pulled up against the side of the hull.  The indentation in the railing further astern were for the port and starboard lights (missing).

 

 

  My 3 projects will, no doubt, be done piecemeal over an extended period of time.  Fair sailing !

 

 

 

 

[Mirabell61]

good job so far SHJ,

its going to be a fine ship after restoration. The sails are well and neatly sewn, you have bolt ropes sewed on all around, and your cleaning procedure looks great, well done. The hull shall require some special care and I`m sure you`l manage that as well....

 

Nils

[VitusBering]

Kudos for taking on this task, it appears daunting to me.

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

18 hours ago, VitusBering said:

Kudos for taking on this task, it appears daunting to me.

  Yes, there are challenges ... but there are some advantages.  First, there is a model under all the accumulated grime - so I with some care it can be partially de-constructed and saved as well as improved (within reason).  As mentioned earlier, my main interest is in learning about rigging - perhaps not 'dead accurate' or 'painstakingly complete' as some are able to do.  It only has to be 'good enough' for my satisfaction.

 

  Some yards will be in a fixed position, so I'll likely use jeers for those that will be in a raised by halyards.  I don't want to drill holes in any of the masts.)  I'd like to save the shrouds (and maybe the backstays), with lighter ratlines put in last  (method TBD).  Once the masts are out, I can try rigging them 'off model' as Rob has shown on some of his builds.  lets see, sheets will go down to tackle at deck level with deck eyes added for the lowest blocks plus a pin rail around the mast to belay the lines.  Clue and bunt lines should rout through fair leads to pins I'll add to the rail.  Braces will be done as convenient.

 

  An advantage to a barque is that there are no square sails on the mizzen.  Typical clippers with square sails on all three masts must have the mizzen braces go forward in the same area where Main braces run astern.  This makes for a "cat's cradle" appearance (slightly 'gimpy').  I do have to think about the in and out haul lines for the staysails and jibs.  Note that the GF does not have catheads (nor 'whiskers'), thus far fewer lines in the bowsprit area.  I will have to fashion a longer bowsprit so it can be firmly set into a drilled hole ... the one made for the model snapped and was re-glued at some point, and is a vulnerable feature on any clipper model.  Hmmm, maybe one of metal (like the original) might be less vulnerable.

 

  Once again, as has been my tendency through life, there are competing interest/projects for me to bounce between.  Yet 'thinking about' about something for a long time before actually doing anything about it often results in a better outcome.  I've always been good at 'following instructions' and thrive in a structured environment, so for things I find myself 'in the weeds' about - I have to 'create my own instructions' in an unstructured setting in order to go forward. 

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  'Time to jump in and clean the rest of the sails on the fore mast.  The most convenient way (with some care) to remove the sails bent to the yard was to utilize a seam ripper as shown below.  BTW, the drawing specifies a silk shuttle Admiralty order to be made of aprox. 1/8 thick stock.

 

 

  The same method of lightening was used as before, but 4 sails were processed together - same result.  The yards were dirty, and plain water would not remove the grime.  So I thought to try denatured alcohol (presuming the shellac was used on the yards) - which should have softened the shellac and stripped off the grime.  Nothing doing - so it became apparent that a varnish had been used (proof against alcohol).  SO I tried a little MEK 'substitute' (too bad I can't get the real MEK anymore ... should have stocked up on it and genuine trichlor while I could), which said was a 'stripper' for some paints/varnishes.  It seemed to work with a little pressure and working.  Since I didn't want to remove too much (like down to the wood, which did not appear to have been sanded very much ... but then the yards WERE nicely tapered, so perhaps some of the grain was raised with age) - so a wad of 000 (or was it 0000) steel wool took care of most of the remaining discoloration, leaving vey nice yards with most of the original varnish in place.

 

 

  'Sorry that the focus is off, but one may notice a little damage (after my repair) on the top gallant.  This happened by mishandling that sails while still wet from cleaning.  'Seems the sail fabric is actually a linen gauze (per the Admiral, who knows textiles - being an historic seamstress/costumer) that is fragile by nature - but more so when wet. There are many kinds of light fabric (like many flannels) that can be evenly torn along weft or weave just bu evenly pulling with both hands.  So how to fix (once dry).

 

  Per another thread where 'clear' shellac was suggested to use on reefing line to keep straight, a very small amount was tried to seal the sedges of a nasty parting near one edge and a smaller tear on the next (simulated) panel of the sail.  It seemed to 'seal', but even clear shellac has a faint tint, and I could see the area treated once dry.  A better product to use that dries almost invisibly is "Fray Check" - sold at JoAnn Fabrics and many other craft or quilt shops.  A narrow very light cotton patch was sewed to the reverse, but I wasn't satisfied with the lightness of it once done (not un-doable).

 

  A modern machine with variable stitch lengths was used - as there was a need for small stitching.  But attempting to use narrow 'zig-zag' on the smaller tear only made it worse, as lateral forces moved the treads that were 90 degrees to the zig-zag.  OK, so I found some 'blonde' natural fine silk that was a better match for the sails post-cleaning and made a larger patch to be applied to the back.  Pre-turning the edges of the patch would have made for a better repair (should another be required), but the situation was acceptably resolved.  Below are pictured of the results from the front and back.

 

 

  I've seem old photographs of clippers where repairs have been made to some of the sails - as well as joins and differences in appearance among panels of canvas used.  Perhaps I can move this sail to the top gallant position on the main mast.  These are 'first experience' from which I'm learning a lot.

 

 

 

  Now I'm going to proceed with the restoration since a.)  It is something that can be completed in less time than either of the two incomplete builds I have logs for.  b.)  I wan't to get some experience with rigging at 1:100 scale (applicable in other scales as well) since the other two builds are either at or close to that.  c.)  There will have to be a display area set-up in the parlor (cased or not .. a like the idea of being able to closely examine the finished project - although an application of 'dust off' may be needed from time to time) - as one side of the room will ultimately be needed for other works in the future ... a trophy wall?

[Knocklouder]

Wow did that ever whiten those sails amazing  work    

[Keith Black]

 I love restoration logs so I'm all settled in. It's amazing how well the sails cleaned up. 

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  'Had a look at a sail with reefing lines, and the 'flyaway' appearance is something I tried a recently posted method to fix.

 

 

  Step one is to approximate a straightened look manually - just a little moisture on the finger will help, as it does with hair.  Step 2 is to use a convenient tool (in my case a dental tool) that has been dipped a little into clear shellac to apply as shown to a reef line that is off of the sail.  Another tool such as a tweezer held in the non-dominant hand can lift the line as needed.  Note how the line just absorbs some of the shellac from the tool.

 

 

  I did goof and either the bottom of the tool touched the sail (or a little shellac dripped off), and this will cause a faint spot.  So the solution was to dip an end of a Q-tip into alcohol (the shellac solvent), wick off any excess on a paper towel then apply to the shellac spot before it dries.  Flip the Q-tip to the dry end and wick up alcohol from the spot, which will bring some of the shellac with it.  Repeat, and whatever shellac remains will also be spread out further and not be noticed much.  So my procedure is revised to wipe the bottom of the shellac bearing tool so the stuff only gets wicked onto the line.

 

  Then the dental tool was flipped and I used the differently contoured end to gently press the line against the sail as it got 'tacky' ... and it did adhere (but can be pulled away if desired).

 

  The last shows the straightened lines next to some that have yet to be straightened.  I'm OK with the improvement, but the lines that happen to be on the sails is as light as the sails - so they tend to 'blend in'.  My next ides is to used a very weak water color to slightly tint the line.  The water will dry and the alcohol in the shellac to then be used for straightening won't bleed the color.  I've used this technique on other projects.

 

 

  'Did see that a couple lines are longer than some others, so I lifted just the ends of straightened lines, and trimmed as needed (not shown here).

 

 

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

 Edited NOTE:  I've mistaken the title quoted below (readily available) with the ACTUAL title - The Boy's Manual of Seamanship and Gunnery , originally published in 1861 (author C. Burney, publisher Trubner & Co.).  This is apparently a rare , collectible book and not readily available.  Abe books offers a "print on demand" from India of the 1871 edition of the book (with shipping comes to about $30).  So I've ordered one by first logging into my Abe Books account and paid by credit card to have them manage the transaction.  This, method avoids having to deal with an unfamiliar seller overseas.

 

  The reprint of the 1904 book was received, and primarily deals with the Royal Navy life circa 1904.  There are some illustrations of rope work and tackle as was still in use at the time, but not focused on sailing ships.  Once the copy of the 19th century book is received, it will be a different kettle of fish - with more pertinent information on square-rigged ships.  Still, there are portions of interest in the early 20th century book top peruse at leisure.  I can comment on the copy of the older book once received. 

 

'Just found a couple of illustrations from a book originally published in 1904 titled "Manual of SeaManship for Boys and Seamen of the Royal Navy" ... and on the strength of the illustrations, a 'like new' copy of a 2010 reprint was ordered through Amazon for $20 (plus tax and shipping).

 

 

 

  'Looks to me like each stage of reefing omits aspects of the previous stage for clarity.  I hope to learn more about rigging with sails (supposedly gunnery and ship life are also detailed in the book), as my restoration will have the sails set as pretty much as they were on the model as found - with some enhancements.

 

  As predicted, I was able to winkle the fore mast right out of its snug-fitting hole in the solid hull - and this will make working on the hull FAR easier, as well as pre-assembling the yards with sails to the mast and a certain amount of the rigging that will pass through fair leads.  A couple more photos should accompany a subsequent post.

 

  The yards were originally just tied to the masts on the model, where the fixed yards on the clippers had various types of metal pivots - and the movable yards some kind of yoke.  At 1:100 (and also having less skill the exhibited in high-level builds of the Cutty and Flying Fish, to name only two) as well as the more basic aspects of the original build that I do not want to mess too much with, I may bend a length of copper wire to go around the mast, then twisted once with the free ends curved forward to pass through the yard.  This will hold it away from the trunk of the mast, yet pivot to assume the position the yard would be in with the wind coming from a stern quarter.  (Each yard above will have a slightly different angle as explained in several other builds having sails.)

 

Edited July 23, 2023 by Snug Harbor Johnny

[gak1965]

Are you planning on scaling down the rigging? By which I mean that a lot of the lines that are on the ship currently (those braces for example) are way too thick for the scale. I ask b/c if you are talking about adding a lot of additional lines you are going to have to use much smaller lines (which will contrast oddly with the existing braces if you reuse) or use similar sized lines, and drilling the fairleads will reduce the tops to swiss cheese. My thought would be to replace what rigging is there (I think you mentioned replacing the braces), but that's your opt obviously.

 

Regards,

George

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

1 hour ago, gak1965 said:

Are you planning on scaling down the rigging? By which I mean that a lot of the lines that are on the ship currently (those braces for example) are way too thick for the scale. I ask b/c if you are talking about adding a lot of additional lines you are going to have to use much smaller lines (which will contrast oddly with the existing braces if you reuse) or use similar sized lines, and drilling the fairleads will reduce the tops to swiss cheese. My thought would be to replace what rigging is there (I think you mentioned replacing the braces), but that's your opt obviously.

 

Regards,

George

  Well, George .. I've been doing a lot of thinking about this.  For one thing, I'm going to have to replace all of the lines - most likely with scale rope I make on the Rope Rocket. Yes, it will be significantly reduced in thickness - but not entirely to scale.  Now that the fore mast has been removed (and it proved to be relative easy to do so), I see that the upper sections are thicker than if 'true to scale' - and the yards are also thick.  But is this really a bad thing?  I won't replace the masting, if only because it would get too far from being a restoration.  Yet a 'faithful' restoration would be to change as little as practical.

 

  I'm compromising on something 'in between'.  I note that the sails are sized wrong (compared to the original ship), but those are the ones that I'm using since they cleaned up nicely and someone put a lot of work into them ... I can only hope that at some future time in my semi-retirement that I can make a Thermopylae more closely imitating the original (also with the barque rig, yet before she was painted white prior to sale to Portugal) ... see, when I saw the present model at a distance it made me think of the 'Big T' in white.  I do have a photo of Thermie converted to barque rig, but still with the original hull color.

 

  Its noted that the mast I have to work with is fairly stiff and resists bending.  It is probably due to being a.) made of sturdy dowel - as not all dowels are created equal, b.) is somewhat out of scale in the upper sections, and c.) is coated thickly with varnish that may add a 'monocoque' effect - not unlike early aircraft whose strength was enhanced by a metal skin over the framing.  It makes plastic masting/yarding seem rubbery, as late editions of Revel and Airfix ships often turn out to be.  Even the original version bend too much.  I see great advantages to using well-chosen wood.

 

 

 The plan right now is for the course yard and lower topsail yard to be fixed (as usual) - with (for simplicity) will used copper wire bent a shown in the next pic - the upper topsail will have a yoke and parrel, then a fixed lower topgallant and a moveable upper topgallant.  Sure, this isn't 'right', but its pretty much how the model was made and its the hand I'm dealt.

 

    During lunch at per-diem work today I made a crude sketch .  The masting can have a hole for the halyard of the two yards that will be setup as movable.  The lower topsail and topgallant yards will have a crane, and the course yard will have a chain.  This will be better than just 'tying the yards to the mast' with line as done originally.  The upper topgallant will have a slack lift (since it will be raised), simple downhaul tackle, no clew lines (per Underhill) and the sail will have a slab line on either side - so the blocks on the yard near the mast will be double blocks (for the down haul and slab line on either side).

 

  I want to take advantage of (as shown in Underhill) how two bunt lines can be merged into a single control line ... and also how the leech line can be combined with the outer bunt line (in one of 2 ways).  This can reduce three lines (leech, bunt and bunt) into a single line to go down to the deck .. thus greatly reducing the amount of fairleads that get drilled into the top above the course yard.  Now bunt block were like something like 6" blocks (150mm), so using 1.5mm seed beads (perhaps 2mm) will be adequate for these - and other 6"blocks.  8" blocks would be 2mm at 1:100, but I have some that size and appear daunting to work with - but a compromise at 2 1/2mm can make things easier.

 

 

 

 

 

    Now the yards below can have a hole drilled near the yard ends for the sheets of the sail above - routed to a double block in the center of each yard and thence downwards in front of the mast (no fairleads needed except for a couple on the undersides of the yards).  Since the yards are a bit thicker than need be, I'll have to see what to do about mounting jackstays and foot ropes (not shown on the sketch).  Worst case I can bend the sails to the yards as was done originally and omit foot ropes ... but either would be a nice enhancement, and practice to see if my hands can do the work.

 

  The lower topgallant is the highest sail to have reef points, but (per Underhill) being fixed it has a clew line - so the double block on the yard near the mast will be for the clew line and reef tackle.  The yard below, being movable, will have a double inner block for the down haul and reef tackle.  The lower topsail yard below that .. a double inner block for the clew lines and reef tackle.  With these simplifications, I'm counting only 11 lines on each side that would pass through the top above the main course yard ... not exactly Swiss cheese.

 

  'Early days yet.  I figure on learning as I go (still waiting for the Seamanship manual) and solving snags or re-thinking as needed.  And I also have to think about what I have to do on the hull and deck areas once the masting is cleared away.  A lot of time to go in 'dry dock' !

 

Johnny

 

 PS ...  Speaking of scale, the ship pictured below of some 450' would have about a 54" hull modeled at 1:100 ... a whopper.

 

 

Edited July 21, 2023 by Snug Harbor Johnny

[gak1965]

https://www.bluejacketinc.com/shop/model-ships/kits-model-ships/sailing-vessels-and-work-boats/schooner-wyoming-k1113/

 

Wyoming at 1:96. 56" LOA....

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  'Sorry mates for my SNAFU over the book title previously posted.  That portion was edited as a precaution.  What happened as there are two similar titles that confused me when trying to order 'The Boy's Manual of Seamanship and Gunnery' (1861, reprinted 1871), but what popped up on line was 'Manual of Seamanship for Boys and Seamen of the Royal Navy' (1904) ... two very different books, although of interest to some in MSW.  I can only chalk it up to the hazards of trusting Artificial Intelligence.

 

  The latter book (once paged through) did not have the illustrations previously posted on reefing details ... or the other details sought, although it did have lots of other cool things relating to service aboard Naval ships in the 'pre-dreadnought' era.  Once my misstep was discovered, better research was done on the desired book having the sort of illustrations fro square riggers ... and a 'print on demand' can be had from India through Abe Books.  My edit is pasted below as further precaution:

 

 Edited NOTE:  I've mistaken the title quoted below (readily available) with the ACTUAL title - The Boy's Manual of Seamanship and Gunnery , originally published in 1861 (author C. Burney, publisher Trubner & Co.).  This is apparently a rare , collectible book and not readily available.  Abe books offers a "print on demand" from India of the 1871 edition of the book (with shipping comes to about $30).  So I've ordered one by first logging into my Abe Books account and paid by credit card to have them manage the transaction.  This, method avoids having to deal with an unfamiliar seller overseas.

 

  The reprint of the 1904 book was received, and primarily deals with the Royal Navy life circa 1904.  There are some illustrations of rope work and tackle as was still in use at the time, but not focused on sailing ships.  Once the copy of the 19th century book is received, it will be a different kettle of fish - with more pertinent information on square-rigged ships.  Still, there are portions of interest in the early 20th century book top peruse at leisure.  I can comment on the copy of the older book once received. 

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  'Saw a fascinating video & thought I'd share ... as long as the link stays active in the either ...

 

 

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

There are six common 'seats of comfort' at the bow of Victory for some 800 crewmen .. a few less subtracting officers.  Looks like all facets of life aboard were 'figured out' for efficiency - the space for crew hammocks seems barely enough (tight pack?).  And even in the Admiral's area there were guns stowed that could be brought into action once the partitions were lifted out of the way.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Snug Harbor Johnny

[gak1965]

Given the location, I would say that speed was of the essence. I imagine few would tarry while the ship was taking bow spray or in the rain....

 

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

   A man, a plan, a canal - Panama ...  My favorite palindrome, but one that emphasizes that I need to plan out how the control lines should be routed to belaying pins at deck level - as opposed to just 'winging it'.    Each line needs to have a purpose, even if simplified for this restoration, yet be a manageable compromise for the scale and scope being dealt with.  The initial crude sketch was redone a bit better, with the addition of compromise fairleads to be added to the main top - to avoid having too many at 1:100.

 

  The low-end borrowed camera overexposed the central area of the sketch, but rudimentary Photoshop adjustment helped a little.

 

  The fore and main masts will be the same as far as the square sails go.   7 of the main top fair leads have a single line passing through, and 9 are shared by 2 lines.  The yards will first have blocks and sails mounted, then the intact masts from the model will be fitted with blocks, shrouds and the yards off-model.  Any work on the hull must precede the addition of the masts.

 

  Fore stays will be typical and fitted with stay sails as applicable, followed by rigging/belaying the halyard and sheet tackle around the masts.   The lines from the fairleads get belayed before the lower shrouds are fixed and adjusted.  Braces will have to be added sometime, as rigging lines become more crowded - as will ratlines.  There's a lot yet 'to be determined', but a course is charted - more or less.

 

  Then there was 'Napoleon's lament' (also a palindrome): "Able was I ere I saw Elba."

 

As for me, "Are we not drawn onward, we few, drawn onward to new era?"                           Johnny

 

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  'Very busy this time of year - especially with some breaks in the heat for outside work.  Yet there is opportunity to think about the project at hand while doing all sorts of other things.  Guess the idea is to 'measure twice, cut once'.  Considerations include:

 

1.)  Re-thinking walnut blocks.  I've always liked walnut, and for deadeyes they seem pretty good as-is.  But they appear too dark for blocks to my eye, and lighter colored wood may be preferable.  Now late-period clippers had internally stropped blocks for the most part, so wrapping wood blocks with line makes me scratch my head.  Rob made good used of molded Cutty (1:96 kit) blocks on models he's made - yet even so they appear somewhat out of scale, strictly speaking.

 

2.) The scale issue.  As mentioned elsewhere, a 6" block would be about 1.5mm at 1:100, and 8" block would be about 2mm and a 10" deadeye would be about 2.5mm ... all pretty small stuff for fingers that just don't want to work things that small (like mine).  Obviously, going larger can help - but that can only go so far until the blocks really DO look overly large.

 

  So an idea covering two of the above came to me as I escorted the Admiral at a bead and polished stone show recently ... that is Czech demi-round glass beads in a flat, coppery-brown color - which I found at the show.  In the photo below are the three sizes I bought to try:  #11, roughly corresponding to a 2mm (8") block t 1:100 - meant to serve for my representations of 6" single blocks (bunt or others);  #8, about 3mm or about a 12" block at the above scale - meant to serve as a nominal 8" - 10" block (single or double);  and #6, about 16" at scale, meant to serve as a nominal 12" triple block where applicable.

 

 

  These seem to be the available sizes (no #7s or 10s), and the color could be a little lighter - but one must use the tools one has.  For a simple block with no becket, I'll put a line through the bead and tie a 'hangman's noose (which nicely pulls one end of the line into the 'shank' of the noose) - then pull the noose tight on the bead block.  Where a line would go from a becket, another noose is made opposite the first - simple.  In some cases thin copper or black finished copper wire might be just twisted after passing through a bead (with one end trimmed close to the twist) - also simple, so it satisfies the KISS rule (Keep It Simple, Stupid).

 

  I see now the advantages of working in 1:70 scale - and even better at 1:48.  Then it is much easier to use 'real wood blocks'.  Now there are some highly skilled practitioners who can do amazing feats of miniaturization - and I doff my hat to them (and am tempted to build a small shrine to do homage).  I'll always be glad to see truly fine work (and there is plenty of examples found on MSW), but as for me - I'm mainly trying to learn and appreciate  bygone era while making something now and then at a skill level I can manage.

 

  The Gorch Fock has turnbuckles instead of laced deadeyes, yet the little fittings used on the model at hand represent (sort of) deadeyes.  I found something called a 'bar' for beadwork, but it  may be too large (6 scale feet) as shown below.  I'm considering tying beads through a short length of thin brass tube to represent aprox. 3' turnbuckles.

 

3.)  I'd like most of what I do on the GF to be 'reversible', for someday additional maintenance or repair might be needed.  This might be compared to making work done on 'Old Masters' reversible by future conservators.  Hence means of pinning, tying and wrapping should be preferred over outright gluing.  As already mentioned, I'm fortunate that the masts will come right out of the solid hull, simplifying life considerably.

 

4.)  There are no 'instructions' per-se that go along with this project - hence I'm constantly thinking things out in two ways.  he first is how to accomplish what I'm planning to do step-by-step clearly in mind before doing anything.  The 'other' way of thinking has me imagining I'm a 'scaled down' man who has to climb aloft to do all the functions a sailor might have to do.  Can I get everywhere I need to go?  Are the handholds and foot ropes appropriate.  How will the lines run, and can they be managed at deck level for the intended task?

 

  The quality of instructions, detail and order of operations that go with model kits is critical for those learning the art of ship modeling.  What is provided by various kits (both old and new) is highly variable in quality and accuracy.  That is why the various builds found in MSW are an invaluable aid to those not expert in the craft (like old Johnny).

 

  There will be both simplifications and enhancements on this restoration, to be sure, but I think the result will be rewarding.

 

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  'Tried using a 50-50 clear/amber shellac mix to test on some reef points per the previously posted 'straightening' method - since the pale threads seemed nearly invisible against the cleaned sail material.  This was to see if I could eliminate a step, the first step being to tint the points with water color prior to using clear amber to tame the 'flyaway' nature of loose threads.

 

  I wasn't keen on the shortcut for a few reasons - so the tint first, then straighten with clear shellac method was settled on with a reasonably good result.  The reef points are not really 'glued' to the sail (but the micro fibers do tend to adhere), and portions of each point (and some in their entirety) are free of the sail.  Yet they remain relatively straight, but with slight bend in some - which seems 'natural' in that they are NOT strictly in rows like men at attention.  It is better than a 'bad hair day' appearance for sure, which they had before.  The topmost sail has no points.  Looking closely, the method of reef point application appears to be passing a fine thread from the back (leaving a tail loose), passing the needle back through the sail a couple warp threads over and then back out the front through or near the original needle hole.  No knot was needed,

 

 

 Now I'll have to dismount all remaining sails (keeping them in order with the yards from their respective masts), clean then treat the points.  I've ordered appropriate three-hole stanchions for better railings from Age of Sail, as well as lifeboats, a prop and two types of anchors - plus a few odds and ends.  I saw an interesting picture recently, so I'm attaching it to this below:

 

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

   Well mates,  a detail very important to this project is how to handle the closed turnbuckles for the shrouds.  The crude cast deadeyes in pot metal (common back in the day) don't jive with the original ship, but were likely what was available and practical when the model was built.  A number of concepts were considered, concurrent with whatever else I've been doing (except when 'focusing' when special attention was needed).  At last I tried to make a 'plan' with a sketch (pictured below), that might make sense to someone familiar with machining.  Yeah, my first few attempts proved that theory and practice are often different things ... and the smallest brass tube easily available does not have enough wall thickness to machine per concept.

 

 

  The space available was tight to avoid excessive bending of the material (which did indeed bend some, so light multiple cuts were needed).  The 'hex filing' (how a turnbuckle works, by twisting the body so the opposing RH and LH threads will either pull the ends inward together or outward) is just not practical with so little material on the tiny piece available ... but at 1:100 it doesn't have to be represented.  Below is a photo of the lathe spinning ... the camera managed to 'freeze' the chuck, but the higher frequency vibrations on the workpiece make for a little blur.  Simple cuts were made with just the tool seen.

 

  As planned, the model trail track saw cut through the brass tube and let the part slide on the drill - sown taken out of the tail stock below.

 

  Moved off the drill bit, you can see the small size in the palm of my hand. (A little out of focus - and I've been having mechanical/continuity problems with the Admiral's cast-off camera ... I may seek something better.)

 

 

 

 

  The next step is to make a couple eyes by twisting 22 gauge beading wire around the same drill used to support the brass tube in the lathe.

 

 

 

 

  Each eye was put into one end of the closed turnbuckle body.  Crimping with the semi-circular opening of the bead working crimper didn't work out, and deformed the eye a bit - fixed with a fine awl.  You can see that the next two crimping spots have a 'teat' on one side that proved to be far better to secure the other eye (also used on the first eye) without distortion.

 

  Below is the first successful turnbuckle made .. a little 'rough', but I forgot to apply a fine jeweler's file while still spinning on the lathe to even out the fine waves that are inevitable when machining (they also show more on a small part magnified by photography.  In the corner of the picture, part of the one ring of power can be seen - at least it exerts power over me (We serves the Mistress of the precious).

 

 

  Now there are over 50 of these to make (plus some extras), so that will occupy me for a while ... goes with the hobby.  The last picture in this post compares a fitting from the model with the type I plan on using in the restoration ... both about 1/2" OAL - a little out of scale, but I can't easily make turnbuckles any smaller (not that it is impossible, but I'll go ahead with what I have at hand).

 

 

 

   'Feels good to have moved the ball a little further downfield.     

 

 

[Rick310]

Really well done!!  You’re doing a wonderful job!!!

Rick

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  Today (my only day off from hospital service this week) my order from Ages of Sail finally arrived ... since the parts needed for the restoration (plus a couple other items) just topped $150, they shipped for free ...  But the lowest price (for the shipper) FedEx ground coast-to-coast did take longer (9 days) than if I'd paid extra for expedited service.  Since I wasn't in a rush, that didn't matter, but if you need something in a hurry, then by all means pay to save time.

 

  The first picture show the 80 3-hole stanchions ordered to replace the crude nails used on the model (likely what was available at the time).  They are the right size for 1:100.  There are a pair of binnacles and modern anchors, but I'll use only one of each.  The modern anchor goes on the starboard side against the hull (fully retracted).  Its alway 'like Christmas' when a shipment like this arrives.

 

  Next up are some ladders, two sizes of boats - life boats to be stored forward, and two smaller boats for the aft davits.  There's and old-fashioned anchor to go in the deck area allotted for stowage on the port side.

 

 

  The additional items include a 2-bladed prop for the Endurance eventually to be made (I plan on using the 4-bladed metal prop from that kit on the Gorch Fock), and the single hole stanchions (also for the Endurance) that I couldn't get earlier from another source.  The aprox 1:70 scale of the OcCre kit means the 15mm stanchions represent about 41" high ... close enough.  There were no 12mm available that would represent 33" and 10mm would have been too short.  And yes, covered by the pack of ladders are three more turnbuckles made for the Gorch Fock - they are pictured separately below.  I'm beginning to get a little practice with them, and made three in 1 hour.

 

  There is some variation in size, since I'm 'eyeballing' it at this scale - but not too much and I can always sort them so that the slightly shorter turnbuckles will be aloft, and everything at each level will look alike.  With more practice they will look a little better, and I should be able to do about 4 an hour.

 

 

  'Did another look and I'll need at least 74 altogether ...  with some rejects (and breaks) that should take 20 some hours to do.  Likely this will be spced out over a number of days.

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  I realized that my single point cutting tool (mostly what I've used on brass and aluminum - but a few things in mild steel) was likely dulled, and an examination with a 16x loupe confirmed this.  The flat faces were lapped with a little water against a finishing stone and looked at with every few strokes.  This improved the point considerably.  The point was also a little below 'center' with the length it was extended to, so a brass shim easily corrected this.  The result was better cutting (duh).

 

  Fooling around with gel CA was redundant because   A.) a light lubricant applied to the supporting drill left contaminated (dark) oil inside the workpieces, which had to be cleaned out with a miniature swab before any glue would stick   B.)  some Ca would still squeeze out during crimping and have to be removed once cured   C.)  'Getting the hang' of crimping followed by a pull test using a pin through each eye and pulling well more than a shroud could exert proved that properly crimped eyes in the turnbuckle bodies will not fail ... due to proof testing each one.  D.) any glue residue makes it more difficult to darken the brass, unless painting is chosen.

 

  The next consideration was how to darken the brass ... and there have been various discussions on how to do this elsewhere in MWS.  Some methods take a relatively long exposure, and I thought I'd like to find something with 'quick results'.  After fooling around (like some alchemist not knowing what to do) with a variety of things on hand, I stumbled upon something that is good enough for me.  There were two agents that were tried separately, with no apparent effects - not even when looked at the next day.  But applying one first with the corner of a rag moistened by the agent (wearing disposable nitrile gloves, of course) - then applying the corner of a second rag treated with the second agent ... an immediate chemical 'browning' occurred.  I'd liken this to something made of shiny brass that was allowed to slowly take on a brown patina through oxidation - and that can take a long time to occur naturally.

 

  The first agent is known as 'Livers of Sulphur', and is used by jewelers, so I suppose can be found on-line.  I happened to buy a small plastic bottle of it at a gunsmith shop specializing in 'old time' gunsmithing ... Pennsylvania long rifles, as hunting is a popular sport during an exclusive black powder season in PA, where there are extensive state gamelands set aside for hunters.  A description is pasted below:

 

  Note they say it does not want to work on brass, which I can confirm by trying it alone.  But the second agent is an 'instant' gun blue - also bought at the same gun shop, but is generally common to many gun shops as factory bluing may need re-touching due to abrasion or rust spotting due to delayed or incomplete cleaning after use on the range.  Birchwood-Casey is a common brand name, but there are others similarly formulated with phosphoric acid, cupric sulfate and selenious acid ... note that extensive direct contact can result in the absorption of selenium, toxic in excess of the trace amounts found in foods and vitamin supplements (so wear gloves ... but it is swallowing the stuff that can be fatal, duh).  Both agents can irritate skin due to acid content, but the nitrile gloves are more than adequate protection, and there were no fumes that I could detect.

 

  So rubbing with liver of sulphur (sparingly), then with the instant gun blue produced a quick browning of the brass.  The photo below was on the brass tubing stock I'm using to turn the turnbuckle bodies, and the flash of the camera makes the visual comparison less clear, but the untreated tube is bright brass versus a nice brown patinated tube - like one lying around a few years.

 

 

 

  Below are the few assemblies I've made (not many really, and I'm working on making better eyes and cutting better bodies), all but one of which had CA applied (an unnecessary step per my above comments) before or after assembly ... the ones on the right are patinated while the three on the left are not (for comparison).  The one in the center was the last one made and NOT glued ... it seems to have browned the best.

 

 

 

  The eyes are made of jewelry/beading wire, and must be coated to keep the wire bright over time.  I'll have to see if there is a solvent that will take the coating off ... or I'll simply leave them as they are, since a little brass can 'pimp' the model.  Actually I've no objection of using brass on a ship model, as those items will eventually get a natural toning.

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  I've chauffeured the Admiral to another gem and bead show, and continued to scout out any possible fittings or findings while I was there.  Some nice eyes with long shanks were found - to be used as deck eyes that can be pushed far enough into the deck of the solid hull (after pre-drilling slightly undersized holes) so that the tension will be enough to prevent pulling out under the slight tension that might be exerted by new rigging.

 

  I looked for what are referred to as 'bar spacers' to use as turnbuckles (as making them one by one is time consuming ... but then is there a shortage of time - other than waiting for the last call to sea?).  Nothing was found, and an on-line search (including Fire Mountain - a major supplier) did not turn up anything suitable that was not gold-filled, ergo $$$.  So I'm sticking with my present fabrication plan.

 

  Completely darkened turnbuckles caused the fine diameter differences turned on them to mostly 'disappear', given the small size and scale.  So a small file was used to remove the color from between the collars meant to represent where a spanner would be placed during tension adjustment of a shroud.  Uncolored assemblies were colored with fine paint applicators with the reagents in order, and that did darken the bands of those pieces.  I happen to like this look better, so when more are turned from pre-darkened tube - the collars will remain dark and the minor diameters will have fresh brass exposed. 

 

  The turnbuckles might just be painted white, as railings can also be painted white, but as said before, I like the look of brass (which will age gradually and get a patina) and paint often 'gunks up' fine details.  A photo of some assemblies is below ... only 74 more to go !