subject: Re: Overview accessing article spool?

text:
On 2007-07-12, Maurice Janssen <[email]> wrote:

Thanks for the fast pointer! Actually 'nnrpdcheckart' is
set to true, which would answer my initial question, but
immediately raise another one ;-) Since i'm kind of a INN-
Newbie, i'm now wondering how much "damage" i'd have to
expect by setting 'nnrpdcheckart' to false? Is this kind
of a "better safe than sorry" setting and can be set to
false without regretting this immediately?

Thanks,

	Frank


author: Russ Allbery

subject: Re: Overview accessing article spool?

text:
Frank Fegert <[email]> writes:

Yeah, but nnrpd serializes all of those operations, so you lose potential
I/O performance to system call overhead.  timecaf is about the worst
possible storage mechanism to use from the nnrpdcheckart perspective; I
think every other storage mechanism would be faster.

It still sounds like it's slower than I would expect, but it's not
horribly surprising.


subject: Re: Overview accessing article spool?

text:
Frank Fegert <[email]> writes:

It's the way I prefer to do it too.

Note that you'll get better performance with a real-world server than you
do with innxmit since with innxmit you're probably bound by network
latency and you'll get better performance with multiple simultaneous
article streams.

innd still blocks on I/O, though, so there's a limit to how good of
performance you can get out of it at the moment.  (The really fast news
servers are multithreaded.)


author: Maurice Janssen

subject: Re: Overview accessing article spool?

text:
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 07:58:46 +0200, Frank Fegert wrote:

The only downside I've ever experienced, is that a news client can
receive overview data for articles that are no longer available.  So
when the clients wants to receive that article, it gets an error message
that the article is not available.  IIRC this is fixed when you run the
expire process (the missing article well be removed from overview), but
until then the above might happen.
For me, this is not a big problem.  And if you don't honor cancel
messages, then I suppose it won't happen at all.


author: Frank Fegert

subject: Re: Overview accessing article spool?

text:
On 2007-07-15, Russ Allbery <[email]> wrote:

Thanks for explaining! I was already wondering where the avg.
3k/s and max. 10-20k/s syscalls were coming from ;-)
So converting the timecafs to CNFS or tradspool seems the way
to go. I'll start some tests on monday, to see which one works
better with ZFS.

Thanks,

	Frank


subject: Re: Overview accessing article spool?

text:
On 2007-07-13, Maurice Janssen <[email]> wrote:

We do allow certain cancels, so the situation you described will
probably occur.
Let my try to explain the original problem, maybe there's another
solution i'm not seeing. We recently updated our server:
  Solaris 8 -> Solaris 10
  INN 2.3.2 -> 2.4.3
  1 GB      -> 4 GB RAM
  4x 36GB   -> 8x 73GB mirrored stripe disk spool
  UFS       -> ZFS

With the additional disk space it seemed like a good thing for
the users to up the expire times (approx. factor 5). Now with
about twice as many timecaf-files (~80k) and about 10M articles
in spool things get a little slow if you're opening a groups
overview. Especially if the group contains a large number of
unread articles. CPU, memory and even disk I/O do not seem to
be the cause, everything is at or below 15% (20% max) usage.
truss'ing a Test-NNRPD showed that it spends most of its time
reading lots of timecaf files, which i now know is due to the
nnrpdcheckart option. What puzzles me is that although it seems
the reads/seeks of the timcaf files are the bottleneck, the I/O
on the machine is nowhere near the machines limit. A test with
a much bigger server and some fast SAN storage showed the same
behaviour - the overview is just crawling if nnrpdcheckart is
set to true. Might this be an Solaris oddity, or has someone
similar experiences?

Thanks,

	Frank


subject: Re: Overview accessing article spool?

text:
On 2007-07-15, Frank Fegert <[email]> wrote:

Following up on the ZFS subject. I'm currently feeding the existing
spool on my test machine (~10M articles) into a new tradspool. This
is done via innxmit - probably not the preferred method, but the one
obvious to me ;-) The tradspool is residing on a ZFS-mirrored-stripe
(2 way mirror of 4 striped 70GB disks). The ZFS record size is set
to 32k.
Now innstat tells me the inn is processing about 160 Arts/sec., with
CPU about 10% and disk I/O about 10-20% busy evenly on all disks.
Has someone a Arts/sec. value for comparison?

Thanks,

	Frank


author: Julien ÉLIE

subject: Re: Overview accessing article spool?

text:
En rï¿½ponse ï¿½ Frank Fegert :

Well, I do not know whether my post will be of help but according
to what you say, I have checked what changed regarding overview:

[2.4.0] A new option, tradindexedmmap, has been added to inn.conf. If set to true
(the default), then the tradindexed overview method will use mmap() to access
its overview data (in 2.3 you couldn't control this; it always used mmap).

-> perhaps you do not currently use it.  Check if it is set to false
   (the default is true so, if you changed nothing, it is not the problem)

[2.4.3] Previous versions of INN had an optimization for handling XHDR Newsgroups
that used the Xref header from overview. While this does make the command much faster,
it doesn't produce accurate results and breaks the NNTP protocol, so this optimization
has been removed.

-> do you send XHDR requests?

Other things to check would be overcachesize (I for one put 384, instead of the
default 15) and nfsreader if you use NFS storage.

If nothing changes, could you enable nnrpdoverstats and see whether there is
something wrong?

Regarding Solaris, did you check the file descriptor limit?

http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/software/inn/docs/install.html#S12

I am not sure whether my suggestions can solve your problem (and even if they
are linked to it) but I believe it is better to say it.


subject: Re: Overview accessing article spool?

text:
On 2007-07-14, Julien ï¿½LIE <[email]> wrote:

No, we're using ovdb which in itself is pretty fast: 30k article
overview with "nnrpdcheckart: false" in ~5 sec. With "nnrpdcheckart:
true" well over 4 Min. :-(

I didn't see those in truss/strace, but that doesn't necessarily
mean they weren't sent ;-)

The storage is directly attached and according to the inn.conf man-
page overcachesize seems only to be used for tradindexed: "This
setting is ignored unless ovmethod is set to tradindexed."

The default FD-limit for Solaris has been 256 for quite a while now.
Since Solaris would complain very much about running out of FDs and
since during the overview the timecaf files are accessed in a serial
manner rather than parallel, i'd think FDs aren't the cause of the
problem.

Thanks for your hints. Even if they don't apply directly it's a
good thing to make sure and double check ;-)

In the meantime i talked to some newsadmins running similar sized
servers. Some have set "nnrpdcheckart: false" a long time ago,
others (also) use other storage methods. Since ZFS (being a flat
nonbalanced tree) *should* perform way better on a large number
of files than the old Solaris UFS, i think i'll go ahead and do
a comparison of the different storage methods. Even if that does
not yield good results, i always have the option to go ahead and
turn off nnrpdcheckart.

Still, if someone has a bright idea on the subject please don't
hesitate to followup ;-)

Thanks,

	Frank


author: John Kopf

subject: Ship Modeling FAQ, Part 01/15 (Contents, where to find FAQ: 10K)

text:
Archive-name: ship-models-faq/part01
Posting-Frequency: monthly
Expires: Fri, 2 August 1996 00:00:00 GMT
Last-modified: 18 June 1996

This is the Frequently Asked Questions FAQ (part 01) on ship modeling.

Obligatory Disclaimer: The information contained in this message was
contributed by individuals, who, unless otherwise indicated, speak
only for themselves and not the institutions or businesses they are
associated with.  The author(s) and editor(s) of this material make no
warranties as to the correctness of the information provided.

This material should be considered copyright by the author(s).  This
material may be redistributed for non-commercial use without explicit
permission of the author(s) as long as the text is used exactly as is
(except for reformatting) and the author(s) is given full written credit
for the material.  Commercial use requires explicit permission of the
author(s).

The set of FAQs is, quite frankly, oriented toward access using a
"World Wide Web Browser" (e.g, Netscape, Mosaic, Internet Explorer,
etc.); reading it with such a tool you'll find "links" to other sites
of interest.

{   A note about the addresses presented.  When I show:
    http://www.seaways.com/faq/faqind.html
     ...that is interpreted as:
    http:// www.seaways.com /faq/faqind.html
    ^^^^    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    |       |                   |_ the path to the file
    |       |__ the Internet address
    |___ the method - in this case, HTTP
     ....these are shown in this way so that people viewing this FAQ
     using a World Wide Web browser -such as Netscape or Mosaic- can
     simply click on these addresses to go there.

 NOTE:  I record these addresses, but don't necessarily visit them on a
        regular basis.  Thus, I may not know if they "disappear".  If
        you try to access one and it appears to be no longer available,
        please send me Email at: mailto:[email] ; I'll check it
        out and delete the reference if it's really gone.  Thanks.
}

Disclaimer:  My personal experience is with traditional, static wooden
ship models.  Thus the answers below lean toward that aspect.  PLEASE
feel free to provide me with information on other aspects (e.g.,
plastic ship models, etc.).

NOTE:  New material each month is flagged with the string "*NEW*".

                        CONTENTS
                        ========

(FAQ Part 01):
        Table of Contents
0.      Where is the FAQ?
        Contributers

(FAQ Part 02):
    PREPARATION
1.      I don't have the patience to build a ship model (?)
2.      Where do I get started in making rc model boats?
3.      What is a good beginner's model kit to start with?
4.      Whats the difference between "bread-and-butter", plank-on-
        bulkhead, and plank-on-frame construction?
5.      What's the difference between Beginner, intermediate, or
        advanced Kits?
6.      What experience have other modelers had with the European kits?
7.      What tools do I need to get started?

(FAQ Part 03):
8.      What scale should I use?
9.      How does one change the scale of plans?
10.     What woods are recommended?
    THE HULL
11.     How do I scratch-build a modern hull?

(FAQ Part 04):
12.     How do I bend wood for a ship model?
13.     How do I use paper templates to check the hull shape?
14.     How do I cutting the bevel(s) on a bulkhead/frame of a model?

(FAQ Part 05):
15.     How do you drill the mast holes in a solid-hull ship model?
  DETAILS
16.     Should models be painted or left natural wood?
17.     I'm looking for a source of sheet copper for plating a model?
18.     How is the copper applied?
19.     How do you paint and mask camouflage detail?
20.     Does anyone have any experience and/or tips on how to use slide
        cover glass to make windows?

(FAQ Part 06):
21.     How does one work with "real" scale rivets?
22.     What is "lead sickness"?
    RIGGING
23.     What can be used for fine rigging line?
24.     How does one assemble rigging?
25.     How do I install ratlines?
26.     Do ratlines extend beyond the futtock shrouds to the lubbers
        hole?  Is the futtock shroud tied directly to the main shroud.?
27.     How can rigging line be made to hang naturally?
28.     How do I build small blocks for model sailing ships?
    OTHER STUFF...
29.     What is meant by "Museum Quality" ship models?
30.     Where can I find plans for the Frigate (HMS) Rose?
31.     How do I get a ship model appraised (for insurance purposes)?
32.     I'am looking for info or suggestings on model subs?

(FAQ Part 07):
33.     Why do {your choice} cost so much?
34.     Where can I get 1/72 scale coast guard decals?
35.     Am modeling a Fletcher and need up to date colors etc.?
36.     How do I make small, inexpensive cast plastic fittings?
37.     Is CA glue reliable?

(FAQ Part 08):
38.     How do I clean a model?
39.     What do I use for sails?
40.     What are the correct USN Camouflage Measures?
41.     What is accurizing?
42.     How do I Clean up Ship Decks?
43.     How do I eliminate the fuzz on model rigging?

(FAQ Part 09):
100.    Are there any ship modeling clubs?

(FAQ Part 10 & 11):
  (FAQ Part 10):
101.    Where can I find... ?
 101-A.  RECOMMENDED BEGINNER KITS
 101-B:  KITS, FITTINGS, ETC.
 101-C.  TOOLS
  (FAQ Part 11):
 101-D.  LUMBER & OTHER MATERIALS
 101-E.  MISCELLANEOUS
 101-F.  SHIP MODEL and MARITIME DEALERS, APPRAISERS, BUILDERS,
                CONSERVERS

(FAQ Part 12):
102.    Where can I find information... ?

(FAQ Part 13):
103.    What are some good books... ?

(FAQ Part 14):
104.    What's available on the Internet?

(FAQ Part 15):
105.    What's available on the WWW?

(The latter six questions have disjoint numbering so I won't have to
renumber frequently.)

        ###############################################

0.      Where is the FAQ?
    A:  The FAQ is posted at the beginning of each month.  It goes to
        news:rec.models.scale.  The FAQs also go to news:news.answers
        and news:rec.answers, which most sites tend to keep around for
        a while. They are archived at (access via FTP):
    ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/news.answers/ship-models-faq (.ZIP files)
        -or at-:
    ftp://mirrors.aol.com/pub/rtfm/usenet/rec.models.scale
        -or at-:
    ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/rec.models.scale    (.ZIP files)
        -- or via WWW at:
    http://www.seaways.com/faq/faqind.html
    http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/ship-models-faq/

Alternative FTP sites (these tend to be old copies) are:
  Europe: ftp://ftp.uni-paderborn.de/pub/FAQ/rec.models.scale
          ftp://ftp.Germany.EU.net/pub/newsarchive/news.answers/ship-models-faq
          ftp://ftp.sunet.se/pub/usenet/rec.models.scale
        -- or via WWW at:
          http://www.cs.ruu.nl/wais/html/na-dir/ship-models-faq/.html
  Asia:   ftp://ftp.hk.super.net/mirror/faqs/ship-models-faq

E-MAIL:
------
If you do not have http or anonymous ftp access, RTFM.MIT.EDU can send
the FAQ to you via email.  Send e-mail to:
    mailto:[email]
...subject ignored, and the body containing:
    HELP
...for instructions.

                CONTRIBUTERS
                ============

The following people have contributed to this FAQ:

John Berg                       mailto:[email]
Mike Bishop                     mailto:[email]
William Blakely
John Beaderstadt                mailto:[email]
Denis Bohm                      http://www.gremlins.com
John Bonnett
John Buehler                    mailto:[email]
Thomas Burkman Sr.              mailto:[email]
Burl Burlingame
PhilCampbell                    mailto:[email]
Monica Chaban                   mailto:[email]
Bev Clark
Derek Conlon                    mailto:[email]
David Cooper
Chuck Cowman                    mailto:[email]
Simon Craven                    mailto:[email]
Kerry David                     mailto:[email]
Brett W. Denner                 mailto:[email]
Tom Dougherty
Sten Ekedahl                    mailto:[email]
Clayton A. Feldman              mailto:[email]
Steve Gallacci
Ron Ginger                      mailto:[email]
Robert Godfrey                  mailto:[email]
J. J. Gordon Jr.                mailto:[email]
David C Graf                    mailto:[email]
Kurt Greiner (Seaphoto)         mailto:[email]
W. Hannan                       mailto:[email]
Paul & Victoria Heisner
John Huggins
Dan Johnston                    mailto:[email]
Steve Kennedy
Olaf Kievit
John O. Kopf                    mailto:[email]
V.L. Kraut
Kevin Lambie                    mailto:[email]
Ben Langford                    mailto:[email]
Mark Lardas                     mailto:[email]
Pete Law                        mailto:[email]
Michael Long                    mailto:[email]
David Loseke
Abe Lynn
Dana L. McCalip                 mailto:[email]
Andrew Madison                  mailto:[email]
Dave Mainwaring                 mailto:[email]
Bob Marek                       mailto:[email]
Gary Newman                     mailto:[email]
William Nichols
Peng F. Mok                     mailto:[email]
Allan "battleships!" Plumb
Tim Philp
Paolo Pizzi                     mailto:[email]
Joseph W. Reyna                 mailto:[email]
RAlcorn824                      mailto:[email]
Albert P. Rauber                mailto:[email]
Robert Robinson                 mailto:[email]
Al Ross                         mailto:[email]
SALT 6                          mailto:[email]
Staale Sannerud                 mailto:[email]
Bob Santos                      mailto:[email]
Don Schmidt                     mailto:[email]
Septimus                        mailto:[email]
Dave Seuferling
Cookie Sewell                   mailto:[email]
Jack Silvia                     mailto:[email]
Mark Shannon                    mailto:[email]
David Shein                     mailto:[email]
Don Stauffer                    mailto:[email]
Dan Sullivan
George Swierczynski             mailto:[email]
Stephen Tontoni                 mailto:[email]
Aaron Taylor
George Wallace
Jon Warneke (REDBOZO6)          mailto:[email]
David R. Wells
Mark S. Wheeler                 mailto:[email]
Dave Wilke                      mailto:[email]
Paul Wilson
Woody Vondracek                 mailto:[email]


subject: Ship Modeling FAQ, Part 02/15 (Contents, Q.1-7: 27K)

text:
Archive-name: ship-models-faq/part02
Posting-Frequency: monthly
Expires: Fri, 2 August 1996 00:00:00 GMT
Last-modified: 1 June 1996

This is the Frequently Asked Questions FAQ (part 02) on ship modeling.

Obligatory Disclaimer: The information contained in this message was
contributed by individuals, who, unless otherwise indicated, speak
only for themselves and not the institutions or businesses they are
associated with.  The author(s) and editor(s) of this material make no
warranties as to the correctness of the information provided.

This material should be considered copyright by the author(s).  This
material may be redistributed for non-commercial use without explicit
permission of the author(s) as long as the text is used exactly as is
(except for reformatting) and the author(s) is given full written credit
for the material.  Commercial use requires explicit permission of the
author(s).

The questions being addressed are listed in part 01 of the FAQ.

        ###############################################

                        PREPARATION
                        ===========

1.      I don't have the patience to build a ship model (?)
    A:  First of all, "Patience is that attribute required to do
        something you DON'T WANT TO DO!"...if you don't want to build
        a model, no one will (or CAN) force you to.
        However, there are a number of thing you can do to make it more
        likely that your patience will be sustained for the duration of
        the project:
        o  Have some idea what you're doing.  READ THE INSTRUCTIONS (if
           it's a kit).  If you don't understand (and many instructions
           are "opaque"), ASK someone (see the list of ship Modeling
           Clubs, or ask here)!
        o  If you've never built a (ship) model before, start with a
           SIMPLE one (see 3., below).  That will help insure that
           you'll finish in a reasonable amount of time, and will help
           you understand the terminology (i.e., what you call the
           "pointy end of the boat", and all those "sticks" and
           "string").
        o  Build yourself a "kit".  Most people start with the hull,
           which is typically ~10% of the work/time required, and ~90%
           of the visual effect (more than once, I've been asked by a
           visitor if I've done anything to a model since they've last
           seen it (6 months earlier), because I've spent the 6 months
           adding details that you have to LOOK for).  Instead, BUILD
           SUB-ASSEMBLIES FIRST (e.g., the anchor, ship's boats,
           cannon/carriages, etc.) -- these can be added to a row of
           parts marching across the "mantlepiece";  every time you
           look at them you see you're making progress.  When you're
           done, THEN assemble them into the model.
        o  Contact other modelers (even if not ship modelers).  Even if
           they are not doing the same thing you are, being able to ask
           a person questions, and explaining your "tricks" is a
           stimulus to get your interest up again.  (John Kopf)

2.      I'm interested in starting to make rc model boats and was
        wondering if anyone could help me with some info about a good
        starter project or perhaps a good beginners book I could use
        to get going with?
    A:  There are several but the best advice I could provide would be
        to post this question in news:rec.models.rc (that news group is
        being superceeded by news:rec.models.rc.water, but is not
        carried yet at all sites) where there are a bunch of RC boat
        guys.  (Larry Marshall)
         ***I can suggest several sources but first a couple of
        questions:
         o What sort of subject matter interests you?  Tugs, Warships,
           Ocean Liners, Race boats, etc.
         o What sort of price range can you afford?
         o How long do you want to spend building the project?
         o What is your level of experience in other modeling areas?
         If you can answer these I will try to steer you in the best
        direction I can.  (Kurt Greiner)

3.      What is a good beginner's model kit to start with?
    A:  The following Wooden Ship Models are often recommended:
        Bluejacket:     Eastport Pinky, Bluenose
        Model Shipways: Phantom, Katy, Sultana
        A. J. Fisher:   Pilot Schooner, Lark
        Model Expo:     Gjoa, Swift, Scottish Maid, Pinky
         Note that this list does NOT contain any of the popular
        European kits - these suffer from poor instructions and plans,
        inadequate research, and excessive complexity for a beginner;
        only a small fraction of the kits sold are ever completed.
        (John Kopf)
         ***Most modelers enter the hobby from plastic  kits.  (They
        migrate to sailing ships from plastic a/c or modern ships).  To
        many, the jump from plastic non-sailing ships to a wooden
        sailing ship is too big.  They become intimidated.
         Some good plastic kits do exist, that are suitable as beginner
        kits.  These include the Heller 1:75 NINA and PINTA.  (Little
        jewels, although some filling is required.  Also, I suspect
        they are really 1:90 -- compare the hulls to the 1:100 plans in
        Pastor's "Ships of Chistopher Columbus").  Don't waste time on
        the Revell Columbus ships.  They are useful for fittings, but
        of much lower quality than the Heller kits.
         Another possiblity is the Airfix 1:72 "Golden Hind."  This has
        more complex rigging, but simpler than say, the Revell 1:96
        Constitution.  If you do not mind using stretched sprue, the
        Airfix "Great Western" is fun, too.  The sail plan is simplified
        because it is a paddle steamer, but there is enough to be fun.
        I would recommend that only to an experience plastic modeler
        who is a neophyte in sailing ships.
         An advantage to plastic kits is that you rig them just like
        the wooden kits.  Rigging tends to be the biggest challenge in
        a sailing ship model.  Get comfortable with rigging, and going
        to wood doesn't seem so scary.  (Mark Lardas)
         ***A good point...If you're unfamiliar with ships (either
        sailing OR power), an inexpensive plastic model will help you
        recognize the various parts of the ships, and help begin to
        familiarize you with some of the problems you'll encounter (such
        as few straight lines, flat surfaces, and the need to review the
        plans and instructions before you "paint your self into a corner"
        by installing one part that blocks the installation of a second
        part.  (John Kopf)
        ***I recommend you obtain a wood ship model kit that comes with
        an instruction book which describes the DETAILS of the prototype
        vessel, or vessels of the very type you are modelling. In other
        words, the plans and general instructions rarely give a novice
        enough information on what the rigging details look like, or
        how to reproduce them in scale.
         Start out with a fishing vessel which has one or two masts,
        and is not square-rigged.  I have a modest library of ship
        model books  from the 1970s, but none of them is likely to be
        of a lot of help in completing a particular model, so I won't
        recommend any.
         Bear in mind that experienced ship modellers often junk the
        wood strips supplied in the kit and replace it with strips sawn
        from very hard, fine-grained wood like maple, apple, pearwood
        and boxwood.
         Good quality woodworking tools tend to be lot more costly than
         the tools required for plastic kits.  (Septimus)

4.      Whats the difference between "bread-and-butter", plank-on-
        bulkhead, and plank-on-frame construction?
    A:  In bread-and-butter ("B&B"), successive "slices" (sawn out of
        planks) of the hull (either parallel to the keel or to the
        waterline) are stacked and then carved to final shape, using
        templates (see Question 11 about use of templates).  The
        individual planks are frequently "hollowed" so that the
        resulting hull is only a thick shell of wood -- this make the
        hull lighter, and helps prevent cracking which might result
        from a solid hull.
         Plank-on-bulkhead ("POB") uses cross-wise slices of the hull
        to shape "bulkheads", which are fastened to a "backbone" with
        the profile of the hull; these are normally made from plywood
        and are common in the European kits.
         Plank-on-frame ("POF") models actual "frames", fastened to the
        keel.
         The latter two methods are then planked (although nothing
        prevents one from planking a bread-and-butter hull).  Both
        methods require beveling the surfaces of the bulkheads or
        frames (see Question 12 about beveling).
         POB models have excessive spacing of the bulkheads to support
        the planking; these are normally double-planked, so that the
        first layer of planks (the "learning layer") can be sanded fair
        to produce a smooth surface for the second layer (the "finish
        layer").  Unfortunately, the bulkheads are often so far apart
        that the planks "sag" between fastening points -- many modelers
        get around this by filling in the surface between the bulkheads
        with some soft wood (balsa is fine for this) and sanding this
        to the shape of the hull before planking...this essentially
        results in a more-or-less solid hull (like B&B, with the
        bulkheads serving as built-in templates).
         One side advantage of POF is that the fastenings ("trunnels")
        of the planks are properly located and have a solid backing to
        connect to.  (John Kopf)
         ***I guess "plank on frame" in a strict sense would imply that
        the ship is built with a hollow set of frames as opposed to a
        set of massive plywood-style bulkheads, as you say. However, it
        is commonly referred to as plank-on-frame whether you use
        massive bulkheads or proper frames.
         Proper plank-on-frame could be used if you wanted a complete
        interior in the ship, or at least on the gun-decks. This is
        rather hard to do with massive bulkheads. Also, I am convinced
        that adding a complete internal structure with deck-beams et al
        will make it easier to get the outside right - you will have
        far more references to the placing of wales, gun-ports etc
        (always assuming that the internal structure is put in the
        right places :) It has certainly been a problem with my massive-
        bulkhead Neptunus, 80.
         I haven't tried building proper plank-on-frame myself, but
        from what I gather it a) is a lot more work than plank-on-
        bulkhead (all those frames to build and put in place), and b)
        makes for a better hull shape and a more solid model. Think
        about it - you would be defining the hull shape for each and
        every frame, instead of just at the bulkheads, and the external
        planking will be supported by an almost continuous array of
        frames instead of just the occasional bulkhead.
        (Staale Sannerud)
         ***Most of the plank-on-frame models I have seen omit the
        planking on the  lower hull, in order to show the detail of the
        keel and futtocks and all that.  I suppose you could do a fully
        planked plank-on-frame model just for your own satisfaction,
        but there would be little other point.
         As I understand it, the actual planking process is a little
        easier, because there is more material underneath the planks to
        support them.  However, this is more than outweighed by the
        extra time and effort (not to mention material) necessary to
        accurately model the frames.  Unless you want to demonstrate
        the construction of the original ship, you might as well go
        plank-on-bulkhead.  (David C Graf)
         ***Look at it this way. A  200' ship might have only 10
        bulkheads, but 100 frames.  If you were doing an admiralty
        model, you would want to show all of the frames, so any
        planking would be plank on frame. If you are building what
        would be considered a completely finished hull,  then you are
        depending on the bulkheads ( as defined in the ship's lines)
        to give you the hull shape.
        Here is a tip for you, if you fill in the space between the
        bulkheads with pieces of balsa wood, and sand them down to the
        ship's lines, you have the equivalent of a solid hull to plank.
        (Thomas Burkman Sr.)
         ***Why would anyone plank a model anyway?  By that, I mean
        after the hull is planked you cannot see bulkheads either.
        There are at least two reasons for plank on frame that I am
        aware of.  One, that's the way a real ship is made, so I want
        to do it that way.  Two, maybe I am going to put in some
        internal detail, leave hatches uncovered, etc., and don't want
        to have bulkheads visible (that were not there on prototype).
        With large warships this internal detail might be the guns, and
        the interior is clearly visible through open ports.
         I might point out that there are a number of hybrids that are
        neither fish nor fowl.  Some POB kits feature the bulkheads cut
        back to look like frames starting at the lower gundeck.
         It is also possible to build a hybrid with a solid hull up to
        the lower gundeck, with frames above that, this whole structure
        then planked.  In this case, of course, the hull is smaller by
        the dimension of the thickness of the planks from what it would
        be if it were a carved hull not planked over.  (Don Stauffer)
         ***A scale plank-on-frame model is the highest expression of
        the wood modelmaker's art: The keel, stem, sternpost, frames
        and ALL hull timbers are accurate scale reproductions of the
        prototype vessel. In some British "Admiralty" models, the
        planking was purposely left incomplete to allow the viewer to
        examine the hull timbers.  (Septimus)

5.      What's the difference between Beginner, intermediate, or
        advanced Kits?
    A:  This is a good question and difficult to answer. As a designer
        for Model Shipways, I do not always agree with the final
        category which appears in the catalog. There is naturally an
        effort to categorize a model at intermediate or beginner
        level - more sales! The recent Pride of Baltimore II kit was
        desired as a beginners kit, I felt it an advanced kit, so we
        wound up compromising at intermediate level. Here are some of
        my thoughts as a designer and model builder:

                Beginners -
         Solid wood hull is often difficult to shape properly and it
        takes some skill to fit templates and carve correctly. It would
        then be an intermediate skill.  However, many solid hull models
        can be completed by the beginner simply by sanding it without
        regard to total accuracy. Consequently, on the smaller models
        with a solid hull the beginner can handle it. So, the beginner
        should know something about sanding wood, and at least have the
        skill to do some "pocket knife" carving.
         The beginner should have some basic understanding of a ship,
        knowing a deck from a mast and be able to read the plans and
        instructions. If the model has rigging, the beginner should be
        able to at least tie a knot to fake a seizing.
         Since most models are painted, the beginner should have done
        some painting with brushes and know how to make reasonably
        smooth brush strokes. The beginner also needs to know a little
        something about gluing parts together with white glue.
         The beginner should possess the ability to stick with the
        project a reasonable length of time, understanding that it
        cannot be built in a hurry, and understand that a wooden model
        will take a longer time and require more part making than say
        compared with a plastic model where the parts are basically
        complete.

                Intermediate-
         For solid hulls, the modeler should be able to use gouges and
        chisels for removing wood and have the patience to work longer
        on a large hull. For the POB hulls, the modeler should have
        the skill to use a hobby knife and saw and cut parts accurately
        to lines. Cutting bevels on the bulkheads and tapering planking
        is important, and use of the tools is essential.
         Intermediate models start to have many small parts for deck
        furniture. The modeler must be able to handle and assemble
        (glue) small parts together accurately and to keep them to
        scale. In rigging, there will be more to do, so the modeler
        must have the patience to spend the time to complete the rig.
         They should have the ability to "think out" the rigging
        beforehand, and also know how to push and pull lines about with
        rigging tool aids.
         The painting of the model is going to be more difficult. The
        modeler should know how to plan painting the various parts and
        proceed in an orderly fashion, so as not to work their way into
        a hole.

                Advanced-
         Most advanced models are really just more of the same. The same
        skills are required for the most part. The name of the game is
        patience. The Flying Fish model from Model shipways is an
        advanced project. It was always a big seller to beginners and
        advanced modelers alike. From old Model Shipways, John Shedd,
        I was told that it was a good seller, but less completed model.
        Modelers start but never finish the model. My only thought is
        that they loose patience and get bored with the project over a
        very long time period. So, you must have the patience and
        endurance for advanced projects.
         Like the intermediate model, the advanced model has even more
        rigging involved, but if you can rig a single mast you can
        certainly rig two. The skill is the same. An advanced project
        will require you to do more detailing and the tying of simple
        knots is not likely to be satisfactory. Consequently, you
        should have the skill to make seizings of lines, wraping them
        with fine thread.
         The advanced project will probably get you more into soldering.
        The Flying Fish is a good example. There are many iron fittings.
         So, you should have the skill to cut, shape, and solder small
        brass parts. Sometimes, you can substitute other methods in
        lieu of soldering. You should have the ability to make these
        decisions and know that the result will be satisfactory.
         Painting again will be difficult but should not be any more
        involved than on an intermediate model.  (Ben Lankford)

6.      What experience have other modelers had with the European kits?
     A: The following originally was with reference to an Artesania
        Latina kit, but in general applies to ANY of the European kits.
        (John Kopf)
         ***I bought a 1:48 model of the U.S.S. Charles W. Morgan (three-
        masted Whaler) about 8 years ago for $180.  I've been working
        on it off and on over that time (with multi-year breaks of 'off'
        time).  Lately I've been 'on' and progress has been pretty
        steady.
         But during the work on the whole beast, I've been surprised at
        how poor the instructions are and, despite fairly extensive
        diagram sheets, how incredibly easy it is to screw up.  This
        was my first foray into model ships and I've obviously bitten
        off a huge chunk, but it's been lots of fun.  Except for the
        part where I botched the stern.  And the part in the bow where
        the planks don't really form to the first layer of the hull.
        And where the...
         I doubt I'd have done a second one if I'd built something
        simple.  There's something epic about building this monster.
         But to return to my question... Is Artesania Latina a reputable
        outfit or not?  And do they still exist?  I'd like to talk to
        them about getting some more stock for the ship (not enough
        doweling for the spars). Anybody got an address on these guys?
         To any fellow novices who are working on an Artesania Latina
        model, here are my words of advice:
         The guys who did the instructions are laughing their collective
        behinds off at the thought of somebody following what they
        wrote down.  The order of steps is horrendous and frequently
        leaves out dependencies between various pieces.  Look at the
        plans about 8 times, look ahead in the directions about 5 steps,
        measure everything twice, dry fit it to the model a couple
        times and then, only then, do it all over again before you even
        think about cutting or shaping anything.
         But in all honesty, the kit has been buckets of fun.  I can't
        imagine getting more enjoyment per dollar in any other way.
         I know this much - the whales are safe from this baby...
        (John Buehler)
         ***Like you, John, I'm working on my first Latina kit (it's
        the Swift pilot boat) and I have to agree, the instructions
        leave much to be desired. In my case there's no mention of when,
        of even if, the keel should be attached. But you're right, by
        reading the instructions thoroughly at least three times and
        comparing the written word to the diagrams, you should be able
        to manage.
         I wanted to let the company know what I thought of its
        instructions and tried to find the company on the net, but it
        didn't turn up with Netscape Search.
         As for spare parts, my local hobby shop is able to get
        Artisania Latina parts (even for the Swift which has been
        discontinued), but any quality hobby shop should carry the
        dowels and the proper types of wood needed.
         I've completed a couple of solid-hull wood ships this past
        year and the Swift is my first attempt at planking a hull. I
        have no gripe with the quality of the parts and fittings in the
        Latina kit but I'm glad my first planking job is on their
        beginner kit.
         The company does still exist and I've recently seen their new
        catalogue. The finished ships look great and I'm considering
        buying their version of the Blue Nose II, but I'll wait until
        I've experienced more of their Swift. I may opt for Model
        Shipways version of the original Blue Nose.  (Derek Conlon)
         ***I saw a review of Artesania's top of the line kit in an
        English boat modelling magazine a couple of years ago. The ship
        in question is the Spanish 74-gun San Juan de Nepomuceno, in
        1:90 scale or something like that. Here are a couple of points
        that I remember from the review.
         The belaying pins were all out of scale, and had to be
        replaced. The rigging plan was ALL wrong, and had to be
        scrapped - time to dig out "Masting and Rigging" again...
        The kit in itself got pretty good reviews, though. Good
        materials, sensible layout and so on. I can't remember
        anything about the building instructions, apart from the
        rigging foul-up, but they can't have been too horrible or I
        think I would have remembered.
         From what the review photos showed, the Nepomuceno kit made a
        pretty lovely model once it was finished - those Spaniards made
        some beautiful ships back in the 1760s.  (Staale Sannerud)

7.      What tools do I need to get started?
    A:  In most all of the recent Model Shipways kits, the instruction
        book lists those tools that are needed for the particular model.
        However, this list has almost become boiler plate in the
        instruction books I prepared. Here's a composite of my list:
        A. Knives and saws
                1. Hobby knife
                2. No.11 blades
                3. Razor saw or jeweler's saw
        B. Files
                Set of needle files
        C. Clamps
                1. A few small C-clamps
                2. Wooden clothespins
                3. Rubber bands, #16 and #33
        D. Tool Set
                A small carving tool set or individual gouges and
                chisels for carving keel rabbets, tapering the stem,
                or carving solid hull models.
        E. Sharpening Stone
                Necessary to keep tools razor sharp
        F. Boring Tools
                1. Set of miniature drills: #60 to #80
                2. 1/16", 3/32", and 1/8" drills
                3. Pin vise
        G. Miscellaneous
                1. Tack hammer
                2. Tweezers (a few)
                3. Small fine pointed scissors
                4. Miniature pliers
                        a. small round
                        b. flat nose
                5. Bench vise (small)
                6. Soldering iron or torch
                        a. solder
                        b. flux
                7. Wire cutters (for cutting fine wire and strip metal)
         My response regarding tools was primarily for the "minimum"
        needs, obviously addressing hand tools. There is also one power
        tool that I keep on my minimum list, for models as well as
        large woodworking projects. That is the band saw.  I have never
        been without one, and never will. To me it is the most useful
        power tool in any shop, for fancy cuts, stripping, or just
        plain cutting a piece of scrap wood in half.
         For model work, a small band saw is desirable. I had been
        using a large Sears saw up to a few years ago. However, I
        bought a speed reducer for it, and now use it exclusively for
        cutting metal. Of course, you can change the reducer, and
        change the blade for wood cutting. But I'm to old for wasting
        that much time. I decided to invest in a small model band saw.
         Well, Micro Mark had just advertised a new Black and Decker
        band saw for the modeler. I jumped at it. But boy was I
        disappointed. This was a big piece of junk. I think it had
        a wooden or rock gear drive. It was so noisy you could not
        believe it. It was also not accurate, would not line up, and
        the case and other parts pure trash. I was not happy that Micro
        Mark sold such a thing. Well, maybe they got the word too,
        because they soon dumped it, or maybe B&D did.
         What I have now, and good old Micro Mark is selling it also,
        is the new Delta 8 inch band saw. This is one dreamboat. It is
        so quiet you can hardly hear it running. Very accurate and the
        case and all parts are of excellent metal and machined very
        well. It cuts smooth as silk. I generally use a 1/8" blade
        which is very thin. You can get this saw for a song at the big
        stores like Home Depot, and some mail order.
         As a model band saw, cutting small stuff, I added a new plastic
        laminate table on top of the metal table. Saw a slit to the
        center with the blade and you have a nice table without the big
        hole around the blade.  (Ben Lankford)
         ***While I now have a pretty good stable of power tools, I have
        scratchbuilt hulls using a coping saw.  While a jig saw
        certainly makes life easier, it is not absolutely essential.  I
        used thinner lifts, and these actually make shaping the hull
        easier anyway, although it is more work cutting more layers.
         Of course, that may require re-lofting the waterlines, but that
        doesn't take more than a couple of hours.
         Of course, this requires that the hull be built bread-and-
        butter, but I always do that anyway.  Wood gets expensive when
        you want a single large block.
         The thing I like about scratch building is that I can pick my
        own scale, and can build any ship I want, not just the ones
        that are kitted.  (Don Stauffer)
         ***The only power tool I have is my dremel! No real workbench,
        no large saws, not many tools bigger than an Exacto, I borrowed
        a table saw & other tools at a friend's house to do the first
        cuts on the Incomparable hull) That's why  I don't scratchbuild
        more than I do. Kits, even inaccurate ones, require far fewer
        facilities, and far less time to make into an acceptable model.
        (David R. Wells)
         ***The producers of model kits supply wood and metal parts for
        a completed kit of average detail. A "good" kit will have plans
        which allow the dedicated and experienced modeller ample scope
        for adding more detail. Generally, you have to supply some
        materials yourself.
         I think you will add more tools and materials to your workshop
        with each kit you build.  (Septimus)


subject: Ship Modeling FAQ, Part 03/15 (Q.8-11: 17K)

text:
Archive-name: ship-models-faq/part03
Posting-Frequency: monthly
Expires: Fri, 2 August 1996 00:00:00 GMT
Last-modified: 1 June 1996

This is the Frequently Asked Questions FAQ (part 03) on ship modeling.

Obligatory Disclaimer: The information contained in this message was
contributed by individuals, who, unless otherwise indicated, speak
only for themselves and not the institutions or businesses they are
associated with.  The author(s) and editor(s) of this material make no
warranties as to the correctness of the information provided.

This material should be considered copyright by the author(s).  This
material may be redistributed for non-commercial use without explicit
permission of the author(s) as long as the text is used exactly as is
(except for reformatting) and the author(s) is given full written credit
for the material.  Commercial use requires explicit permission of the
author(s).

The questions being addressed are listed in part 01 of the FAQ.

        ###############################################

8.      What scale should I use?
    A:  Ship models have been built in various scales, from 6"=1' (the
        model of the whaling bark Lagoda in the New Bedford Museum) to
        1"=100' and even smaller.  Obviously, the smaller the scale,
        the smaller the model (and all of the details thereon); the
        larger the scale, the easier it is to put in fine detail.
         A "museum quality" ship model (see # 29, Part 06) generally
        shows all details that will have a dimension of at least 1/16th
        inch on the model.
         Common scales are specified in one of two ways, either as a
        pair of dimensions (e.g., 1/4 inch = 1 foot), or as a
        dimensionless ratio (e.g., 1:48).  The latter is probably a
        better usage, since one unit on the model corresponds to *n*
        units on the actual ship (no matter WHAT units are being used...
        inches, feet, metric, "points", etc.;  it also avoids confusion
        (is a 1/16 model 1:16 or 1"=16' ?)
         Probably the most important criteria is:  how much room do you
        have to display the model?  Consider the Queen Mary -- Overall
        Length = 1,019.5 ft. (310.74 m.) -- admittedly an extreme
        example, and the U.S.S. Constitution ("Old Ironsides") --
        length (between perpendiculars) = 175 ft.

        Scale           Length of model:        Q.M.      Constitution
        1:2     6"=1'                           509' 9"         87' 6"
        1:3     4"=1'                           339' 10"        58' 4"
        1:4     3"=1'                           254' 10"        43' 9"
        1:6     2"=1'                           169' 11"        29' 2"
        1:12    1"=1'                           84' 11"         14' 7"
        7:96    7/8"=1'                         74' 4"          12' 9"
        1:16    3/4"=1'                         63' 9"          10' 11"
        1:24    1/2"=1" ==> 1" = 2'             42' 6"          7' 3"
        1:32    3/8"=1'                         31' 10"         5' 6"
        1:36    1"=3'                           28' 3"          4' 10"
        1:48    1/4"=1' (1"=4')                 21' 3"          3' 8"
        1:60    1"=5'                           17'             2' 11"
        1:64    3/16"=1'                        15' 11"         2' 9"
        1:72    1"=6'                           14' 2"          2' 5"
        1:96    1"=8'                           10' 7"          1' 10"
        1:128   3/32"=1'                        7' 11"          1' 4"
        1:196   1/16"=1'                        5' 3"           11"
        1:384   1/32"=1'                        2' 6"           6"
        1:500                                   2'              4"
        1:700                                   1' 6"           3"
        1:768   1/64"=1'                        1" 4"           3"
        1:1000                                  1'              2"
        1:1200                                  0' 10"          2"

         Kits often are to a scale "that fits the box" -- I have an
        ancient set of kit plans for the Normandy at 1:686 !  And, of
        course, there are other, "bastard" scales (model railroad "HO"
        scale is 1:87.1 ==> 3.5 mm = 1"). The "popular" scales seem to
        be:  1:700 (plastic warships), 1:96 (modern ships), 1:48
        (sailing ships), 1:24 & 1:12 (small boats).
         *** How much space do you have to devote to your collection?
        1:48, 1:96 and 1:192 are popular (but not exclusive) scales
        used in maritime and naval museums in the U.S.  In Europe,
        Metric scales (e.g., 1:100, 1:200, etc.,) seem to dominate.
        (RAlcorn824)
         ***I have seen various postings on the net proposing a
        standard modeling scale for naval ship models, 1:700 being
        too small for those of us with crappy vision, and 1:350 being
        only great if you have a stadium to display your finished
        models (1:500 would be great, too).  Well, my humble proposal
        is (no surprise) 1:600.  (Joseph W. Reyna)
         ***To a large extent I agree. Also, most 1:700 scale ships
        are waterline models. I hate them. I like working on props,
        rudders, bilge keels, etc.
         Most of my fleet is between 1:450 and 1:600.
         Thanks to the folks on r.m.s., I've been working on more 1:600
        Airfixes lately. My British collection is getting to be quite
        big, and it will soon outgrow its display box.
        Also, Arii makes Yamato class & Iowa class battleships in
        1:600.
         Keep in mind that Frog, Renwal and Nichimo also put out 1:500
        scale ships. Find them if you can. Frog & Renwal are gone,
        (the Frog molds are in Russia, and Revellogram has the Renwal
        molds) and the Nichimos are rare.
         A standard scale is exactly what is needed. Unfortunately,
        the standard is now 1:700 waterline. For good, bad, or
        indifferent, most of the model kits today come from the Far
        East, and they are the staunchest supporters of the 1:700
        standard. They aren't going to make all new molds just for us.
         There aren't enough ship modelers to make it worth their
        while. Similarly, Revellogram is going to continue with their
        "box scale", simply because they aren't making any new ship
        molds, and they get by with just re-issuing their old stuff.
        As much as I would like to see a 1:500 or 1:600 full hull
        standard scale, it isn't going to happen. (D. Wells)
         ***Ever tried Heller's 1:400? Good stuff :-) (John G. Burns)
         ***That depends on *what* you build. True a 1:350 battleship
        may be big but a destroyer or a sub is about the size of a
        1:48 airplane.
         This scale is not as bad as you may believe.  Here are some
        dimensions for the ships that we as ship modelers need in
        this scale:
                USS Pennslyvania  BB38  20.84" x 3.43"
                USS St. Louis  CL49     20.57" x "2.12"
                USS Alaska  CB1         30.21" x 3.13"
                USS Saratoga CV3        32.17" x 3.30"
         And the detail to these that someone could do would far exceed
        any of these other smaller scales! (REDBOZO6)

9.      How does one change the scale of plans?
    A:  In the past, people made do with pantographs, proportional
        dividers, and basically redrew the plans by hand.
         Today, people use "copiers" to scale drawings up or down.  A
        typical copier can enlarge or reduce a drawing by from 64% to
        142%.  Unfortunately, this doesn't help much if you need to
        change the scale more than this amount.  However, you can still
        get by making partial scale changes -- for example, expanding
        by 141% and then expanding the first expanded copy by another
        141% gives you 1.41 x 1.41 = 1.9881; expanding it by 142%
        instead gives 2.0022...either is probably close enough to 2x to
        be acceptable.
         When enlarging, lines tend to get broader (and "muddier") --
        set the copier to "light" to help reduce this effect.
         Copiers tend to "stretch" the drawing more in one direction
        than the other (this is supposedly to prevent the copying of
        paper money -- the resulting image won't match in change-making
        machines).  If you are doing multiple expansions/compressions,
        try to change the orientation of the drawing each time (from
        horizontal to vertical, etc.) so that the error introduced in
        one operation is canceled out in the next.
         If you anticipate needing multiple copies, do them all at once,
        using the same batch of paper -- that way stretching or
        shrinking of the paper is more likely to be uniform for all
        copies than if you made copies at different times using
        different lots of paper.
         Finally, commercial copy shops can frequently make larger
        copies, and/or bigger scale-changes with one pass.  In order to
        help them produce a copy of the correct size, draw a pair of
        lines somewhere on your source, at right angles to one another,
        and properly scaled and annotated with something like "enlarge
        to 6 inches long" -- that way you won't have to explain about
        the (often obscure) scale that is on the plans themselves.  (If
        you are using historical foreign sources, make sure what units
        are actually being used -- for example, Chapman has scales in
        Swedish, French, and English feet...all are different!)
        (John Kopf)
         *** Whatever fits, it seems.  Plans I use range from 1/2" =
        1' to 1/32"=1'  much smaller than this becomes self defeating,
        even if you are building a model to a smaller scale. (RAlcorn824)

10.     What woods are recommended?
    A:  A large variety of woods exist...some of these are useful for
        ship models:
        apple           - good for planking...bends easily
        balsa           - TOO SOFT for ship model use! (At least on
                          surfaces; occasionally useful for "spacers"
                          used internally.)
        bamboo          - tough, easily split;  used for trunnels, etc.
        basswood        - soft but readily available
        boxwood         - the best for find detail carving
        clear pine      - for bread-and-butter hulls
        cherry          - fairly common, fine grain, somewhat brittle
        degama          - good for masts and spars
        ebony           - Black!  very hard and brittle, doesn't bend
                          easily
        holly           - White!  good for decking, carving
        pear            - works like cherry but brown instead of red,
                          and not brittle.

         ANY wood can be stained to look like ebony using black india
        ink as a stain. (John O. Kopf)
         ***At some point you are going to substitute the relatively
        soft, weak wood strips supplied in the kit with very dense,
        close-grained exotic hardwoods like pearwood, boxwood,
        lancewood, and applewood. The kit producers will furnish you
        with basswood because it is commercially available and not very
        costly.  Don't feel badly about upgrading or adding to the
        materials supplied in the kit.  (Septimus)

                        THE HULL
                        ========

11.     I have some plans I bought from Floating Drydock a few years
        ago of the Montana-class battleship and Alaska-class cruiser.
        I'd really love to scratchbuild these guys in the future, which
        leads me to my inquiry...
        None of the articles in the modelling mags show how people have
        scratchbuilt their ship hulls.  I'm wondering what experiences
        others have had in doing it, especially what techniques work
        the best for them.
     A. A lot depends on the scale you're using, and on the intended
        purpose.  The best method for a 1:1200 waterline model is
        probably carving from the solid;  for a large model either
        bread-and-butter, planked bulkhead, or some combination of the
        two will probably serve best.  (John O. Kopf)
         ***If you are considering building a hull for display on a
        fairly large scale check the these references: Scale Ship
        Modeler, June 1995, Mike Winters has an article on building a
        cruiser (USS Memphis) using bread and butter method using
        styrofoam insulation panel instead of wood. I have been working
        on a liner at 1:192 and found this material easy to work with
        and am quite satisfied with result. I modified Winters
        technique, though. Try Scale Ship Modeler March/April 1995
        where Jack Melody describes building the battleship USS IOWA
        (1896 vintage) at 1/20, 1 inch=20 ft. using a hull made partly
        of solid balsa block below waterline and bulkheads above with
        balsa sheathing. (Al Rauber)
         ***Mine is not the approved method, but here's how I always did
        it.
        1) Take appropriate size chunk of wood.
        2) Using saber saw, band saw, whatever's around, cut out the
        basic outline of the ship.
        3) Make templates from the hull sections on your plans.
        4) Carve/file/sand the hull until it conforms to the templates.
         OK, that's a gross oversimplification, but the basic technique
        is there.
         I freely admit that I did not use the bread-and-butter method.
        The reason is that I worked in relatively small scales,
        (1:500-1:600) and big-enough wood was readily available.
        (David R. Wells)
         ***I seem to recall that the Nov/Dec '94 issue of Model Ship
        Builder magazine had an article about scratch-building a hull
        of the type you are referring to.  I believe the author was a
        long-time builder of static-display wooden sailing ship models
        (I'm working from memory, here) and he decided to build a model
        of a more modern ship as a change of pace.  Some scratch builders
        construct their hulls with plastic sheet, but his approach was
        much like building a sailing ship model, with plywood bulkheads
        and wooden strip planking.  If you can find a current issue of
        MSB, you can probably back-order that issue for about $6.25 or
        so. (Brett Denner)
         ***OK, I'll chime in on this.  First and foremost, you're in
        real good shape with those plans.  In looking at the listings
        in The Floating Drydock's catalog, your Alaska plans will have
        the hull sections you need for building the hull.  As for the
        Montana, go out and fing a copy of Dulin & Garzke's "U.S.
        Battleships" (ISBN:1-55750-174-2).  In the section on the
        Montana's you'll find a set of hull lines for her.
         Now the fun (?) part.  Hull sections (HS) look like a funny
        drawing of the hull with one half looking aft and one half
        looking forward.  On each of these halfs, there are curves
        lines that are labeled with either numbers or letters. These
        lines are frame references, and they'll correspond to marks
        below the outboard profile (OP) view.  These marks show where
        each of the lines on the HS drawing are located according to
        the OP.
         To build from these, I use the plank on frame method.  What you
        want to do is to set out a keel dimensioned to the length of
        the bottom of the hull on the OP.  It doesn't matter the shape
        right now.  Next, use the HS drawing to make each of the
        bulkheads shown.  Now remember, you're looking at half of it,
        so duplicate the left (or right) side for each bulkhead.
        Number each bulkhead as you make them so that you can keep
        track of them.  Next.  mark the positions of the bulkheads from
        the OP on to the keel piece.  Attach the bulkheads to the keel
        at the proper places, and you'll have the frame of the ship.
         Once you have the frame, the next thing to do is to start
        placing planking on the outside of it.  Use relatively small
        pieces to do this, and don't worry about making them fit
        exactly since you'll eventually sand them smooth.  Once all of
        the planking is in place, sand out the rough parts and joints,
        and you'll have your scratch hull.
         Two words of warning.  First, when you're at the point of
        attaching the bulkheads to the keel, it'll be very delicate.
        But if you break off one of the bulkheads, just glue it back.
        Second, make sure that you allow for the width on material
        you're using.  I use .06" plastic for my hulls, so when I
        measure out a bulkhead, I've got my calculator programmed to
        automatically subtract .12" from the overall calculation.
        (REDBOZO6)
         ***I can't say which works best, but a long time ship modeller
        locally builds his hulls from 1/2" basswood planks. The planks
        are first cut to shape to match the widest part of the hull
        section, and once all of the layers are glued together the hull
        is sanded to shape by removing the "steps" in the planks.  He
        notes you have to be quite careful not to create convex/concave
        surfaces doing this...
         ***Since many modern ships have a relatively square cross-
        section for much of their length, a combination of bread-and-
        butter for the ends and planked bulkheads for the center work
        relatively well.  When I've done this, I start with a plank
        cut to the shape of the lowest waterline.  The severely curved
        ends are build up as bread-and-butter sub-assemblies.  The
        "central" portion of each is rabbeted for the ends of the
        planks.  These ends are fastened to the bottom plank.  The
        intermediate stations are drawn onto plywood, allowing for the
        thickness of the planking (I don't use a central "backbone",
        although I have seen others use a "box-beam" here - that's
        simply a long plywood box that the bulkheads slid onto -- very
        rigid and torsion-resistant!).
         Also allow for a thick strip at the sheer (and, if the curving
        of the bilge is extensive, I also allow for a block there).
        The bulkheads are glued to the bottom plank in the appropriate
        locations, and the shear strip (and  bilge blocks, if used)
        are installed. Planking the remainder is now easy, as the planks
        will all be relatively straight.  (John O. Kopf)


subject: Ship Modeling FAQ, Part 04/15 (Q.12-14: 20K)

text:
Archive-name: ship-models-faq/part04
Posting-Frequency: monthly
Expires: Fri, 2 August 1996 00:00:00 GMT
Last-modified: 1 June 1996

This is the Frequently Asked Questions FAQ (part 04) on ship modeling.

Obligatory Disclaimer: The information contained in this message was
contributed by individuals, who, unless otherwise indicated, speak
only for themselves and not the institutions or businesses they are
associated with.  The author(s) and editor(s) of this material make no
warranties as to the correctness of the information provided.

This material should be considered copyright by the author(s).  This
material may be redistributed for non-commercial use without explicit
permission of the author(s) as long as the text is used exactly as is
(except for reformatting) and the author(s) is given full written credit
for the material.  Commercial use requires explicit permission of the
author(s).

The questions being addressed are listed in part 01 of the FAQ.

        ###############################################

12.     How do I bend wood for a ship model?
   A:   The best method to use depends upon the dimensions of the stock,
        and on the degree of bending required.  In general, wood
        *should* be pre-bent; if it is simply "wrapped" onto the model
        the resulting tension can easily tear the model apart after a
        few years.  Instead, use one the methods listed below to pre-
        shape the wood; fasten it after it has "set" and holds the
        shape by itself.
         First of all, you'll have better luck if you chose your stock
        so that the grain runs lengthwise (I've frequently found
        commercial strips to be severly cross-grained at some point,
        perhaps with the grain running as much as 45 degrees to the
        length -- this is often because the strip was cut from a board
        near a knot).
         A thick or complicated shape may be easiest to form by carving
        it from the solid -- perhaps laminating the solid from a number
        of pieces so the grain tends to follow the final curve (I use
        this technique for sailing ship head-rails, which can be a half-
        circle in some cases).
         You can also laminate a piece from a number of thinner pieces
        bent to a former -- the thinner the individual wood pieces, the
        easier they are to bend, an the necesary thickness is achieved
        by gluing these side-to-side over a form...the result will hold
        it's shape when it's removed from the form.  (This method is
        frequently used to make "mast hoops" by wrapping a glue-coated
        plane-shaving around a waxed dowel and then slicing off the
        hoops when it has dried.)
         Wood can also be bent more easily if it is wet or hot or both.
        Simply soaking a strip in water will make it more pliable. If
        you then bend it to shape, and let it dry out it will "spring"
        back only a small amount. Hot water works better than cold.
        Wood is a "plastic" material, and thus can be deformed under
        heat or as a result of chemical softening.
         Many people use household ammonia for this purpose (instead of
        soaking in water) -- if you can bear the smell.  It may also
        discolor some woods.
         You can also hold the strip over a kettle and steam it.  The
        trouble with this is that thin strips cool off so fast that
        you'll end up working with cold, wet wood by the time you get
        it in place.
         For reasonably thick work, such as deck beams, I've had some
        success either wrapping the stock in wet rags, or floating it
        in a dish of water, and then microwaving it for about a minute.
         It's relatively easy to wrap planks around a hull. it's much
        harder to bend them sideways (i.e., give them an "edge-set").
         For some places where I need a plank bent edge-wise (e.g.,
        railings), I find it easier to take a WIDE piece of stock whose
        thickness is the final width, and bend this piece to shape.  I
        then saw curved planks from the edge.
         Do not use these methods on multi-layer board (e.g., plywood).
        Water soaks the glue and causes the board to warp or split.
        The best way to bend boards is to score the "inside" curve and
        build a jig.
         You can also get a good job with the plank-forming pliers and
        bending jig from Micro-Mark.  Jig is adjustable. Using a plank
        bender without heating or soaking the wood will likely just
        fracture the wood.
         (This includes suggestions from: Chris Maxfield, Clayton A.
        Feldman, Rich Gortatowsky, Ron Ginger, Trevor Farrell,
        PKAeronaut, Jack Silvia, and Keath Wong.)
        MORE---
        ***In bending planks, I use an old soldering iron I got over
        twenty years ago.
         It no longer has a label, so I don't know what the wattage is,
        but the barrel that holds the nib is about 3/4 of an inch in
        diameter and the nib is about 1/2 inch, and I suspect it runs
        about 40 watts.  I think it might have been used for automotive
        body work, but don't know for sure.  Scrounge the yard sales
        and flea markets...
         I find it works better than a plank bender, because a plank
        bender, at least the ones I've seen, works the arc in the plank
        while holding the plane of the width of the plank constant.
        This gives you a nice curve for a plank that would lie on the
        hull all in a horizontal plane, but hull planks usually sweep
        up in addition to curving toward the bow and stern.  With the
        soldering iron, I can form both curves at the same time.
         Here's the steps I go through:
        1 - Cut the bow and stern taper in 4 planks, leaving them about
        4 inches (2 on each end) longer than they need to be on the
        hull.  You use the extra to give you something to hold onto
        while you bend them and install them.  Cut them in pairs, one
        for each side of the hull.
        2 - Float them in a soaking tray, (a piece of 4" or 6" pvc
        capped on both ends, then cut longitudinally in half works
        well for this) for about a half hour.  Flip the planks over
        and soak for about 15 minutes more.  Pay attention to which
        planks form a pair.  Plain, warm water works fine.  For some
        woods adding ammonia helps, for others it makes them more
        brittle.
        3 - While you're waiting, cut two more planks and set them
        aside, clamp the soldering iron in a bench vice (by the handle)
        so its sticking straight up, and plug it in to heat.
        4 - Work the flat of a plank against the side of the nib holder
        of the soldering iron, stretching it and pulling it into shape.
        For one side of the hull, use the side of the iron opposite to
        you and pull the bend toward you and up, for the other, use the
        side nearest you and work the bend away from you and up.
         Remember that the bends need to be mirror images of one
        another.  Work fairly quickly, and pay attention to how dry
        the wood is getting.  If it dries out completely, it will
        discolor or burn.  Feel free to dunk it into the water if it
        does begin to dry out too much.  What you're doing is making
        steam that penetrates the wood, pulling it into shape, and
        cooking the water back out again.
        5 - Once you have it close to shape, you can install it on
        the hull.
        6 - Between installing the first and second planks, put two
        more into the soaking tray, and cut two more and set them
        aside.  Installing two planks, while two planks are new in
        the soak tray, seems to work well relative to the timing of
        the soak.  Just keep track of which are new.  You should
        have 4 in the tray all the time you're working.
        7 - I've been using a cryo based glue (Krazy glue, wood &
        leather) as my working glue, and it doesn't seem to care if
        there is still a little moisture in the wood.  A day later, I
        reinforce the joints between the bulkheads and planks with
        carpenters (elmer's yellow) for as many strakes as I can reach
        before the sides meet the deck.  I've got two hulls I did
        in 1986 that don't show any signs of separating, even at the
        strakes that are held only by cryo, but who knows how they'll
        look 100 years from now. I also 'nail' my hulls though, so
        that may also be helping to hold them together.
        8 - Keep repeating the process from step 4 until you get bored
        or tired.  Then call it quits.  When you do, clamp the keel
        into a keel clamp to make sure it doesn't bend while the wood
        finishes drying.
         Note:  The important message here is work one plank on each
        side of the hull at a time, even if you're doing the second
        layer of a double planked hull.  Once the planks are fastened
        to the bulkheads or inner hull, their environment is different
        from wherever you were storing them.  They change shape and
        try to straighten back out.  Wood is an imperfect medium, so
        you can't control the shape change.  Working port, then
        starboard, with the help of a keel clamp, tends to average
        the stresses out by the time you reach the gunnels.  You can
        hide a slightly bent keel, when the distortion is side to side,
        when you mount the model, but if you hog the hull, there's no
        way to hide it.
         Note 2 (for beginners):  A keel clamp is fairly easy to make.
        Get some oak flooring, 2" wide and longer then your hull
        length, and drill holes about 1/2 of an inch from one edge, so
        you can put 1/4-20 bolts through and clamp the boards together.
        Slip your keel in along the oposite edge, between the oak
        boards.  Tighten the nuts down and let it sit overnight.  If
        you want to get fancy, and have a much easier time rigging,
        you can rig a stand to one side of the clamp so you can hold
        the finished hull in a bench vice while you're doing the deck
        houses and rigging.
        ***Another easy way is to heat up an old style electric
        soldering iron, clamp it vertically in a vise, and bend your
        hot water soaked planking strips around  it, moving the strip
        slowly into the curve you need with  second or two of contact
        at each mm along the way. Experiment with a bit of scrap to
        determine the correct contact time for bending and before
        scorching.  (Clayton A. Feldman, MD)
        ***This method can certainly be used - but you had better not
        try to use the soldering iron for soldering afterwards! I found
        that my iron was covered with a sooty residue after bending
        planks (of course, the iron may have been too hot. An iron on
        which you could regulate the temperature would be the best for
        the purpose.)
         Anyway, the point is that wood can be bent using heat, and
        water will keep it from scorching. You can also use live steam
        to bend planks, as a lot of modellers do, but it would involve
        a bit of gear (heater, water container etc) and I guess you
        could easily get burnt. What I like about the water/candle
        method is that it doesn't involve a lot of equipment - and you
        don't have to have an electrical outlet within arm's reach.
        (Staale Sannerud)
        ***I just use the 100w light bulb on my bench lamp...it's
        plenty hot for stripwood.  (John Kopf)
        ***I used to attend the very active Alberta Ship Modellers'
        Society meetings and the modellers have two methods.
        1.  Use a (.5in or .75in dia) copper pipe to contain the plank
         strips and run live steam from a kettle through the pipe.  Pin
         planks to hull formers until dry then glue.
        2. Soak the planks in laundry ammonia to soften them.  You will
        have to do this in the garage or outdoors on account of the
        stink.  (Peng F. Mok)
        ***I find that the candle-and-water technique I have mentioned
        earlier on this group works well - I basically first bend the
        planks one way for sheer and then bend it the other way to lie
        against the frames - it takes time, though:)
         I would guess that any bending technique can be applied in
        this manner: First sheer, and then the other way. If you use
        steam, I guess the whole plank will become wet and flexible -
        pin it in place while it dries and it should fit pretty well
        when it dries! Anyway. the important thing is to make the
        plank fit naturally in place, so the pins and glue don't have
        to force it to keep in place!
         Different woods behave differently, too. I used obeche for
        wales on my Neptunus model (80 guns, 1789) and I found that it
        was much easier to bend and handle than pine, not to mention
        balsa. If the planks on the Golden Hind won't behave, you might
        consider bying planks of a different wood and using them
        instead - it is available if you know where to look.
        (Staale Sannerud)
        ***Several years ago Philips made a travel steamer; a small
        hand held container which you fill with water.  Plug it in and
        steam comes out of a row of small holes.  The steam issued at a
        high temperature and with a bit of pressure.  The purpose of
        the device was to steam the wrinkles out of clothing when
        traveling.
         I found that the row of steam holes was just right for ship
        model planks.  A few moments in front of the device and you can
        bend a plank to fit any stern curve.  Hold the curve until the
        wood cools, let the plank dry, and then glue it in.
         There must be similar units on the market now.  (Dan Johnston)

13.     I am building a solid hull ship; the kit comes with paper
        cut-out templates to check the hull shape.
        Will these paper templates suffice to check out the shape or
        is it intended that one should use the templates to cut out
        balsa templates?
    A:  Typically, the paper templates are too flimsy to use to
        accurately verify the shape of the hull. It is better to copy
        their pattern to a stiffer cardboard or poster board. You can
        also use these patterns to make a stand to keep your model in
        while you work on it, and also to make a nice permanent stand
        for the finished model.
         Ideally, getting a copy of the original ships plans, and
        creating patterns from the ships lines is the best. Many people
        abandon the solid hull that came with the kit, and create their
        own plank-on-frame/plank-on-bulkhead hull (deviating from the
        kit in an attempt to create a more accurate/appealing model is
        quite a common practice among ship modelers). (Monica Chaban)
         ***I usually mount paper templates on some sort of card stock,
        adding stripwood as needed to stiffen the body.
        ( Kurt (Seaphoto) )
         ***IMHO stiff white cardboard has the minimal stiffness and
        durability for hull templates. Mattboard found in art supply
        shops for matting pictures would be ideal.
         You would, for example, fix the printed template patterns to
        the mattboard with rubber cement (not water-based glue) and
        cut as close to the line as you dare with a fine fretsaw or
        power jigsaw, then clean it up with sandpaper to the line.
        Some hull section diagrams are printed in such a way that you
        might need the additional step of tracing them with high
        quality tracing paper (also from your art supply shop) and
        then cementing the traced pattern onto cardboard.  (Septimus)
         ***...good quality card (file folder stock, etc.) stock (or
        thin sheet styrene, or even metal, such as stock from aluminum
        soda cans), and trim that to shape.
         A good idea is to block up the hull so the waterline *or* keel
        is level, and then cut a "tab" on the pattern so it can sit
        using the table as a reference plane...that's more work, but
        it's also more accurate than trying to fit the pattern to the
        hull at the keel and shear line only. (John Kopf)
         ***Even better for templates is 1/64" thick aircraft ply. The
        rubber cement and cut-pout process is just as described above.
        It's very durable. (Clay Feldman)
         ***Regardless, Use something with a bit more stiffness than
        paper. Even 'shirt cardboard' works.  The pointer about adding
        'tabs' which would permit setting all to a horizontal waterline
        is very useful.  Try to keep the working edge of the template
        as thin as possible while retaining the necessary rigidity.
        (RAIcorn824)
         ***...The plywood works great as it is strong and stiff.  The
        balsa has a tendancy to be soft when pressed against the hull
        to check on dimensions. (David Loseke)
         ***If you're transferring the pattern to thim aircraft plywood,
        make a Xerox, lay it face down on the wood and wipe the back
        with gasoline or another serious thinner in a rag. (Don't
        smoke while you're doing this.)  The right amount of soaking
        and pressure will transfer the Xerox powder to the wood.
        (Burl Burlingame)
         ***don't use gasoline for anything except motor fuel.  A
        friend of my sons was burned to death while cleaning dirt bike
        parts in a can of gasoline. The spark that ignited the vapor
        was over 20 feet away.
         A safer method is to heat transfer it. Place the paper on the
        wood, with the toner against the wood and iron it with a normal
        clothes iron, set to a high temp. Hold the iron on for a few
        seconds, then peel the paper off.
         Sometimes this will cause the wood to develop a curve - if you
        heat only  one side of it, so also iron the back side of the
        wood and it will flatten out.
         There are special toners made to transfer eaisly, but the
        standard stuff of a copy machine or laser printer works fine.
        (Ron Ginger)
         ***Actually, ball-point pen works well too...put your drawing
        ink-side down onto the wood and iron the ink into it.
        (John Kopf)

14.     I'm a little mystified by the process of cutting the bevel(s)
        on a bulkhead  or frame of a wooden ship model?
    A:  Good plans will have three views -- the "plan" (top view),
        profile (side), and "section" (slices through the hull
        perpendicular to the other two).
         From the section view, trace the horizontal and vertical lines
        that correspond to the water- and "buttock" lines.
         On the plan and profile views, draw a pair of lines that
        correspond to the front and back edge of the bulkhead or frame.
         Using dividers, transfer each intersection between the drawn
        lines and the water lines and buttock lines to the drawing;
        fair these up with a smooth curve.  You'll now have a single
        drawing of the bulkhead showing BOTH the front and back edges.
         Glue this to the wood, and saw to the outside line. Now bevel
        from the back (*outside*) to the front at the *inner* line --
        the bevels are now complete, and it can be put into place.
        (John Kopf)
         ***Yes, several methods are available..  First, obtain a copy
        of Underhill's book "Plank on Frame Models", volume 1.
         Second, get / buy / make about a dozen 'battens' approximately
        10% or even 15% longer than the hull oength. Take the first
        batten (actually a pair) tack one end to the stem and the other
        to the stern,  "wherever it fits", providing the midships
        section was parallel to your datum line.  Take note of the
        difference in contact with the 'frame' (actually bulkhead).
         Now divide the spaces and insert additional battens.  In a very
        short time, you will see a pattern developing - the side of the
        frame closest to the maximum hull dimension will show maximum
        contact with the batten, and there will be a gap fore or aft.
         At this point you have a couple of choices: shave down the high
        spots on the bulkheads or build up the low spots. (Either will
        be a compromise!)  What you are shooting for is a batten (or
        fairing strip, or whatever you choose to call it) making *solid
        contact* along the 'face' of each bulkhead the entire length of
        the vessel.  In any case, with the exception of the 'dead flat'
        (read more about lofting if the term is unknown), the edge
        surfaces of the bulkheads should never be parallel to the
        longitudinal axis of the vessel (unless you are building a coal
        or garbage barge).  Repeating myself, but Underhill's book
        provides probably the most lucid description ever written for
        modellers on how to cope with the thickness of frames/bulkheads.
        (RAIcorn824)