Landlubber Mike

Holy cow, that looks amazing Jason. It almost looks like it was drawn on the computer or something the lines look so perfect. I'll send you my Pegasus to copper if you don't mind...

Really nice work Don. The wood in the MarisStella kits is really beautiful with a natural finish. By the way, I blame you for me now working on three builds at the same time

Friends, I'm a bit stuck in terms of a color scheme for the hull. I was originally going to go with a similar approach that Kenji Nakajima's build took (first picture at the top of my log) and go with mostly black and either walnut or pear for the brown areas, with boxwood accents. But, after seeing Chapman's plans for the Venus and the two builds for the Göta Lejon, I'm thinking of trying something different. In particular, I'm really taken by the color scheme on this model: If I went that route, does the blue strip running across the full hull look odd? Does it look odd to have the dark brown areas just above that blue stripe? I haven't seen too many ships with this color scheme, but it seems like these Swedish ships might have had a slightly different color scheme from other European ships. An alternative is Chapman's color plan of the Venus, which is similar, except it looks like a black stripe runs across the top of the hull, but there is a red stripe at the top near the quarterdeck: Alternatively, I could go with something like this color plan, where it's mostly black and pear around the gunports, with blue at the top of the hull at the quarterdeck and forecastle: Any suggestions or preferences would be greatly appreciated as I try to figure things out. To avoid the use of paint, I'd do the hull below the waterline in holly, wales in black, and that middle band around the gunport likely in pear (I think box might be a little light for my tastes). It's just what to do with the other areas of the upper hull that I can't decide on Thanks!

Thanks guys, really appreciate the support. Jason, I'll have to do a little more research I spent some time with the kit the last few days. First I test fit the bulkheads with the keel, and was happy to see that there was a nice snug fit without the need for much opening of the slots. So, a good start on things. Then I read Pete's build notes - a very nice resource for Euromodel builds. He correctly pointed out that the mast slots in the keel are incorrectly positioned. Not only are the slots positioned too far back, but the main mast and mizzen masts are at the wrong rake. Pete did say that the foremast needed to be repositioned another 3mm, but at least with my keel, it seemed like the foremast slot was maybe off only 1mm or so, if at all, and was at the correct rake. Interestingly, the keel matches Plan Sheet 17, but not Plan Sheet 3. My guess is that Plan Sheet 3 is correct, after looking at other plan sheets in the kit and taking a look at Chapman's Plate XXXI. So, I redid the slots for the main and mizzen masts, which included adding some scrap plywood so that the masts would fit snug in the slots. Thankfully Pete pointed this out, as it was an easy fix at this stage. I had heard of people having issues with the plans not matching up, and that does seem to be the case unfortunately. Interestingly, the stem matches Plan Sheet 17 (first picture below), but not Plan Sheet 3 (second and third pictures). You can even see how the bulkhead slots on the plans don't match up with the slots in the keel: The stem is pretty close, but this brought back painful memories of the Corel Unicorn kit, which I abandoned in frustration because the plans were all over the place, and on top of that, did not match the Chapman plans in the Architectura in having a hull that was too tall by a factor of something like 20mm. So, I spent some time taking various measurements (gunports to waterline, waterline to bottom of keel, etc.) against Chapman's Plate XXXI. In my edition of the Architectura, Plate XXXI is smaller than the Euromodel plans by a factor of approximately 2.3. I am very happy to say that the Euromodel plans appear spot on with the Chapman plans in terms of hull dimensions! I do want to say that I don't want to come across as overly critical of the kit or anything. Just wanted to point these items out so that others that might be following this log might avoid any confusion with their kits. Aside from a few inconsistencies, the plans seem very true to Chapman's Plate XXI which is a big relief. Next I started work on determining where to install the mounting screws for the pedestals. I've been using #6-32 zinc plated machine screws with a nut epoxied into the keel. They seem to fit nicely through the pedestals I bought from Model Expo, and I can get the screws in 3" lengths. The stern is a bit lower than the stem, so I started by marking the waterline, and then positioned the pedestals approximately 25% of the way from both the aft end and fore end of the keel. This worked nicely in that the pedestals were safely between bulkheads. I'm still considering color schemes, so I'll drill the holes for the screws/nuts once I figure out the wood to be used for the keel. Here's a quick photo I snapped, with some bonus artwork in the background from the real artists in the family

Really nice work Martin. Great job on everything. Those Fly plans are really detailed, to the point of even detailing the friezes. Are you going to add them to your Fly? Will you use photo-etched parts (not sure if the Fly kit has them, the Pegasus does) or paint them on? I think I'm leaning towards painting them on.

Really amazing work Greg, wow! It's amazing how much detail these plastic kits have, especially with the various upgrade options. I think I'd be really nervous undertaking a project with such small detail pieces. I can't tell you how many nights I spent a ton of time coming through the living room rug looking for a small piece that fell to the ground - the PE pieces on your Dreadnought would really be a pain to find!

I haven't been able to find much on Swedish frigates on the period. One ship I did come across is the Göta Lejon from 1746. I found plans as well as two beautiful models. It's obviously a bigger ship (I think a Third Rate), but it shares a lot of the design characteristics seen in Chapman's Plates XXXI and XXXII of his Architectura. This, along with the Venus pictured a few posts ago (and the closed waist), make me lean towards thinking that the ship in the plates is a Swedish vessel.

Thanks everyone - the more the merrier! Mark, part of what sent me down this path of research was the helpful discussion you and others had with J.P. on his build log. I wasn't aware of the stove/fireplace distinction though, thank you! I need to get my hands on the Boudriot "History of the French Frigate" book - it's one of the few very expensive books out there though

Thanks Frank, really appreciate the kind words. I'm sorta bumbling along and driving myself crazy at times, but I really am having fun playing with wood and power tools (though, it's probably all fun until someone loses a finger!). One of these days I want to go for the "Frank weathered special" on a model

Provenance of Kit There has been a lot of discussion on what ship this kit is supposed to represent. What is clear is that the kit is based on Plates XXXI and XXXII of Chapman's Architectura, with the only details being that these plates are included in the section of "Privateers": Euromodel states it's a French vessel that was launched in 1747. However, it appears that the ship at the following links is likely the "true" La Renommee for that period: http://ancre.fr/en/monographies-en/20-monographie-de-la-renommee-fregate-de-8-1744.html http://maquettes-marine.pagesperso-orange.fr/renommee/renommee.html http://www.shipmodels.com.ua/eng/models/elite/renomme/index.htm From what I've read on a Russian ship model forum, in Boudriot's research, Admiral Paris, a Frenchman, in his Souvenirs de la Marine (which was published in 1879), was copying over plans from Chapman's Architectura and mistakenly labeled it the Le Renommee, when he was intending to say something about the anchors or stern or something being similar to the Le Renommee. That mistake has been passed down, and may have been passed down into this kit. Then there is Keith Julier, in The Period Ship Handbook 2, who believed that the kit represents a frigate of the same name that was built in 1793. That vessel only had 32 guns, while the kit supplies 40. It clearly can't be that ship because the Architectura was published in 1768. Then there are others that think it's actually a Swedish ship named the "Jupiter" because of the figurehead and certain stern details. On page 106 of Wolfram zu Mondfeld's "Historic Ship Models" is the exact picture of the stern which is labeled as the Swedish privateer from 1760. The German site below, as well as a Russian model ship forum I came across, also think it's a Swedish ship. I can't find anything on a Swedish ship named the Jupiter though, and a query to the Digitalt Museum in Sweden came up empty. http://www.line-of-b...regatte-jupiter I'm by no means a naval historian at all, but all this is very interesting. One thing I was thinking was whether there were particular features of this ship that are uniquely French, Swedish, Danish or other. I would surmise that you could look to plainly visible things like the figurehead, ornamentation, flags, etc. Then there are structural items such as how the stern is constructed, height between the decks (for example, I learned in researching the Unicorn and Lyme that they were based off of French frigates, which had a lower height between the decks than seen in the typical English ship of that time, as well as had shorter railing, etc. on the quarterdecks). I thought maybe the open stern would provide a clue, but Plate III shows a very similar but smaller (and unfortunately, unknown) ship, and Plate LI shows another with a similar open stern that is of an English East Indiaman. One clue might be the waist. I've done a lot of research on the waist of ships because the Corel Unicorn clearly uses the wrong waist for a British frigate of that time. From the Gardiner books on frigates, the waist of ships in the 18th century was generally open during the early to middle part of the century, and gradually started closing up as the 19th century approached. I think this principle clearly applied to British ships, and likely French ships as well (I don't have any books on French frigates, but flipping through the Ancre monographs for ships at the time, all seemed to have similar open-waisted ships to the British). Gardiner seems to have essentially limited his studies to British frigates, as his last book, the "Sailing Frigate," uses pictures from the NMM. In that book, he shows the development of the filling in of the waist, and shows a similar closed waist with row of light gratings similar to Plate XXXII with the Lacedaemonian (SLR0674 from the NMM), a ship that was circa 1812: http://collections.r...ects/66635.html What's curious is that Plate XXXII shows a very closed waist which wasn't used by the British until the beginning of the 19th century. So, I don't think Chapman copied it from the British. Then take a look at the Venus, an actual Swedish frigate that was designed by Chapman and built in 1783 (it was captured by the Russians in 1789): A smaller ship for sure, and obviously post-dates the Architectura. But look at the general design with the gunport rows, small windows at the quarterdeck, the name badge just under the row of windows on the stern, and in particular, the waist and main deck with the rows of gratings (again, not seen in British frigates until the beginning of the 19th century). It looks like the little younger sister to Plate XXXI! All this is not at all meant to disparage Euromodel. The kit is clearly based on, and true to, Chapman's plans. As we know, actual ships sometimes differed from the plans, ships were captured and converted, etc. In any event, whether Chapman himself designed the ship in Plates XXXI and XXXII or copied it from elsewhere is anyone's guess, but I would lean towards this being a Chapman design given the early adoption of the closed waist and line of gratings. Now, whether the ship in Plates XXXI and XXXII was in fact built or not is also anyone's guess. And does this make this a Swedish ship? In the grand scheme of things, does any of this matter? The kit makes for a very nice model of a mid-18th century frigate with really beautiful lines that I will have a lot of fun building - regardless of whether I put a French or Swedish flag on her in the end

There are a few Euromodel build logs on here, and one thing that really stands out with their kits is the quality. The plans are absolutely first rate. This kit has 18 plan sheets, which go into incredible detail on everything from deck items, to rigging, sails, etc. The order in which things are presented in the sheets is a bit of a head scratcher, but not an issue. The wood in the kit is also very good, and the fittings are especially nice. The cast pieces in particular are really well done - they really put the MS Charles Morgan cast pieces to shame. The box is quite heavy! Here are some pictures of what comes in the box:

Build Log Contents

My next model is the La Renommee kit from Euromodel: This kit has been on my wishlist for quite a long time. I believe someone had a beautiful build log going pre-crash with MSW 1.0. That image stuck with me, as well as the Kenji Nakajima model pictured above. As far as I can tell, the only log going here is from J.P., who is doing a masterful job and setting the bar very high! I bought the kit on eBay a few months ago. I originally was going to build this after I finished the Pegasus and Charles Morgan, but given how much I have been bashing those two kits, I thought it would be a nice change of pace to build a kit from the box (even though Euromodel kits often encourage builders to take advantage of the incredible plans to enhance the kit). I also have the Euromodel Friedrich Wilhelm zu Pferde on my shelf -- a really amazing kit -- but I want to better my skills before tackling that kit to do it the justice it deserves. When my kit arrived, I realized not only was I missing Plan Sheet 1, but the keel was pretty warped (it had obviously been sitting somewhere for quite a while). I contacted Euromodel, and Massimo Mazza was incredibly courteous and helpful in replacing both for me. To show my gratitude for Euromodel's kindness, I decided that I would start this model alongside the others. I just hope to do the kit, Massimo and the other folks at Euromodel proud by my efforts! One thing I should mention is that this kit is in Italian and has limited instructions. However, Euromodel, together with MSW's own PiratePete007, have done a really nice job in providing translation and other materials. In particular, Pete has really done us model builders (and Euromodel) a great service in putting together very detailed guides on how one can go about putting together models from the Euromodel line-up. Those guides are really well done and very insightful, especially for me as I am on the beginner end of the spectrum, so a big thank you to Pete!

Beautiful work Mark, very nice!

It's very good - I picked it up as well as earlier books as used books for not too much money. That particular book is in full color, which therefore was a lot more helpful than the earlier B&W books. He uses a lot of interesting techniques and materials at a smaller scale, but I think they can carry forward to larger scales that most of us mere mortals model at.

Hey E.J., I was just reading the Philip Reed book "Building a Miniature Navy Board Model," and his model of the Royal George had an entry balcony very similar to the one you added to your build. I instantly thought of your Couronne when I saw it. Very nice job by the way. It's coming along really nicely!

Thanks guys! Don - the kit has really nice looking plates. Much better than the copper foil tape that came with my MS Charles Morgan. I don't know if the plates are self adhesive, or you need to use glue for them. Judging by BE's response, it sounds like I will need to use glue to fix them BE - hmm, that gives me something to think about. Thanks for passing that along. Martin - no finish on the redheart just yet. From what I've been reading, any finish just delays the inevitable so no rush to do so I don't think.

Very nice Dave! Beautiful work, I love your use of different woods. A big inspiration as I try to take a similar approach on my builds. Looking forward to following your next projects.

I finished the bulwark planking, though I left the very tops open for the thin strips of above the forecastle and quarterdeck. I think the redheart is a really nice touch. It won't stay this red, but over time will fade to a more orange-brown color which I think will be a nice effect against some of the other colors in the build. It's a nice wood to work with, though it can be a little crumbly and has a little of a burning rubber odor when working on it with tools (it doesn't bother me at all, but given that some people mention it, it must bother them). To tie everything together, in addition to the bulwark planking and red strip on the upper hull, I will likely use redheart for the bitts and possibly capstan. I'm also planning on integrating it into the stern as well as the quarterbadges as a bit of a decorative touch. I didn't bother with different thickness woods for the spirketting and waterway or with any focus on the widths of the planks for the non-waist areas, as those areas will be covered by the forecastle and quarterdeck. In case you could see a little of the bulwarks, through the gunport or otherwise, I figured I might as well use the redheart for consistency instead of stains or paints. Not sure what I want to tackle next. I'm mostly a lap modeler, so I'm thinking of doing the upper hull rails and certain other elements now, including possibly the stern and quarterbadges, and at some point I'll also need to treenail the deck. I want to delay adding the cannons as long as possible given my propensity for popping them off my Badger, but I'm also hoping to delay the coppering as long as I can as well. My guess is that I'll do most of the outer hull details, copper the hull, then switch back to the main deck to add the deck items and guns.

Turning out to be a real beauty Nick. Very nice job!

Looks great Joe, I'm in for the ride. Did you make a decision on your Morgan yet?

Beautiful work!

Hey Ron, your Morgan is coming out really nicely! Hope you don't mind that I've been following your log. It's given me a lot of inspiration as I think about how I will go about doing things on my Morgan. It's definitely a different type of build, isn't it? Dealing with the plank sheer and the various frames and supports and rails, it's a little more complicated than the typical kit that is out there. Everything is fine on my end, I've just been a little busy, and have been getting in some work on my Pegasus when I can find some time. Part of the delay on the Morgan was that I have been trying to figure out how to approach the color scheme. I was originally going to go with pear stained black for the black areas, boxwood for the ochre, and was hoping to do holly for the white areas. Then I thought about trying African blackwood for the black areas, and took the suggestion from Dave (DocBlake) to look at yellowheart. Well, I was thankfully able to source enough holly from Jeff's Hobbymill close-out, and to boot he had extra yellowheart left over so he milled me what I think I needed. The African blackwood was tough to source though, and after 2 months of emailing and calling various suppliers, I got very disappointed. Then MWB suggested a supplier of wood for inlays who works with ebony and was able to cut for me sheets and strips in the sizes I needed. Hooray! So after a lot of time, I've settled on ebony for the black areas, yellowheart for the ochre, and holly for the white areas. The deck will likely be maple stained with General Finishes Antique Oak to give it that grayish look, and the waterway will likely be pear stained a dark brown. If I can pull it off, it should be a pretty unique build. We'll see if I can pull it off though. I prefer the look of natural woods, or stained woods in lieu of using paints. I was fortunate enough to find a ship in the Morgan with three main colors that I can replicate directly with wood. There's a lot of planning that I'll need to go through, which I've started. For example, the plank sheer may end up being comprised of all three woods - yellowheart for the interior of the ship, ebony for the exterior, and a strip for holly on top of the ebony for the white stripe. A bit complicated, but should be fun. Now that I have the wood, I can get back to work. Thank for looking in! Good luck with your Morgan!

Really nice work Don, congratulations on a wonderful build! Those MariStella kits really work themselves into nice models. But your skills in bringing it to life, along with your added touches, really make for a nice model. Nice property too - must be really relaxing sitting on the mower in that beautiful part of the world. Do you get a lot of snow and cold and long winters? Perfect modeling weather

Hey Chris, There is a good discussion on BE's build log on the cannons, as well as Martin's and Alistair's Fly logs. The guns are too large and out of scale. I went with the same barrels that BE used for his Pegasus that he describes here (I bought mine from Cornwallmodelboats): http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/332-hms-pegasus-by-blue-ensign-victory-models-enhancing-the-kit-a-build-log-of-sorts/?p=4136 http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/332-hms-pegasus-by-blue-ensign-victory-models-enhancing-the-kit-a-build-log-of-sorts/?p=354782