Jack12477

I have seen Dan's model HMS Vulture and started to follow his build log recently. Have to go back to the beginning and read thru to play catch up. Have not (yet) seen his technique for making blocks but will certainly look carefully for it in his log(s).

Have a look at Dan Vad's blocks, Jack. He does these in the traditional way by hand after cutting lengths on a saw. Saw, scalpels, files, sanding. I am pretty determined to keep practising since it is clear some people can do it!
 
Tony

Tony, beautiful photos. Thanks for posting. In what year(s) did NMM say these models were built?

Thanks, Tony. What prompted my question was the level of detail, especially in the rope and blocks on each of the models. It's amazing what they could produce 200-300 some years ago without the aid of all the "power" tools we have today. I have not seen blocks or rope like that from any of the current kit manufacturers with the exception of Chuck's Syren products.
 
Even the scalloped edging on the plank ends on the foredeck of the 1790 Trial is amazing detail.
 
Thanks for posting !

Thanks, Tony. What prompted my question was the level of detail, especially in the rope and blocks on each of the models. It's amazing what they could produce 200-300 some years ago without the aid of all the "power" tools we have today. I have not seen blocks or rope like that from any of the current kit manufacturers with the exception of Chuck's Syren products.
 
Even the scalloped edging on the plank ends on the foredeck of the 1790 Trial is amazing detail.
 
Thanks for posting !

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 118 – Chain Pipes/Catheads/Topgallant Rail
 
Not a great deal of progress to report – just trying to get the model to the scope of volume I of the book.  The first picture shows the second chain pipe being inserted.  These reach down to the hold where the chain was stored.  From these openings the chain was run forward around the winch to the hawse holes.
 

 
In the next picture blanks for the catheads have been fitted.  The fancy rail is cut out where these pass through.  They will bolt through carlings on the inboard ends and into the framing at the side.
 

 
While sheaves were being cut into the catheads the pieces of the forecastle topgallant rail were cut, boiled and put into the fixture shown below to dry.
 

 
The rail will consist of a central bulwark plank with strips attached to the top on either side to simulate a thin top rail – much easier that to bend the 2” rail on its edge.  Sanding and painting make it look like a single rail – much like the multi-part rails along the sides.  In the next picture the rail has been assembled -  including short stanchions on the inside – and is being glued to the fancy rail.
 

 
Paint was scaped from the fancy rail for this.  The topgallant rail was then bolted through the pinholes, finish sanded and painted – as shown in the last picture.
 

 
This picture also shows the finished catheads installed – with their American plaque emblems painted on the ends.
 
Ed

Also, Harv', less vacuuming is needed afterwards ...

Well, Isopropyl beats dynamite for removing planks-and it's cheaper
 
Harvey

Mine quite often IS, Matt ... this is why my accountant recommends I buy shares in Isopropyl !!

Hi Dennis
 
Seeing the photos of the chain conjures up the image of the chain swinging wildly from side to side as the AG is buffeted by winds and rising seas. The waves crash over the bulwarks, lashing the deck with water, which then flows heavily from the scuppers as the hull is tossed from side to side. Up front, the bow buries itself in a large sea, whilst at the stern, the propeller thrashes wildly out of water as the stern is heaved above the waves. On deck, those crew members who are forced to stay outside, bear the full brunt of the weather as they're thrown about from side to side....
 
Yep, Dennis, so good is your AG, that it really sets my mind wandering. That's a true test of a great model.
 
Well done.
 
Cheers
 
Patrick

You guys have provided amazing information and insight into the term ‘Kit Bashed”….I can clearly see here at MSW this is a term open to interpretation (which I think is actually quite refreshing).
 
 
I’ve spent enough time competing in competitions that have very specific rule books, and while I understand the reason and purpose of such things….I much prefer artistic freedom to do as I choose.
 
 
Having read all the above comments the term "Kit Bashed" seems to imply the kit builder will spend a great deal more time and/or money on their build....to bring it to life as they imagine it should be.  
 
 
Perhaps another way to look at it would be; it fills the very large gap between stock box kit builds and scratch builds. 
 
 
So when I see a build log that says it’s a "Kit Bashed” project, I know the builder is going to step out of the box so to speak   
 
I really appreciate all the comments and I’m going away from this question with a much better understanding of the intent.
 
 
Thanks again 
 
 
Boyd

As another with a model railroader (MRR) background, I agree with Andy. It's important to define, if we are going to an IPMS or NMRA event, when you have to categorize the models for a contest. As an occasional contest judge and model evaluator for model railroading, I've been in the cross hairs of some irate contestants. It's a tough spot to be in. I try to avoid contest judging nowadays, but still help to evaluate folks' work, normally in their homes. Can't haul your layout in to my place to look at track-work or scenery, can you?
 
We don't judge here, we support and offer constructive criticism. Big reason why I'm here. For our purposes and  usage, super-detailing and kit bashing are equally valid terms and the MRRs here will occasionally slip and call these kit-bashes superdetailing. Let's not fall on our swords over a little semantic issue. C'est la vie!

I don't see why there's all this so-called "fuzzy" or grey area.
 
If you start with "A" and end up with a highly detailed and hyper accurate "A" (even if you had to significantly re-build or modify it), it should be considered super-detailing.
 
If you start with "A" and end up with "B" OR if you start with "A" and "B" and combine them to get "C" it's kit bashing.
 
 
Andy

I think, like most, the answer is "it depends".   Replacing kit parts with other parts really isn't a bash.  It is in the broad sense, but it's like putting better tires on a car or pinstriping.   Drop a completely different engine and we're talking "bash".  
 
I suppose, opening up the gundeck and fully detailing it would be a bash... as would as other have said, about taking a kit and making into something else.  Or updating.. such as WWII New Jersey and turning it into a Vietnam era. 
 
But... unlike the other hobbies mentioned which have definitions that are pretty much hobby wide, shipmodeling doesn't at this point.

I don't see any reason why we couldn't expand our lexicon a bit. 
 
 
Andy

I've got to climb up on the soapbox with Andy.  The ship building understanding of kit bashing is totally different from that in model aviation where a bash is turning a known design into something else.  An F-22 biplane would be a good example.  This definition is consistent with the terminology used in model railroading.  But, this IS a ship building forum so I'll abide by the commonly used meaning here.

I kinda like Andy's definition of kit-bashing vs. super-detailing.  However, around here I think you will find the two terms are used more or less interchangeably.

it's kinda what I enjoy doing........taking the hull of a known kit and turn it into some other ship.  your comment Andy,  makes a lot of sense......I never thought of it that way.

Personally, I feel the term "kit-bashed" is being completely misused in the model ship building community.
 
Coming from a model railroading background, kit-bashing means taking something and turning it into a completely different model. Usually multiple kits are used, but occasionally one kit is heavily rebuilt to reflect a different prototype.
 
What I find here, is most builds labelled "kit-bash" are in effect super-detailing projects. Taking something, and increasing the accuracy and detail levels. Fundamentally, the kit remains what it is, as stated on the box, but more closely reflects its prototype, even if a major rebuild is conducted.
 
In other words, Dafi's HMS Victory build is a classic example of a Super-Detailing project. I also consider JGerson's Rattlesnake a super detailing project.
 
A kit bash, would be taking a Revell "Cutty Sark" model kit and turning it into the Great Republic. 
 
I'll step down off Mark's milk crate (or is it soap box?) now.
 
Andy

Cutter; 12 Guns. Object ID SLR0704. 
The description provided on the NMM web site is: "Scale: probably 1:72. A contemporary (?) plank on frame full hull model of a 12-gun cutter. The fact that the hull is planked in carvel fashion, (edge to edge planking), and that a square topsail is rigged would suggest a date of about 1820. Also the decoration on the stern indicates the name ‘Pelican’ although a cutter of this name cannot be traced either as a man-of-war or a revenue cruiser".
 
The interesting thing here (for me, at least!) is that again the belaying rack at the bow is running fore-aft by the bowsprit.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Tony

They look to be hanging nicely Popeye.  Really well done.  Perhaps you should consider early retirement and open up a ship's chandlery!

It's amazing the amount of detail you're putting into her Dennis. Like Piet was saying, the other fishing boat models I've seen just look a little bare in comparison. Not to take anything away from them, just the difference between going the extra mile or not. Nice work!
 
Cheers

Cutter Hawke 1777, NMM Object ID SLR0314
Next of the models I saw is the model referenced by Goodwin in the AOTS book on the cutter Alert. Unfortunately, when the model was taken out Dave Lindridge noticed that someone had damaged the topsail and had put it back in position totally out of place. This is something they will fix, but as the details are so interesting I am still posting the pics for those who have a particular interest in the Alert. As I mentioned previously, this was the only cutter with the topmast aft of the main mast.
 
It is interesting that there are many details quite at variance with the Alert shown by Goodwin. See, for example, the shrouds.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Tony

John,
 
Well said, as goes for Mark.

Well said John.  I think most of us feel the same way but have never expressed it.  I know I feel that way and haven't said it.