ccoyle
-
Posts
9,756 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by ccoyle
-
Welcome! You're not by any chance related to Clarence Merle Golden (d. 1946 in Lane County) are you?
-
Yep, that was my first thought too when I saw those. That's some serious fine control skills with an airbrush on display right there!- 33 replies
-
- 7
-
-
-
- graf zeppelin
- trumpeter
- (and 2 more)
-
Smugglers tended to use any craft that was fast. In the latter half of the 18th century, cutters were a common choice, and Vanguard Models has a very good kit of one in 1/64 scale. Their banner is on our home page.
-
I can't say with any authority whether Euromodel has ever updated any of their kit range. If they have, I have no knowledge of it, and I have had my ear to the ship modeling ground for 20 years now. What I do know is that their kits are generally highly esteemed, and Royal William is definitely one of their flagship models. Their current MSRP for that kit is 1373 Euros, so you can use that as a starting point to judge how great of a deal you got (bearing in mind that a retailer may charge only 80-85% of that price -- plus tax and shipping).
-
Welcome, Sean. Both of your questions would best go in our generic wood kit discussions area.
-
Interesting link, but even more interesting is the description: "Up for sale is a Mid 20th Century Model of 1541 German Hanseatic League Warship! When on top of the wood stand, it measures 32 1/2" tall, 40 3/4" wide, and 10 1/8" deep. The piece is in excellent overall condition with minor signs of wear consistent with its age and use. " Um ... no. This just goes to show that antiques dealers are not reliable sources of information on ship models. It most certainly is not a ship of 1541, and I'm not going to pay $950 for it unless I have a whole lot more information on its provenance besides just "Mid 20th Century Model." Like, a lot more. Also, notice the difference in the mizzen mast rigs on the two models.
-
This model is an example of a decor model, and it was probably manufactured in Germany, as indicated by both your story and the Hamburg coat of arms (which should have the heads of both lions facing away from the shield). As such, it does not represent any particular ship, nor is it a good scale likeness of a type of ship. I'm not sure what is supposed to be indicated by the year 1541 on the foresail, as that is not the year the city was founded (it is far older), nor is that year indicated on the city's coat of arms. It also certainly does not indicate the year in which the depicted ship was built, as the model is obviously meant to portray a ship that is at least two centuries newer than the types that would have been seen in the Middle Ages. So, it is a fanciful ship, but with a good backstory. A lot of people pick this sort of model up at a yard sale or antique store and have no idea where or when it was built -- you are fortunate to know at least that much.
-
Rant Mode: ON This kit continues to thumb its nose at me and challenge me to "just try and finish me, nyaah!!" I have this sneaking suspicion that the single sheet of diagrams printed one-sided on text-weight paper was supposed to be double-sided, as there is an inexcusable paucity of diagrams. There are, for example, no diagrams at all that show the construction of the wings, ailerons, elevators, or engine. The lack of engine diagram in particular is baffling. I have built a number of radial engines in the past, so I have a general idea of how they are usually built in a card kit, but with only the numbered parts to go by and no diagram, this engine appears to be significantly different. It's a Wright Cyclone, which was a common enough power plant, but these kit parts will not go together in any fashion that resembles a Cyclone. I have a spare kit of a Bloch MB.152, which has a Gnome-Rhone 14-cylider engine. I'm going to see if I can use that kit's cylinder heads for the H-75. Will report back later ... Rant Mode: OFF EDIT: Rant Mode: Retraction I found some of the "missing" diagrams, including one for the engine cylinders. 🙄 The Gnome-Rhone engine was a no-go, being likewise over-simplified, so I'm going to have to make do with the kit engine.
-
I fixed it up for you. Now you can use this one as a pattern.
-
I'll add my voice to the growing cascade of accolades -- all of them well-deserved! A great log, and I look forward to your next project.
-
I've been building card models for roughly 20 years now, but I'm still far from being an advanced practitioner. If you want to see some fantastic card models, check out the builds listed here. Danny was a master of the medium. Sadly, he passed away earlier this year, but he left behind a lot of content to continue inspiring us.
-
The colors are a close match for this season's home and away kits for Everton FC.
- 43 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- Norwegian Sailing Pram
- Model Shipways
- (and 1 more)
-
Additional work on the empennage, plus wing mated to fuselage. Main story here is the wing -- there are pretty much zero instructions on how to afix this to the fuselage. The wing fits between two fuselage bulkheads, but the space produced by them was about 2 mm too short. So I took my best guess at how to fix the problem and simply whacked 2 mm off the aft end of the wing structure. But the wing still wouldn't fit, because the cutouts in the fuselage skins were in the way. So, reckoning that any damage would be covered by the wing fillets, I hacked away at the offending fuselage skins; this was either going to work or be an irretrievable disaster and wind up in the Great Bin in the Sky. Since there were no internal formers to help mate the wing to the fuselage, I first looked at many online images of P-36s and then, once again, made a best guess at how the wing and fuselage should be positioned relative to each other. Final judgement of the outcome would hinge on whether all my guesswork ultimately allowed the wing fillets to be positioned more or less correctly and hide all of the radical surgery. Happily, the fillets went on without much fuss, and everything looks good to go for continued construction.
- 46 replies
-
- 15
-
-
I'm one of those "no treenails" advocates, so take this advice accordingly. 😉 For models that do have treenails, the biggest turn-offs for me are a.) treenails not aligned properly, and b.) treenails too dark (producing a model that looks like it has the pox). So on the basis of color alone, I would choose #1 -- but I'd choose a filler (or stain) that is even lighter.
- 409 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- Syren
- Model Shipways
- (and 1 more)
-
Cap San Diego by mikegr - 1/160
ccoyle replied to mikegr's topic in - Build logs for subjects built 1901 - Present Day
You got it in the right place, since you are doing a scratch build using the kit parts as templates. I've seen this attempted before, but I can't remember in whose build log it was or if they ever finished. The card company, for those who may not know, is Dom Bumagi ("Paper House"). I believe they are out of the Ukraine, and they offer some very nice kits. -
Progress continues, but it's not terribly exciting. The next step of the build is to prepare for fiberglassing the inside of the hull. The major component of this prep is to sand smooth the fillets around the bulkheads and to clean up the messy spots. This is one end of the hull finished up. I did about five hours of sanding last weekend, but I didn't keep track of how much total time the job required. The other end of the hull is about half done. Here's one side, on which sanding has barely started. You can see it looks pretty rough and there's a lot of slop to clean up. And here's the other half, which was today's task and is about 95% done. Lots of fine dust all around. I had to stop for the day because the sandpaper was wearing my fingertips raw. That's all for now!
- 299 replies
-
- 18
-
-
I have the card version in my stash.
-
Thanks, guys, I do appreciate the encouragement, but I'm being honest with my assessment. There are folks who are far better at working in this medium than I. I can only try to get better each time and try new things. Some kits go together better than others (kinda like wood kits in that respect). Some turn out great and hold up well under close scrutiny, others benefit from some thoughtful and judicious camera work. This one will fall into the latter category, methinks.
-
The acquisition of such an item would probably put you in some pretty select company as far ship modelers go.
-
Welcome aboard!
-
Fuselage, cont'd. Not really happy with this kit, which is too bad considering how much I like the subject. In short, there are a disturbing number of fit issues that I have only partially been able to navigate. On top of that, the diagrams are on the skimpy side; this has led to the discovery of a number of parts only after I have completed the particular structure to which they belong. Oopsie! Anyways, if the model is held at arm's length and viewed in dim light, it still creates the impression of a Mohawk.
- 46 replies
-
- 12
-
Our Emblem ®
