ross

There is another interesting spur to this thread.
How often, with a kit do you find that you reach a point and are unsure on how to proceed?
The plans are unclear, the instructions don't make mention.
If your ship was a 'real' one then you can do the reasearch and resolve the subject more often than not.
If it is still a 'real' one (Vic, Conny, Vasa, Cutty Sark) then you may actually find pictures as well.
So your task is a lot more satisfying if you can resolve these issues correctly.
 
Nick

I bought their Dos Amigos last year. The hull is inaccurate. I have a set of Admiralty draft copies and she does not measure up. For one thing the deck house is way too big. They've simplified the stern to a transom stern rather than counter and transom as on the original. etc. etc. A lot of the wood is just not nice at all. I did have a build log on the forum before it went pear-shaped, so it's no longer here. basically, I used their hull planks, but replaced the deck with Lime, rebuilt the stern - and the stem. A lot of work....

Many thanks for your replies,thats cleared my question up,will stick to a couple of water butts.Ross

The more I become familiar with the many great ship model kits out there, the more often I seem to hear that this one, or that one are not, in fact models of "real" ships.
 
The manufacturere do a great job of spinning a yarn as to the exploits of the ship their kit represents, but when one does even a little research, one finds out that, many times,  this model is really a fictional replica of either a non-existent ship, or at best a fictional conglomeration of a type of ship which sailed at some point in history.
 
I realize that some ships are, simply, not historically documented, and some liberties must be taken, based upon the best we know about the real ship (the Mayflower, for example), but the ones I am talking about are just an absolute figment of someones imagination.
 
When one reads all of the hoopla about a ships exploits, written by the kit mfgr, how can we separate truth from fiction.
 
Even a well thought of Mfgr like Model Shipways isn't imune from some of the type of things I speak about...  ALL of the advertising material, catalogs, and even the box labels, show the "Niagara" as a radient blue in color.  When you get a paint set for the model, there is no blue included in the set.... Hmmnnnn.   In fact there is no blue on the real ship, and, probably, never was.  It's Black!
 
When I see the extent to which modelers go to make accurate sizes of ropes, rigging, and everything else, and then see how much leeway the kit mfgrs take, it makes me cringe.
 
I am surprised the community does not, at least, put together a list of the out, and out, fake ship kits that are out there, and that the Mfgrs are able to pull the wool over our eyes so much.
 
Dave

Thanks for the info, very interesting, learning more every day,many thanks Ross

So again a bit further, since the last post I tweaked imitation tarring on board. Following the example of one guy who showed progress on http://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/to ... ils/page-5. First I applied aboard graphite powder, spread it on the deck brush and then wipe with paper surpluses. Next, I painted the deck with oil and let dry for about 5 minutes and then scraped the blade of the knife and eventually married again with oil. The result, I think it is much nicer than when I had split boards made ​​only pencil.
I also did a "railing" on the front, it is carved out of balsa wood, it was ultimately the easiest way to do it.
Finally, the stretching rails around the body. With them I proceeded as with planking when I shaped wet latičky around the trunk and then dyed and glued, super glue, which I again spotted on scraps of paper. The black slats, I tried to indicate division and so I just gently took a scalpel, painted, glued and then a completely resurfaced the part where a lot exceeded. Otherwise, I did not want those substances were completely flush, because if it previously did so with some bullshit.

And the final planks are in place.
 
Cheers.