Morgan

Dafi, The 14 September entry logs what is applied to / painted on the ship, the other earlier entries are the stores received by the ship, so they are not additive. But your question still remains given the disproportionate amounts. Gary

Thanks Dafi, I’ll make a point of looking in. Gary

My bad Dafi, your right and the usage supports this: 8 NRNM 1064/83; Record number 2376. Another expense, entered by the Victory’s carpenter dated 18 August states: ‘To painting Boats the Quarter deck and Refreshing ye. Paint on the Ships Sides this Mo. [month]) 11’. The Paint and materials listed in the margin are as follows: ‘Paint White 95 lbs. Paint Yellow 24 lb. Paint Black 67 lbs. Oil 30 gallons. Brushes Six No.’ The carpenter’s entry dated 14 September reads: To painting the ships side after caulking, the Gunroom and Officers Apartments under the Awning and Quarter deck Waist &c. after Refitting and the paint and materials consumed for the above entry listed in the margin are given as: Yellow – 350 lbs; Black – 150 lbs; White – 450 lbs.; Oil – 47 gallons; Brushes – 20 in No.8 and Concerning the yellow currently used for the ship’s sides and other applications in the Victory, a letter dated 6 December 1805 from William Marsden, Secretary of the Navy Board, states that Commissioner Middleton, ‘submitted a proposal from Lord Nelson that the private ships in the fleet are painted three times a year and the flagships four times a year. The proportion of white paint to yellow is to be 6 lbs to 1 lb’.14 In short Nelson authorised a six-to-one mix of white and yellow, which would be so light as to verge on the colour cream. So the yellow / white mix must have been plastered on! Or the the black has better coverage. All above from Goodwin.

No argument on that one!

I guess because it was mixed by hand, other than by weight / volume there would be little consistency between successive coats, then all Ochers themselves vary immensely from light to dark, again no batch or quality control in those days 😮 , just the Mk1 eyeball. Then I suppose it depends where they sampled the ‘Salmon Pink’ from, I’m guessing an internal surface (Goodwin says some of the internal upper deck was yellow) as all the external planking will surely have been replaced long ago given all those refits and restorations, and if it was an internal surface was the yellow paint diluted as much as the outside? Too many variables, I guess we have to defer to the experts. Gary

Dafi I understand that the yellow was diluted extensively with linseed oil, which itself has a yellowish tinge, I doubt the black would be cut (diluted) as much, but it was to some extent as we know the hull colour was really a dark grey, so I’m not surprised the yellow quantities are lower. Actually Nelson thought the the yellow stripes were still too dark and wanted a much lighter colour, but Trafalgar got in the way and he was never to see this put in place. Gary

Going back to Goodwin's notes these are the paints supplied to Victory: " The overall analysis of paint related issues recorded in the carpenter’s accounts in the Victory in 1805 conclude the following points: 1. Lime and glue were employed for whitewashing the ship internally along the ship’s sides along the middle and lower gundecks and equally extensively throughout the orlop and within the hold. 2. Black varnish was applied for yards, tops, cross-trees and quite probably on the topsail and sheet bitts of each mast. 3. Linseed oil was mixed with the paint pigments. 4. Tar was applied for blacking the wales, especially at the ‘bends’, such as the main wale near the ship’s water line. 5. Black oakum was equally applied. The document is exceedingly thorough in accounting for all paint colours or pigments used. In this host of information there is a remarkable absence of reference to the red ochre paint that is supposedly synonymous with warships of the period. Red paint applied to the inner faces and edges of gun port lids, gun carriages, gun port sills, lintels and side facings is generally thought to be a predominant (and perhaps iconic) paint feature on the Admiralty Board ship models. Red is also evident in many paintings by recognized marine artists, for example, Brooking, Cleveley, Dodd, Loutherbourg, Luny and Pocock, to name but a few. These are the relevant stores supplied to Victory at Portsmouth on 31 August 1805: 1. White – 120 lb 2. Yellow – 34 lb 3. Black Varnish – 66 gallons 4. Glue – 12 lb 5. Lime – 8 bushels 6. Whitewash brushes – 6 Then on 2 September 1805: 1. Yellow – 350 lb 2. Black – 150 lb 3. White – 150 lb 4. Oil. – 47 gallons 5. White – 66 lb 6. Black – 13 lb 7. Yellow – 78 lb 8. Verdigris (sic) – 5 lb 9. Prussian Blue – 1 lb Then on 6 September 1805: 1. White – 86 lb 2. Yellow – 234 lb 3. Oil. – 2 1/2 gallons 4. Black Varnish – 66 gallons. lb” It may well be that they used the black varnish, which depending on dilution could be greyish and semi translucent, but who knows those gun carriage wheels have been replaced long since! Just to correct my note on the red paint I mentioned above Goodwin also says "No evidence has come to light indicating when the Victory changed her original red-painted inboard works to yellow ochre, but it is considered highly likely that she had red inboard works when she was the flagship of Admiral Sir John Jervis at the battle of St Vincent on 14 February 1797. Although the Victory could have adopted whitewash or yellow ochre at any time between early 1803 and 1805, the change most likely occurred when Thomas Hardy superseded Samuel Sutton". Certainly Turner's paintings does not show red, just a dark yellow ocher, and Turner went on board the Victory in December 1805 and January 1806 and would have witnessed her colour scheme first hand. Gary

Ronald, Ongoing research hasn’t identified the colours of gun carriages and wheels, but what we know is that the black hull is actually a deep slate grey (Victory’s new colours), so grey on the wheels wouldn’t be wrong, the raw paints were often mixed with other paints and oils so it is unlikely any of the colours were a deep black or deep yellow. Gary

Ronald, I would go with your personal choice for aesthetic or historical reasons. The ex-curator of HMS Victory Peter Goodwin examined the carpenters records preceding the Battle of Trafalgar and he identified that there was no red paint used, the colours throughout the ship were black, yellow, white, verdigris and a very small amount of Prussian Blue, all of which would usually be cut with linseed oil. This was published in a 2013 article of The Mariner’s Mirror (journal of the Society for Nautical Reearch). Chances are the carriages were yellow (ochre) with black wheels. Gary

Looking at the image the passage seems a bit abstract, is there a preceding series of notes that may give some context to these comments. Gary

You are reading it right, the ones in the waist are ‘lidless’. Gary

People will recognise Alert from the AOTS book so it will probably register easier with your target market, but can there be a Sprightly option to increase appeal?

Just catching up on this superb build. I’d never been a fan of the Corel cast ports, but I’ve changed my mind looking at your Bellona, the natural wood finish complements then nicely. Gary

If I’m not mistaken Chris has developed an Endeavour for Amati recently, but like the Victory its release date is somewhere in the future. Gary

Good to see you back Chris. A while ago on this forum you toyed with the idea of a 1:64 frigate, possibly a Leda, given there has to be a commercial side to your kits how about Shannon and Chesapeake - this would appeal to both sides of the pond. Gary

Caldcraft produce a 24pdr in 1:32 scale, it’s the only large scale cannon that I’m aware of, but it is expensive at US$41.41 for a single kit from Cornwall model boats. There are other cheaper large cannons on their website but their ‘shape’ isn’t necessarily authentic, but depends on whether that’s a consideration for you. Gary

Hi Lin, Lookin good, I’ll tag along, I’m also building the Trincomalee on and off for 10 years now, at 1:64 scale. Someday I’ll get around to posting som pics. Good luck at your rate of progress she will be in the water decades ahead of mine 🙂 If you need any help with plans or photographs let me know I’ve got most things covered, and if I get stuck I’m only 10 minutes walk from the ship herself. Gart

Hi Christian, Looking good. The chequered floor was usually a painted canvas, however the ‘Great Cabin’ was often decorated according to the Captains own taste. Gary

Caldercraft offer them here for download: http://www.jotika-ltd.com/Pages/1024768/Manuals_Victory.htm Gary

I’ve had a kit of HMS Snake barely started for several years, during which time I’ve struggled to get back in to building, what has caught my imagination is a conversion using the Snake kit as a starting point. My plan is to convert the Snake kit into a Cruizer class ship sloop of 1828, also named HMS Cruizer, which may seem odd at first sight as there already is a Caldercraft kit of HMS Cruizer of 1797. Confused? Stay with it a moment and I’ll just put things in to context. HMS Cruizer (name class) of 1797 was a two masted brig sloop, which spawned over 100 ships predicated on the same basic design. HMS Snake was a 3 masted ship sloop based on the Cruizer design also of 1797, only 2 ship sloops were initially completed, although several of the brig sloops were later converted to ship sloops as the lessons of war, particularly those of 1812 showed the ship sloop rig to be more resilient to battle damage. In 1826 5 more of the Cruizer class were ordered, 2 of which were to be ship rigged, but the changes weren’t merely in the rig, the ship sloops were to be lengthened, as demonstrated on the plans still held by the National Maritime Museum (http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/83740.html): Plan ZAZ3949 (attached) “Scale: 1:48. Plan showing the body plans, sheer lines and longitudinal half-breadth for building Childers (1827), Cruizer (1828), Favorite (1829), Hyacinth (1829), Racehorse (1830) and Hazard (1837), all 18-gun flush-decked Ship Sloops similar to the Cruizer (1797) brig. The plan was cut in two along the midship section and a new piece inserted for the proposed (and approved) lengthening for the last four ships and the alterations to the mast positions as a result. Signed by Robert Seppings [Surveyor of the Navy, 1813-1832]” So, all I need to do is to cut the model in two and slap a bit in the middle! Or there may be more to it than that, not only lengthen it, but also re-position the gun ports, and add raised forward and aft platforms (similar to those flush platforms found on some of the earlier Cruizer models). Then there is the raising of the hawse holes, fashioning a new rudder, raise and re-model the stem, add 2 more Elm Tree pumps (4 shown on the inboard profile), and fabricate a bowsprit bed. After which there is the fitting out, I’ll be going with Stud anchor chain which will mean adding chain stoppers, and for the rig adding Trysail masts which are evident on HMS Pelorus - converted in 1826 from a brig sloop to a ship sloop so the rigging and masts are contemporary with the 1828 Cruizer. As to her career, Wikipedia states: “HMS Cruizer was a Snake-class ship sloop launched in 1828 for the British Royal Navy. The ship was built as a revival of the retired Snake-class ship-sloops. The Navy converted her to a brig in 1831, back to a ship in 1840, and sold her at Bombay in 1849. In 1839 Cruizer participated in the Aden Expedition along with the frigate HMS Volage and the two British East India Company (EIC) vessels, the sloop HCS Coote and the schooner HCS Mahi. Cruizer saw extensive service during the First Opium War. She participated in the Battle of Whampoa, the Second Battle of Chuenpi, the Battle of Canton, the Battle of Amoy, and the Battle of First Bar. During the Battle of Whampoa, Maj. General Hugh Gough, commander of the British army during the First Opium War, personally directed the land assault on Whampoa island from Cruzier's deck. In January 1841, Cruizer recaptured the whaling brig Pilot. The local inhabitants in the Nicobar Islands had captured her in December 1840 and murdered most of her crew. Pilot was taken into Singapore.” I’m going to swap-out a lot of the kit supplied wood and use Swiss Pear, Box and Ebony, I won’t be double planking, but will infill between the bulkheads with balsa. Painted components will be kept to a minimum. Fittings are from Cladercraft, Syren and RB Models. For reference, as well as the basic Snake instructions, and the excellent Snake and Cruizer logs elsewhere on the forum, I’m using the NMM plans and profiles, as well as the book by EW Petrejus - Modelling the Brig-of-War Irene: A Handbook for the Building of Historical Ship-Models. There are then a number of models and paintings available at the NMM and elsewhere to tap into. So the first job – strip off the few planks I’ve got in place and cut the carcass in half. But that’s for the next log instalment. All welcome to follow along, just don't expect a fast pace, I've taken early retirement and am starting the travel bucket list. Gary

Spot on! 👍

Thanks Chuck. I certainly agree that as part of a kit it makes no sense, perhaps one day there may be a viable call for an after-market mini kit. Gary

Hi Chuck, Is it in your thoughts to produce an open Chain Pump option as a mini kit for the cross-section? It’s something I feel always adds a real differentiator to a model as a level of detail not usually available. I’ve always been too slow off the mark to buy a set when they were available from Admiralty Models, but whereas theirs were etched brass perhaps they could be produced in black laserboard like your monograms. Then to stretch the wish list further (😉) if they were available in 1:48 is it too much of a stretch to also offer them up in 1:64? If it’s feasible off course I’m not too sure what the demand would be or the development / investment costs / time, etc. and whether that would make it prohibitive, or whether your relationship with AM already contemplates this, but if you don’t ask ....... Gary

The fact that the model has trysail masts probably dates it to around 1820, it also has no quarterdeck or forecastle armament which also suggests a post war era ship. I agree with Bob the Surprise is nearest in date and size, and could be modified. Gary

Your not alone, there is a definite sharp movement upwards, particularly on their own website, if you shop around there is some stock available at at last years prices, but it won't last long. I was contemplating buying the Agamemnon and my gut feel is that it has jumped around £100 in the last year. Gary