Morgan

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

Zach,

John McKay sells large scale copies of the drawings for Pandora (and all his ships in the Anatomy of the Ship series), he offers them at various scales and if you contact him he will provide a drawing / pricing list and shipping cost. As Richard suggests I'd buy the book first this will help with deciding which drawings you want. His email address is in the public domain so no breach of confidence in telling you it is johnwmckay@telus.net. His response is first class, I ordered a set of 1:64 Victory plans last year and had them in a week (Canada to U.K.).

Gary

Steve,

also so take a look at the book 'The Wooden World' - 'An Anatomy of the Georgian Navy' by N.A.M. Rodger which is look at the eighteenth century navy, how it worked , and how it fitted in within society.

Gary

William James had his own axe to grind having been caught and detained in the conflict of 1812, he set out to prove that no British ship had been captured by an American ship of similar force, as the extract provided by Frolic labours.  James's stated intent was to provide an impartial view, based on the facts he could uncover, however given the objective of his work in recounting the 1812 conflict this in itself renders his impartiality suspect and his bias creeps in to his works.  

Given the prize money associated with rewarding successful captures many captains, of all nations, had a tendency to over-state the size, prowesss and head-count of the prize as this added to their personal glory and rewards. As Mark says war isn't fair, and neither are the Press who picked up on and propagated the exaggeration of the size of the Guerriere and other captures which is what initially motivated James whilst detained in the US.  Nice to see in 200 years at least the Press have remained consistent (on both sides of the pond). 

Craig,

 Count me in to watch this one .

 The book King George  V  Class Battleships by Roger Chesneau is a must have is a must have for the DoY. At page 55  he describes the March 1943 refit colour scheme  as being dark grey hull and horizontal surfaces and light grey superstructure, the colours are uncertain but were probably AP507A and 507C,  and it appears that the dark grey paint was also applied to the weather decks, although the wooden plank in forward of the foremost breakwater seems to have been left in natural wood.

I also have DoY on the stocks and this is one of the best books by far describing her details.

Gary

Living in the town as well I echo David's comments. Hartlepool may seem a bit of a backwater, but the Trincomalee and what is now the Royal Navy Museum of the North is well worth a visit - it is now run by the same museum group as Portsmouth Historic Dockyard and HMS Victory, so hopefully we will see deeper connections over the coming years and a greater exchange of exhibits as part of the maritime experience.

In terms of the Trincomalee Chris Watton was considering a Leda kit, so fingers crossed, given there were 46 in the class that opens a lot of options. Too late for me I'm scratching a POB Trincomalee (I'll have to start a build log). I had the drawings for the Leda class a few years ago when visiting the Unicorn, they were £5.00 per sheet then, considerably less than the NMM, so worth enquiring if you visit Trincomalee's sister.

Gary

Hi Chris,

Looks like the Bismarck or Tirpitz, if you google you will find images.

Gary

Hi Daniel,

Every time I look at the Turner prints I see something new as well, and agree this is a debate worth continuing with.

I've also overlain prints from SLR0513 over John McKay's drawings and agree there are major differences (as well as the similarities to the Turner prints), I think it may be intended to be the Victory, but was hypothetical, and very much intended to portray a concept for re-fit and is not based on the original framing plans as the gun port disposition is all wrong.

One difficulty is putting out of our minds HMS Victory as we see her today and assuming she is anything like she was at Trafalgar, the battle altered her, the post battle repairs altered her, the Seppings style refit altered her bow lines, the Victorians butchered her appearance all the more, and the early 20th century reconstruction to me seems very stylised taking her back to a time before her pre-Trafalgar refit. 

Hope fully more contemporary sources can be uncovered, just got to keep on looking and debating  

Gary

Dafi,

Nicely done, this mirrors what Turner witnessed firsthand.

There is one more Turner sketch of note 'The Victory: From Poop to Quaterdeck, this shows that the Forecastle at the Beakhead Bulkhead was also built up, please see image below, you can see the bulkhead gunport on the right quite clearly.. Sorry to spring this when you have gone to such trouble but I know you are striving for the most accurate interpretation.

Although I've reviewed the sketches previously on this forum, I missed this one, but picked it up in the Trafalgar Chronicle: Number 26 published in November this year. One of the articles by John Conover reviews the Turner Sketches and picks up on the Beakhead Bulkhead barricade, it also draws strong parallels between the 1803 model in the National Maritime Museum (model SLR0513), including a potential different configuration of the stem works (Victory as is now being a 20th Century re-interpretation). It postulates that the 1803 model was a projected re-fit which was never fully completed, but has strong correlations to the Turner sketches.

I believe that John Conover may have published a similar article on the full NRG forum, perhaps someone who has access could check.

Well worth a read.

Gary

Kurt,

If you look at the website for the Royal Armouries here in the U.K. you can search the collections by date and type (artillery), they have one of the best collections, look for the 16/17th century, you will get a good idea of what you are seeking and can use these as a comparison for commercially available offerings.

Regards

Gary

That's great news Daniel, it can only be good for promoting ship modelling, support for conservation of historic ships, and an excellent marketing approach. Well done.

Gary

The pin provides a fixed point from which to off-set the freehand feed if I'm reading this right. I like the idea and will be giving it a go! Thanks for the tip Marsalv.

Gary

There has been a lot of debate on this forum of recent regarding the practicalities of developing kits and consequent costs, sufficient to say you take your choices based on affordability for each member and what you want out of it. I for one see this Victory as a premium level once in a lifetime kit, and accept it may well be the most expensive kit in the market, but also accept it will be a compromise between cost and quality, given that I will purchase a kit but fully expect to pay more to enhance the kit. Each to their own, let's just welcome and applaud the opportunity and aspiration it offers.

I'll get off my high horse now, I feel a touch of vertigo coming on!

Gary

Hi Chris,

Good to see you back, many of us here have missed you teasing us with your fantastic forthcoming developments, and look forward to more details on Victory, Prince, and whatever the future holds. All in your own good time of course.

Gary

I think the idea of a Shannon expressed by several others has merit, as well as being a ship of note in its own right (and would also like to see a Chesapeake) it has some extension possibilities.

The cost of development and manufacture has to be a consideration for Chuck as a developer. The Shannon was a Leda class frigate of which there were some 46 produced for the Royal Navy, including the Trincomalee (my current scratch build) and the Unicorn as mentioned by Beef Wellington. Therefore the ability to adapt the base research at say 1:64 scale and produce a multitude of variants may be worth considering as a means of leveraging the initial investment. We have seen this to some extent with the Victory Models Vanguard / Elephant / Bellerepharon or Caldercrafts Cruiser / Snake.

I wouldn't advocate providing a multiplicity of options in a single kit as that would make it too expensive, but perhaps a common starting point with options to take up for different ships may work. With something of a large class like a Leda you can go from the classic early ship with open rails of the Revolutionary Wars through to the Unicorn with its built up barricades and austere black and white paint scheme of the early 19th century, all which rests with the builder, not the developer.

POB to keep the costs down.

Perhaps an option on materials - if your going to paint the hull then keep the materials simple, if you want the classic look then a premium for box, pear, or whatever.

Price - for the kit I want to build I don't have an issue with circa £500 \ $700, but possibly variable as above as I realise this is too steep for many

Just my views, but ultimately it must come down to a concencus on demand from all of us and that we buy in to that consensus, otherwise Chuck may as well take up painting elephants white!

Gary

Bring it back down to earth folks, one simple rule for an Englishman, you can measure length and weight in anything you are comfortable with, but beer must be by the pint

Gary

Paul,

Look at minaturebrickbargains on eBay, they sell a grout mix for minature bricks.

Gary

Chris,

It is taken fromThe Anatomy of Nelson's Ships by C Nepean Longridge.

Gary

Paul,

The danger with pencil lead is that you drag it on to the adjacent planking so you essentially get a bleeding effect. If you do try pencil lead then I suggest you do so post varnishing, this will reduce any bleeding. Personally I'd go with tree nails, trennels, or trunnels - however you want to pronounce it

Regards

Gary