hollowneck

Jason, Yes, Nic at Bluejacket is all about keeping the high-quality kit market vibrant - and his company, responsive. He is passionate about our hobby, that's for sure. Indeed, I got the news that there will be a Bluejacket Morgan kit but it will be a large scale "tryworks" section; apparently, quite a few people recently voted on his Bluejacket "poll" for this project. Nic was my club's most recent President (CMMS - www.ctshipmodels.org). Nic is very much a "hands-on" leader and a real gentleman. It appears you're solving the problems with the CC Diana keelformer; I wouldn't stress too much as straightening-out the keel with blocks placed between the bulkheads should handle everything. Also, once you get the first few planks handled, the small amount of remaining twist should be virtually eliminated. This was very disconcerting to me too (at first) on my build. The keel piece does absorb moisture and it's virtually impossible to get a straight run without some support pieces along the sheer. I'm glad you got the replacement piece from Caldercraft. I'm not surprised, as I originally mentioned in my earlier post. Good Luck- looks good to me so far; the rabbet and bearding line should yield a decent, smooth run. Ron

Let me add to this thread a couple comments, observations. First, good decision, Jason; you've gone well beyond with your perseverance of trying to fix a bad piece of ply. In my experience of the last 3 years and from carefully reading others comments on both companies on this forum, both Jotika (Caldercraft) and Cornwall are very responsive. I have not had any damaged or unacceptable parts in the kits I've purchased from either (Diana- direct w/Jotika and Agamemnon from Cornwall). Although the "static kits" business of Jotika is an obvious "sideline" for them, they still make up kits pretty quickly - and steadily - and offer decent communication and common sense policies for resolving problems should they arise. My only reservation is about Jotika's marketing: someone in the company (or contracted outside) should pay better attention to their web information and resolve the hangups on moving forward with both the HMS Surprise as well as the "74." The company has invested the resources for both kits - at least the prototypes detailed on their web site. Both of these projects would sell well to an international market, even at the top-end of the kit market's offerings. In the computer business this would be called "Vaporware." In our hobby, I like to call it: "FogWare." When Victory/Amati release Chris Watton's 1/64 Vic it should challenge the aging CCraft Vic pretty substantially. There are quite a few persons who will tackle a huge Vic/Vic. Once this happens (don't hold your breath until at least 2016), Jotika may again start paying attention to our market. I lived in the U.K. for 2 years and I know, first-hand, how big and active the RC Ship business is for Brits. It's a major past time - "pond models"- of all stripes, WW1 &11 and various working boats of different eras. This is Jotika's main business and they are a prime supplier (as are Cornwall) to a very engaged domestic market. Europeans too are big on "pond model" stuff. This said, I am thankful that Jotika still pays some attention to us static model builders. My guess (and it's only a guess) is that this component of their sales is less than 10%. However, my other guess is that static kits (and bits) are very steady - and perhaps near n' dear to the founder's heart. C'est LaVie - Ron

NMM can be painful (and expensive). My wife ordered a large print of the HMS Ardent for me last year as an XMAS gift (kool Admiral, huh guys!). It came in-time, but barely. She ordered it in September; it arrived Dec. 23. Things can go a little slow from The Jolly Land. You and I must remember that we live in an area of the country called "New England." When I talk to friends there, I sometimes jokingly ask: "how are things in Old England?" haha. For research (question re: HMS Camilla), I'm always amazed at what's available on Wikipedia.org. Like any thorough web research one follows all the available links. One does hit dead ends, but Wiki links are pretty good since there is usually extensive citations from other secondary research sources. Try it. Also, Rif Winfield's books are a good source for basic info on English warships. If it floated and had guns, Winfield's books has info on it! I will ask my colleague if he can email me his "cheat sheet" backgrounder on Ariel since we recently compared notes on our two future builds; he's already done his homework on Ariel's history. Ron

Chuck, You are correct to say that I've gotten a lot from my comrades here - inspirational as well as perspirational . I'll decide on whether or not to post a Build Log later this Fall, likely post-NRG Conf. I'm leaning toward doing it - and besides, I hate it when those pins get stuck in that voodoo doll effigy of me! For the record: my Build Log would be for the 1:64 HMS Camilla, configured late 1780's as a 26-gun; fully-rigged, with partial upper deck reveals and probably coppered. Thanks for the support, Chuck. Ron

Tom, I too bought a set of 1/64 plans from Chuck P (syrenshipmodelcompany.com). They are worth every penny! I'm planning on these plans being my early Winter start-up project. I also have been in-touch with Alex, but not for several weeks. I plan to build the POB “Camilla” (named sister ship to Sphinx) and a considerably more interesting history than all the other as-built ships of her size. The research I've been doing on this specific ship for the past couple months is fascinating (her service logs, the captains, numerous actions/campaigns - how about more than 45 known "prizes/captures" and a service life of nearly 55 years); her action history is especially meaningful for a Connecticut Yankee. I do plan to do a full hull plank but leave partial quarter & f'ocsle deck reveals on some beams/framing ala' Alex's approach here. I also plan to fully rig her. Alex's photos will be very helpful; however, I wouldn't anticipate that he'll be able to offer much timely guidance on a detailed build question - at least, I'm not anticipating that kind of interaction. His English is better than my German (but not by much!). And he's got other fish in the fryer-like many of us. Alex's plans are superb (8 large “D-size” engineering drawings including full masting/rigging), the best I have seen thus far in this hobby, period. They are complete, precise, and detailed in extremis; one could build a fully-framed model if one wished - including all the below-deck gubbins.. It's POB for me -per Alex's own personal build nicely detailed in this thread. For reference, the Sphinx plans (in both 1/48 and 1/64 scales) are the equal to fellow MSW master builders Ed Tosti's (Naiad), D. Antscherl's (Swan) and A. Yedlinski's (Euryalus) in my opinion and considerably better than any Hahn or Corrothers plans I've also had opportunity to study. The NMM in London also has a reasonable number of extant prints available on several of the Sphinx Class ships built in this small frigate, post-ship category. I will NOT likely do a Build Log here for Camilla, but I may change my mind as I get into the project. Worst case I will post "progress pics" as I tackle this beautiful, small but effective 18th-C Royal Navy workhorse "enforcer." Even at 1/64 (I did consider 1/48), fully-rigged she is going to be quite large and there are only so many spots left...I'm certain many here will know the problem exactly! Ron

Excellent. Ron

Caldercraft by far. Expensive, but well worth it. Instructions are just so-so, but the plans are very good. Kit wood is decent and all pieces are machine routed, not laser cut. Extensive Photo-etch brass and pewter castings are excellent. This is NOT a kit for everyone; being an experienced builder is mandatory. Hope this helps all who may be looking in on selecting a Victory kit. Ron

Although I have only been in the hobby for approximately 4 years, I relished reading my copies of Conway's Annual Shipwright - always cover-to-cover. I was impressed with such valuable and fascinating information as well as superb graphic presentation. I, too, am sad that there will be no 2014 issue. Perhaps someone can take up the job and continue with the superb editorial; I remain a loyal subscriber to Shipwright should publishing be resumed in the future. Paper or digital, es macht nichts. Ron

Michael, You break no law (or rules) with a photo or illustration here as long as you credit the source accurately with the post. There seems to be no shortage of info/advice on this subject. My 2 cents: I also use no glue, and align masts with rigging and shims. Ron

Duff, Muchos Gracias Meine Freund. This is good info. Ron

Wayne, Jay, Thanks! This info is perfect for my purposes which is to add these features to my current build. Ron

I came across yet another question that I have concerning the specs for "bucklers", specifically, "hawse bucklers." These were used to cover the hawse openings when the ship was under way in heavy seas and obviously, when anchors were heaved and secured. My question is simple: what do these look like? How were they secured to the hawse openings? Did they have a gasket to seal them? Made of wood - or metal? Thanks Mates.

Thanks Jud, good thought about the subject. You could be right about keeping the rope slings in-place and adding the chains. I would imagine they were quite heavy and difficult to rig but better than having the jeers shot away and then losing the main yard during a battle. Apparently, one of the French tactics was to "aim high" in order to disable their enemy's propulsion. Any more ideas or info out there?

I have a question about mid-to-late 18th C Royal Navy warship rigging. I searched but didn't find anything here regarding the use of iron chain (links) for yards. I've read in several novels about how rope rigging used for main course yard slings were sometimes replaced with iron chains when anticipating action. I understand that the jeer ropes and related hoisting tackle was "slackened" and the yards were mainly supported by the rope sling and this was the same for the chain slings. I'm considering using chain to sling my main courses on my current build (HMS Ardent/64, 1764). What size chain should I use (size of links) and was there any special way of rigging the chain that differed from the rope equivalents? Any thoughts or facts on this would be greatly appreciated. Ron

Richard, Cornwall is The Best, period. I just ordered a large Caldercraft kit (32 lbs.) and it took just 3 days to arrive on my doorstep here in CT- and it was NOT expedited delivery. Every past transaction with them (approximately a dozen) has been smooth, flawless. And, they have the best prices (and complete inventory) of any of the internet resources. Now, how is this relevant? Cornwall stocks both 25mm and 35mm Amati cast metal ("Brittania") figures. Both size sets feature a total of six different figure poses. I found that for 1/64 scale that the 35mm figures are a much better choice; yes, they are slightly larger than a 5foot 6inch 18th-c seaman, but they look better displayed in context with the model. Especially the captain figure. I found the 25mm figures a little too small, they look like midgets and dwarves running around, more like Games Workshop Orcs and Hellions... The Amati figures are about $2.50ish ea., but that's o.k. with me. Shipping from the UK is minimal. So far, my other attempts to find nicely molded 17th/18th C sailors in 25-35mm scale has been dismal. Even plastic ones. If anyone here has tips otherwise -even plastic or especially finely cast metal figures, please let me know! Good Luck. Ron

Pierre, The angle of the carriage axle piece for the front is probably angled backwards intentionally. The "transom" piece which one adds at the front DOES have a backwards leaning inclination, slight, but nonetheless angled. So, I'd recommend (if it isn't too late) to NOT file the notches! The transom piece sits up against the front axle, flush. The rear axles however is not angled. Here is a reference for you, courtesy of Chuck Passaro's new web site: http://www.syrenshipmodelcompany.com/resources/Building%20the%20Laser%20Cut%20Cannon%20Carriage%20Kit.pdf Ron

I found O'Brian's works masterful; there are few authors in English literature that can match his facility with the language, particularly the language of the 18th-19th centuries. O'Brian is a slow read for most Americans because complex, complete sentences can consume a full page! There are many examples of this writing style throughout the Aubrey/Maturin Series. I found his characters multi-dimensional and the situations and challenges they faced, complex - like real life. I have only read the series once but I may re-read them in future. In the interim, I'm reading Hornblower and I'm up to the 5th book (in chronological character story sequence) and I'm enjoying them immensely. But Forester is not an English language acrobat like O'Brian. Forester is highly-regarded for his simple, straightforward writing and easy, fun reading. This said, I'm having more fun now with the Bolitho (Alexander Kent) Series. I am liking his writing and stories as much as C.S. Forester's. There are other writers of nautical fiction but these three are at the top of the list; there are many, many hours of enjoyable, exciting reading between these three masters of the genre. Ron

Chris, I would recommend including a set of flags with the kit, but not sails. I have always included flags (and pennants) with my models. I think they are a nice "finishing touch." For those who would want to make sails, a plan set included with the kit would be nice. If the interest is high, Amati can always make a full suit of actual cut sails available as an option. Assuming you drive the completed Vic to Italy this Fall, I understand your job is basically done. I get that you can't accurately guess on how long it will take to put this model into production - however.... can you (please) tell us how long it took Amati to get the Vanguard (or the Pegasus) into kit boxes? Ron

Andy - I left the "pimply" plates off the hull of my Diana partially for just this reason. I am also not a big fan of the shiny copper look on hulls, especially large ones with lots o' surface area to see (and yes, I realize over time copper bits may acquire a nicer looking "patina"). I did use the Chris' copper plates in my Victory Models' Mercury build. I can attest that there copper plates are accurately-sized and the imprinted bolt/nailing patterns look great when viewed up-close. It's a personal preference for me too: I'd rather see a beautiful expanse of finely finished hardwood on a sailing ship hull. Chris, have you gotten any quotes on how much the perspex case for your Vic is going to cost?! Ron

Michael, I just visited the Vasa Museet 2 weeks ago with a Model Ship Club colleague. Your work is excellent. I hadn't noticed your posts until today. There are many builders here who appreciate your attention to detail - and your dedication to creating a stunning replica. Count me as one of them, please. Seeing this reconstucted 17th-C warship "in the flesh" was an amazing (and all day!) experience. We had the opportunity to spend some time with Fred Hocker (the museum's archaeologist and lead researcher) who was kind enough to explain the "latest" finds (and concerns). The reconstruction of the ship is now complete and Dr. Hocker claims that it is 98% original. He's now working on documenting and doing a reconstruction of the anchors, specifically the wrought iron metal work. The Vasa itself is nothing short of extraordinary; a sailing vessel that's nearly 400 years old. The restoration has taken more than 50 years - however- and it's had the full support of the Swedish government. The Vasa is also Sweden's #1 tourist money-spinner; there were more than 1 million visitors last year. Interestingly, although the 10th scale model adjacent to the real thing was impressive, I found the "screaming colors" of the decorations to be garish. As Dr. Hocker confirmed, the actual paint colors which have been studiously researched would have been much more muted. The materials used to create various colors of the day would have been considerably subdued, more pastel-like. In fact, as our conversation about original colors was happening, a young woman walked up and presented a sample of her grandfather's paints to Mr. Hocker so he could advise which color to paint the upper side stern "clinker" panels was more accurate. Of three choices she showed us, Hocker confirmed that the more "terra cotta" color looked the most accurate. This color was a very muted reddish color, not a bright crimson. This may be too esoteric, and if so, my apologies. I spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about and then executing color choices on my models. Mostly I try to "paint with wood"- but I also select finishes and paint hues that attempt to replicate what might have been available centuries ago. Just my "thing." Again, your work is inspiring, both your research and skills to execute what you see. You will truly have one of a very few "accurate" and amazing models of the Vasa when she's completed! Ron PS Have you seen Clayton Johnson's HUGE Vasa model? http://finearts.blog.gustavus.edu/2013/01/18/swedish-warship-vasa-model-on-display-at-gustavus/

Christian, The recently published, "The Sailing Frigate," is money well spent. It has a wealth of high-quality model photos, many of which we've rarely seen, and very good writing that encapsulates a good deal of the developmental history of the "nimble warship." It's a British publication, so the emphasis is where one would imagine it to be, but this isn't a criticism. There are other very good books on Europe's bellicose navies. Your Diana is looking great. Clever idea on the secret air passage flag lockers to blow out dust in the captain's cabin. I'm hoping to get a case made for mine so I needn't worry about dust and such. I've made a (large) base but I discovered that a matching acrylic cover will cost slightly more than my entire build budget for the bashed kit! Oh well... I'd also like to acknowledge that your previous build log on MSW (V1.0) was an inspiration to me; the quality of your work was something I tried to emulate. Regards, Ron

Ortho85, If you manage to avoid some of the worst kits (and their horrible instructions) and stick with this hobby, you'll find that what matters most is a good set of PLANS; these are the detailed sections, elevations and profiles of a ship that are mostly drawn in a relevant building scale. As you gain experience you'll not need "instructions" very much (or at all) and you will know the techniques and sequences involved in building a good kit. In my opinion, the best kit plans come from Caldercraft (UK), Victory Models (Amati/Italy) and Model Shipways (ModelExpo). With regard to instructions specifically, there is "no contest" as any of Chuck Passaro's kits available from MS are the best. I have yet to build a Euromodel kit but I understand their plans are very good. Hope this information helps. I know all of the manufacturers mentioned here will ship to Oz. I think both Caldercraft and Victory Models have distribution there. Ron

I'm glad the damage was only minor. Everyone who has been in this hobby for a while has had an "oops moment!" My worst (so far - as to not invite the shipwreck Syrens), came when I was loading my Mercury into the back seat of my car. I'd measured the opening carefully. No problems; the complete, rigged model will sit nicely on the rear seat, on a cradle. I even cushioned the ride with pillows on either side of the hull (yes, my wife knows I borrowed them). I got to where I was going (a ship club meeting) just fine. I carefully removed the pillows, threw them in the trunk. I was feeling confident, smug even. Made it this far from home, what can possibly happen? I'm certainly not going to drop it. In a split second of inattention, as I carefully slid the ship off the rear seat, the top of the main mast clipped the door frame and the topmast down to the top snapped right off! Rigging went limp. Many will know what this looks like. I actually closed my eyes for a moment and winced, wondering what repair job awaited me. I took it into the meeting and with zen master steadiness (I held my breath), I carefully placed the end of the broken mast where it snapped-off and I swung it up and leveraged it into position. Voila! The mast centered itself on the break, the split wood aligned perfectly and all the rigging went taut. There wasn't even a break mark on the mast and - believe it or not - I didn't have to glue anything. Not one line needed attention (of many). It's 2 years since then and I haven't touched the broken mast since and I believe only one person knows what happened: me. I'm sure this doesn't happen that often. And, yes - I do thank The Force every so often for my good fortune. Ron

Steve, Your most welcome, hope my pics helped you to decide; it is a very nice looking model. You are correct in that the rigging is a little easier than a three-masted ship like the Pegasus. I've replied quite late to your reply and hope you're busy on the build! I have my Mercury in a glass case that also shows a nice Carronade replica (from Model Expo) and a color print of an old watercolor of the ship's captain, A. Kazarski. This kit is one of the best. Amati's high-end is very, very good. Regards, Ron

Ray, You're doing an excellent job. I have peeked-in to your build log from time-to-time. I completed my Diana last year and it was a superb kit - very challenging, but also very rewarding. You may have seen my completed Diana in the gallery. If not, just search on Diana in the site's engine and you will see 10 photos I posted. Although one can follow the masting/rigging plans from Caldercraft, I'd recommend studying Vol 4 of The David Antscherl book from Seawatch Books (Swan class build). This helped me immensely to create more accurate masts, spars and - of course, extensive rigging as well as belaying plans. You may want to look into this BEFORE you complete the weather deck furniture and rail details. A fully-rigged Diana is a most impressive model. Steady-on, keep it shipshape and in Bristol fashion! She'll reward you. Ron