Snug Harbor Johnny

'Heard that after 43 attempts, someone found the perfect mix for a toning stain for this kit ... They call it Grecian Formula 44.

Blame some sub-contractor. Or perhaps a plan or sketch got wrinkled or folded a bit after being approved by the King. Not wanting to offend the King, the construction went right-on ahead. I found a more recent 'example' of something like this from a 60s issue of Mad magazine: The bent fuselage of the Snud U-14 stood for many years as a Soviet military secret; only after the last example of this little-known type had safely crashed was it revealed. During the design stage in 1938, a blueprint had been wrinkled accidentally and because nobody would own up to responsibility-since damaging state property carried the death penalty-the mistake went unchecked and into production.

Thanks, Chris ! It worked like a charm. From time to time I learn new things about the MSW site - like moving the cursor over 'Everywhere' at the right of the search tab reveals all the topics that can act as a filter for a search. Johnny

New update on this project: I was asked if I'd sell the Sergal 1:65 Great Henry kit in a private message, and with mixed emotions I agreed to the request since: 1.) The original kit components had not been compromised - just a trial fitting of the hull frames, with a few pieces cut from the printed sheet stock; and 2.) he seemed to desire the kit either to build out of the box (or possibly to collect?). I did advise him of the large size of the kit model - some 51" in overall length and 36" keel to mast top. That was far larger than I had ever anticipated, ergo my desire to do a model in a more manageable size at 1:88 - so I could use the kit cannon/fittings. So I let go of the kit for someone who wanted it for what it was. That leaves me with my own drawings and hand made frames that are substantially different than the shapes of most of the frames that were in the kit. All the kit drawings and fittings went with the kit, of course. So what I have left is a scratch build, or at least one that may incorporate bits and pieces of commercially available fittings ... I don't intend to re-invent the wheel or do crazy things like making my own blocks, deadeyes, etc. Nor do I intend to go out and cut my own tree, saw into rough planks, age to dry, re-saw into stock that can be further re-sawn into planking wood. And forget trying to locate a source of metal ore, then smelting and purifying brass and iron to make metal stock that I can fashion metal fittings and cannon from. THAT would be "true scratch" building. I'd like to edit the title of this build, but don't see how at this point. Whatever ... the Sergal kit was an 'inspiration' that got me out of the starting blocks on a build of my own in a scale of my choosing. Seeing Baker's Mary Rose scratch build and Louie da Fly's re-build of a Great Henry (wow, and in a small scale no less) also influence what I can do on this project. Johnny

I bought the Khufu Solar Barge kit a few years ago (zootoys) with no problems, but that was pre-tariff. The engineering is good, as I covered in my MSW build log, yet building skills are still needed on a boat model. The instructions are all Japanese, but with patience I was able to translate with my phone and the Google Translate app. This helped explain the many pictures of assembly steps that came with the kit, as well as a couple other build logs and my own judgement - on a few things to do differently.

You could make it easier to do these details in 1:24 😉

Baggy-wrinkle : The effect of sun and salt spray on your face.

'Just saw this idea that can neatly open the base end of a cylindrical bottle ... an easier way to insert a ship into a bottle, CA the glass back together and perhaps conceal the join with a turk's head knotting of scale rope around the bottle there. ... What I saw had sound, but the link is without sound. https://www.facebook.com/reel/1274656010633947

I like the warship directly under the wall painting on the right, where just the first mast sections are shown as if the ship is still under construction or otherwise in dry dock for a period of time. I'm probably going that way with my 1:100 Vasa due to the problems and compromises made in the old Billing kit (ca.1970) - and besides making the hull the focal point, I can wrap up the long-delayed project much sooner and get on with something else.

I'll throw my 'hat in the ring' with the following observations. Once can see on the model that the shrouds from the main top mast are still attached (although slipped) to the main topmast fallen backwards - there is no 'fourth mast'. Besides, the broadside photo of the Arizona shows the second of 4 masts situated in front of the funnels. The deck of the model is clearly seen to have no hole there for a mast, and the mast spacing (if there was one) would be way off from the photo of the Arizona (much too close). The Arizona bow goes almost straight down to the waterline, whereas the model has a definite curve (unfortunately cut-off so it does not go to the extreme bow, ergo does not show a bowsprit - which the Arizona does not have). The Peruvian has a distinctive wide white stripe on the funnels ... yeah the model has two, but perhaps was made by someone from memory. The Arizona has no stripes at all - and the wisp of steam discharged from a vertical pipe alongside the rear funnel is not a wide painted white stripe, which neither funnel has. And note that the Peruvian's thick steam vent pipe is located behind the aft funnel, as on the model. The Arizona has a thinner steam vent pipe ahead of the funnel. The Peruvian's funnels are nearly vertical (as on the model), while those on the Arizona have a significant rearward rake - as are the masts. The model's masts are only slightly raked, and that conforms to the photos of the Peruvian. Check out the complete Wikipedia coverage of the Arizona - she was 450 feet long (!) ... compared to the 373' of the Peruvian. The Arizona would look odd indeed if it didn't have a 4th mast for its remarkably long hull. The diminutive Peruvian would have only accommodated 3 masts, considering that it was originally 312' long. Its rebuilding to 373' after 10 years would account for the longer distance between the fore mast and main mast. There are more observations a keen eye can discern to support the arguments in favor of the Peruvian, but why beat a dead horse?

The 1:65 deAgostini Vasa kit, with all its packages + shipping + tariffs will still undercut the Occre Soleil by $600, and may be a better kit.

As on the Vasa of 1628, the bow guns were near the hawse hole, which on the Golden Hind would be the deck below the broadside armaments (as were the stern cannon). These two guns had longer barrels so their gun carriages could point nearly forward. Period artwork of galleons in general show relatively high angled bowsprits, so the yard with its square sail would be high above the water. This would block the view and the line of fire from any gun on or in the forecastle, but bow guns (like those of the Vasa) would fire under the sail on the bowsprit.

I've heard that 'Practice makes perfect, but only with perfect practice.' If you practice imperfectly, now and again you'll get it right or nearly right - whether a piece of music or just throwing darts at a dartboard. That instance of very good (if not quite 'perfect') practice increases the chance of 'getting it right' (or nearly so) in the future. Over time one will be ever closer to the mark most of the time. Lay off any endeavor long enough, and you'll get 'rusty'.

I'm rather taken by your 'simpler', darker version where there is no 'wrap around' of the so-called Captains Walk. This may be a misnomer, since the rear platform would come in handy for small arms fire and swivel guns to supplement the 2 cannon below that protect the most vulnerable part of the ship. The captain and officers would bunk in the deck above and I think that there would be at least a couple small windows for observation there. Above that is a sail/flag storage compartment. Below the officers' bunk/hammock level would likely be the officers' mess. The broadside does have 7 guns per side - in accordance to the accurate period report of the Portuguese navigator daSilva. The only ordnance missing would be 2 guns at the bow, facing forward on the deck below the main gun deck, where the crew would have hammocks and some stores. I also like the kevels on the gun deck ... we're not sure how early belaying pins were used (early 1600s?), but a few might have been found. You have made excellent models, and there is much to recommend them ! Johnny

Said my Dad, "You'll never succeed until you try." (Don Quixote, "To try, when your arms are to weary, to reach the unreachable star.")