chris watton
-
Posts
1,956 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by chris watton
-
No problem, I didn't mean to appear curt, it was frustrating not being able to find any real history of the vessel, but it definitely was built for the Duchess of Kingston by Hillhouse of Bristol. ETA - I have attached the nameplate that comes with the stand..
- 117 replies
-
- 8
-
-
- vanguard models
- yacht
- (and 2 more)
-
I do like the looks of the xebec, but not on my 'must do' list yet, as there are at least two kits of this out there that make up into very fine models. Right now, I want to develop kits that haven't been done before for a completely fresh range. That is not to say I won't, I probably will if things are successful, but for now, I just want to concentrate on developing from my original 'wish list'..
-
In lieu of a name, the actual title I gave the model is 'HM Royal Yacht (built for) The Duchess of Kingston I do not see anything fictitious about that, as this is what is written on the actual plans ETA - This isn't in my Sailing Navy List book too, but the NMM do have the plans, albeit just the one sheet.
- 117 replies
-
- 4
-
-
- vanguard models
- yacht
- (and 2 more)
-
I had my 3-d printed samples arrive yesterday for the carronades and 32 and 18 pounder barrels, the 3-d files are now with my resin castor, who will printed them and use them for the masters for the black resin castings. One change I have asked my castor to make is to remove the threaded bar at the rear of each carronade and replace with a hole to which a length of brass will be pushed through to simulate the threaded bar. It is too delicate to cast, and all broke on my 3-d printed samples. I have included a couple of (very bad) pics, showing them on their respective carriages. I am still awaiting the PE for each, most noticeable on the carronade beds, which will have PE rear wheels. There is a 32, 24 and 18 pounder standard carronade, plus an early (1780) 12 pounder, with options for early slide or wheeled carriage - looks very 'stumpy'... Joint bolt and blocks are integrated with the carronade assemblies, and all that is required to fit it to slot them into the sliding upper bed, so no fiddly work required.
-
Topgallant shrouds did not have ratlines. At least not British warships, if we're talking mid 18th century onwards. Patrick O'Brian even mentions the lack of ratlines at the topgallant in his book Desolation Island (HMS Leopard)
-
Cannot say yet, as the 'other' revisit is a way off. I am back at work now, so time is limited again, dammit, but I have just started designs for my 7th kit, which will have gun ports integrated with the hull frames/bulkheads. Also, today I received my samples (3-d prints at this time, will have the nice resin castings sometime next month) of another 32 pounder and 18 pounder (latter a frigate 18 pounder, but not my 7th kit, that's for later..), plus 18, 24 and 32 pounder carronade barrels and finally a late entry, an early (1780) 12 pounder carronade barrel with trunnions. Will laser cut the carriages for them when I have time and take pics. I have sent PE files to be done, so these will be offered as a complete unit, carriage, barrel and PE parts.
-
Nice model - but I apologise, it was one of my very first... For the rigging, I follow the main sources. It is important to note that by the end the 18th Century and most definitely 1800 and after, the crossjack was replaced with a main yard and sail. It is highly likely this practise was used well before 1800, with commanders experimenting with the best set up for their vessels. I am sure all Cruiser Class would have had a main yard instead of crossjack. Flirt would be a grey area, but Speedy would have had the main yard, as this is depicted as it probably looked in around 1800.
- 102 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- cruiser
- caldercraft
- (and 1 more)
-
The rear bulkheads do need severe bevelling for the planks to run smooth. I cannot reduce the bulkhead lines as this would make them too small when bevelled. Bulkhead size and shape is an area I spend a lot of time getting right when first starting any new design - but usually the rear most bulkheads, especially with hull lines as fine as Speedy Class, require a lot of sanding.
-
It looks like the rear most bulkhead needs further trimming
-
Funny you say that, I much prefer the lines of the Zulu. If they were cars, I'd liken the Fifie to a full fat SUV and the Zulu a more sleek sports car.
- 261 replies
-
- 4
-
-
- muirneag
- vanguard models
- (and 2 more)
-
Flying Jib Boom (why, when, where?)
chris watton replied to AON's topic in Masting, rigging and sails
According to James Lees, the first issue of a flying jibboom was in 1794. -
All part numbers have since been corrected on the MDF parts, as I found out the problem (to my horror) early early on, but not until the first batch had been sold..
- 261 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- muirneag
- vanguard models
- (and 2 more)
-
If it helps, I think that all Cruiser Class brigs had a standard armament of 16 carronades (usually 32-Pounders) and 2 x 6-Pounder 'Chase guns'. If you went with this set up, your model would be more accurately depict her real life armament anyway.
-
I design kits and only ever use the dining room table, even for a 1.6 metre Victory model!
-
I sometimes number the first bulkhead 1, but I feel this should go to the keel as this is the first item you usually hold. Doesn't matter though, as long as part numbers match up to drawings/pics.
-
I did design that one, and it is one of only two models that I would like to 'revisit' one day, as I love the lines and the rake. It was actually called HMS Orestes when in British hands, Mars being the Dutch name for this privateer before capture.
-
Thanks guys, for the input, much appreciated. I have settled on my next kit, as it is a no brainer. In the meantime, I still have a lot to do for Duchess of Kingston, and Jim is building the second prototype model for me, to make sure it goes together as well as it should, and taking pictures of the building stages. These will be used in the building manual. One thing, though, I am not sure I ever want to revisit stuff I have done before (with just two exceptions), so no Bounty's, Endeavour's, especially/absolutely/definitely no more Victory's. There are still plenty of subjects out there that are perhaps not as well known, but look beautiful when built (Fly being a perfect example). The period between 1770 and early 1780's are rife with such examples, and my initial/intended line up is full of such vessels, new stuff rather than rehashes.. I think I will do a couple more kits like the fishing boats in the future, though, as these have proved quite popular.
-
Coronet looks nice. But then, most sea going sailing vessels look nice - but not all graceful like that one.. Here are the sample cannon barrels I received last week. The ones on carriages are a 9-pounder and 18 pounder. The rest are 12 pounder (lone standard and one for an early 32 gun frigate), 24 and 32 pounders. The retail versions will be in black resin, these are grey so I can more easily see the detail.
-
Maybe one day, but I need to go through my list of subjects that I will definitely do first, all between 1750 and 1806. I thought yachts were well catered for, as most have a kit of one or more?
-
I do intend to do a Leda Class at some point, but this is a large frigate (although smaller than the Lively Class), and will take 10-14 months to fully develop, plus the use of a more powerful laser machine, as bulkhead and keel thicknesses will be twice that of what I currently have. So if I did both Shannon and Chesapeake, this would be 2-3 years of development, and having nothing new to bring out in the meantime. This type of subject needs to be done once I have a healthy range already out. However, the first frigate I have in mind to do will be quite popular, I am sure. Plus I think I can develop this with my current set up. If I were simply designing 'Block Models' like most other manufacturers, then no problem, I could pop out a few new big kits each year. But I don't want to do that, I want develop new stuff with more detail (expanding on my Victory designs) and whenever possible, better materials, and these take a lot longer - but ultimately worth the extra effort, I think.
-
Thanks for the comments, Chris, always appreciated. I do know that if I am to design such kits, they will need a 'USP', as I have no intention of treading (very) old ground, and any new 100 foot-ish brig would need to be special. Still not made my mind up about what to do after Duchess...
-
My experience with model carronades isn't good. They are either simple turned brass parts, always in the wrong size, or very shoddy mismatched white metal, bordering on scrap
-
I know what you mean. I have designed three sizes of carronade barrel, which hopefully will make them painless to make. The problem is that it seems that most brigs and brig-sloops/ship rigged-sloops had carronade main armament from the mid 1790's onwards. There is no getting around this. Plus they would all have been coppered below the waterline.
-
Thank you Ernie, and sorry to read about your father in law. There will be quite a lull after the Duchess of Kingston, as I will need to work out what to do next. There are still a couple of larger (95-108 foot) brigs I would like to do, but am wary about developing too much of the same type. There are two I have in mind that have main armaments of 16x32 and 16x24 pounder carronades and 2x6 pounder chase guns respectively, and another that has a main battery of 18 x 9 pounder carriage guns (and hull lines to die for) . What do you guys think? I would like to develop a frigate next - although this will take a lot longer to develop and new machinery may be required: I am considering getting another laser machine next year, a more powerful laser for the thicker ply and MDF keel and bulkhead sheets that the much larger kits will have. This would be a big investment, but feel I need a second, more powerful laser machine, especially for the size of future kits I intend to do.
Our Emblem ®
