chris watton

Actually, as you did bring it up, I have designed special copper plating for awkward areas, which does include the leading edge of the bow and stem (in one whole strip each with different 'nail' patterns) - for the latter, the strip is pre-tapered, as is the strip for the back edge of the rudder. As for the rudder itself, there is one piece to add either side: Ha!

Adding sail material is of little cost to the overall costing of the kit, so material will be included. Some countries like sails more than others (especially Germany, it seems). Sail plans will be included. After Victory is delivered, I still have much to do - sorting the thousands of construction photographs, adding them to a manual using Quark Xpress, finalising all the construction drawings in CAD to make the plan sheets..it goes on. I anticipate another 6 months of solid PC work to finalise the plans/instructions aspect so that most modeller's can make sense of all the parts. usually, I do all the designs and plans/instructions before I even see any tangible prototype parts, but I had to make sure that what I designed for Victory actually worked (as it's so different to the standard stuff), otherwise that's 6 months work wasted if I had made a catastrophic error - and end up spending yet another 6 months re working the plans. Time frame - I simply don't know - I would hope that perhaps Summer 2014 may be a good bet. I know that Vanguard was 6 months from start to finish, but that's a 'traditional' kit. Victory will take at least twice as long, but as most of the problems (by problems, I mean sorting out certain aspects that were initially difficult for the end user, but re-worked so they're not) have been ironed out, the next will be quicker.

Hi Peter, The plates can be overlapping or not, the point is that you don't have to overlap them to give the illusion of overlap. We studied quite a few photographs of real copper plating to get them right, and what we did was the best solution. I for one was not going to argue with how they seemed to be attached on the real thing - so I simulated what I seen from the sources I used. On the Victory, some are overlapping but most are not. As for cost, it makes zero difference, the cost goes into the etching process and the materials used and has little to do with what's etched. If they were all the same, the same amount of material is still used.

All of the new kits (after Pegasus, I think) have sail material and plans. Sails aren't really my thing, so I cannot give any real pointers on how make them look authentic, have only ever added sails on a customer's request - a Krick Alert, Gorch Fock and a Japanese sail training ship - and that's it! I have seen the signal flags on the Victory at Portsmouth, without sails, so it should work with the model, perhaps...

The kit will have sail material and a full set of sail plans for those mad enough to add them, and I suppose you can't add the sails without adding the flags, too..

It is not having a case. I usually have a wooden crate made and have the finished model couriered to Italy, but this one is too big - if it were to be placed in a crate, the dimensions would be silly. Therefore, we will be hiring a van and driving it from the UK to Italy ourselves when complete in September/October time. I am thinking of including a full flag set, complete with signal flags for the 'England Expects' and 'Engage the enemy more closely' - what do you think?

Yes, they are in the Vanguard and Pegasus kits, too.

Thank you! I know your work so that's quite a compliment!

Not really, it is photo etched 0.10mm copper - the thinnest material we could get away with.

Thank you, Greg! I always thought that the pressed copper tiles never looked quite right, as the simulated nail heads are shown much too proud of the surface, when in fact they were nearer to flush with the surface. Also, due to the pressing out process, the edges on some are wavy or curled up slightly, so the slightest brush against them can snag and pull them off. They look OK from a distance, but do not stand up so well to close scrutiny - I have always thought; what is the point of adding super detail parts for a model when other aspects let it down - it has to be all or nothing. It is no good having, say, super detailed window frames, but when looking at them, your eye is instead immediately drawn to the oversized clumps of poorly cast blobs of metal that is meant to be the stern carvings - or even worse, changing the shape of the actual main stern pattern to accommodate the oversize parts!. This I think, is the big difference between beautifully scratch built models and the majority of commercial kits. I prefer kits that, when built, people cannot tell the difference between kit and scratch, or at least blur the lines between them - if it is as true a scale model as you can possibly make it, then there should be little difference (especially in the bow and stern areas) - except you don't need a fully kitted out workshop complete with expensive machine tools to make the kit..(although a small lathe would help for those pesky masts and yards..)

She is a Dachshund, or Sausage dog and her name is Mrs Miggins. We bought a long haired Dachshund just before we moved to Italy, and a female standard Dachshund from Pisa when we moved. Not long after they got together we had this: And here is the culprit: Mrs Miggins is the one on the right: We kept 3 of the 5 pups, letting them go was so difficult. Mrs Miggins was to go to my friend, but she didn't like it and was so happy to see me when we came to take her back home that she made sure I didn't put her down until we were in the car! This is her now, on Christmas day, working out a way to get that turkey on the table (which I have since commandeered for Victory..)

Thank you! Although you'd better off with the kit, as I have changed a lot during the build: stern and quarter gallery balustrades, stern counter, better gun port lids to name but a few. Anyway, judging by some of the works of art that others are capable of, they'll put my effort to shame. I guess I only have the new poop screen bulkheads and poop deck area to finish off, and the figurehead and anchors for new interesting pics - after this it is just the boring stuff, yards and rigging. I find this area a bit of a chore now, as I enjoy building the designs, and seeing how well (or not) things work out. But with the masting and rigging you know exactly what to do and how long it will take so I end up 'sleepwalking' through it - not as much fun.... Having so many parts pre cut can make you lazy, I have found. I was convinced I had drawn a dolphin striker for laser cutting, and looked everywhere on my mass of laser cut prototype sheets - but nothing. I then looked at my own plans and realised I have had to make it myself from dowel! I may complain.. I may make just the hull without the masts for myself in the future, as I have enjoyed building this one. I think I may be doing Prince next. Oh yes - I haven't glued the flying jibboom in place, as that's guaranteed to be broken off at some point...

OK, Just tried to take some pics outside, as it's so sunny (still!). I have completed the mast assemblies (less blocks), and it has definitely taken over our large dining room table. With the bowsprit in place, it is near to 1.5 metres in length, going up to 1.6 when the mizzen gaff/boom is in place. Not the easiest thing to manoeuvre... The poop deck is not yet fixed in place, only dry-fitted so not sitting fully into position. The flag lockers are a combination of 0.4mm photo etched parts for the flag compartments and 0.8mm ply for the outer shell. I see flag lockers on other kits and they always look way too thick - even in 0.4mm they are slightly oversize! They will also sit lower once the poop is finally glued down, giving enough room the cleats above, which are fixed to the inner stern board. The skylight is 0.8 plywood and looks quite good, scale-wise, with the window frames being very thin. I realised another advantage of the MDF frames - because of the very low tolerances I can design into the structure, the masts and bowsprit fit perfectly and are exactly 90 degrees to the keel when looking fore or aft. ETA - When it is sitting on our dining table, the main topmast cross trees are at eye level!

@chris watton I do know that, while researching and designing the Endeavour (13 years ago now, cripes!), it did state in the Anatomy of the Ship book that the hull colour was in fact nearer to brown (I think I even wrote this in the instructions, if memory serves - but that's 18th Century). So I guess it can vary - although off-white is by far the safest bet if no sources tell you otherwise.

LOL, but for us Brits, I felt I was in the process of photosynthesis it has been so bright! Three days of hot weather so far this year - things are looking up...!

LOL, Cheers I will have anything laser cut or photo etched I can possibly think of to make my, and the modeller's life as simple as it can be. Essentially, anything I can get away with. (I had a good moan about the tab positions on my prototype parts - been a nightmare releasing some of the parts..) I do wish we could find a company to make the masts and yards pre-shaped, as you really do need a lathe to make them properly..

Have started on the masts while I wait for the new poop parts. Initially, I tried to rush this as I went into auto-pilot - and made some stupid mistakes (bowsprit gammoning cleats in the wrong place due to me not pushing the bowsprit in right to the end - so had to remove and start over - no extended cheeks on the mizzen, when it clearly has them - what an idiot!). I decided to slow down and complete the mast plans before going any further, which I have now done. The lower mast are almost complete and have been primed: (My wife is re-decorating around me!) I did make sure I had laser cut mast and yard cleats in various shapes and sizes - saves a little time... (Pity I couldn't have had the gammoning cleats laser cut...) And that's where I am right now - I spent all of yesterday (Sunday, in the sweltering heat) turning the upper masts.

Hi Daniel, Thank you! I am not sure at all regarding the history of that particular model (I assume you mean the one with one too many gun ports on the quarterdeck and the odd stern)? Perhaps it was a model made by a builder and submitted to the Admiralty for approval, for how she should look after the 'great repair', I don't know. I do know that when studying both models and paintings can throw up massive discrepancies between them. Prince for example. The beautiful model in the Science Museum is definitely of Prince, but when looking at the Van De Velde drawings (These are almost as good as photographs for the Restoration period, IMOHO), they show a small open stern gallery on the real thing, and this seems quite consistent with other contemporary drawings, and some paintings - but it is not there on the actual model. I assume it was added during the build and after the model was made. For Victory, being 'only' a couple of hundred years old since the rebuild, you'd have thought there would be pliantly of correlating material relating to how she looked - but this hasn't been the case, I have found... Chris

The lighter the model, the less damage it will take if dropped, it could be argued. Dropping a heavily laden model with 2kg worth of needless material could spell catastrophe, as opposed to a few things to repair and touch up. The only concessions I make it to do with the rigging, and none of it is glued/fixed permanently in place (from experience..)

I have this book and can confirm it is very good, especially for very detailed and sharp colour photographs. There is also a lot of input from Peter Goodwin.

You could buy the kit, and cross out the 'Victory' and write 'HMS Temeraire' underneath - she'll never know! The Vallejo paints are water based and produced in Spain, I think. If you're painting large areas, they need to be airbrushed, as acrylics don't seem to be as forgiving as enamels. For smaller parts they are great, though.

I remember adding extra weight to my Airfix Victory to make it sit correctly in the water - just before blowing it up with a French Banger! Those were the days - probably get arrested on some kind of terrorist charge if we were to try that today....

Thank you for your kind words, they are much appreciated. I designed a 72nd scale Victory in 2001, and I certainly didn't want to do the same thing again regarding the usual and fairly simple designs - and I figured what would be the point in spending time developing such a hackneyed subject if when released, it's just the same as all the rest - why chose this over others?. I had to be sure that, after spending so much development time and Amati's money, even people who are sick to the back teeth of Victory kits (me included) would think twice about this one. Regarding the bow platform, I think I explained that in an earlier post. My primary sources for the main designs were/are the original plans from the NMM, John McKay's Anatomy book of Victory and Alan McGowan's HMS Victory: Her Construction, Career and Restoration. All three show the bow platform at upper gun deck level, although I am fully aware that Bulger, Longridge and the Victory herself show the raised platform. I have researched this area more than any other, and I still don't know which is correct. With this in mind, I had to think what would be easier for the modeller to change, if he/she wanted to changed the height? I concluded that It is much easier, even for relative novices to add the extra height than lower the deck. Thank you. Unfortunately, this is a commercial kit and cost of parts does have to play a part. I would prefer the Jerzy/Chuck type blocks as I feel this kit deserves them. However, although we did that for Mercury, there are so many blocks for Victory that they would add at least another £200 to the cost of the kit - that would be commercial suicide, as the kit will be quite expensive anyway. Plus, we are not sure whether the outside sources who manufacture them would be able to make enough (initial kit runs are 500-1000 kits - having all of the parts for every kit is vitally important) This, unfortunately is one of the compromises we have to make for commercial kits - most will not care about the blocks, but people like me and you do - but we are in a small minority. For everything else that I has a personal control over, I do try and make sure the parts are as accurate as they can be, though - I have even turned new belaying pins (the fat 'hour glass'-shaped ones would have looked entirely out of place) as well as the cannon barrels. There are very few 'off the shelf' fittings with this kit - ladders and the ship's bell is all that's used for the hull, I think. The rest is bespoke. There will be a full set of sail plans and sail material for those who like to add them.... I will ask if the proper blocks can be added as an optional extra, though - this may be the best compromise. Even perhaps 'Special Edition' kits in fewer numbers with the blocks! Thank you! You could leave one side open, yes, or just parts of the side left open. I am about to start on the mast now - pretty boring stuff.. Chris

Very impressive - someone after my own heart. Well done.

I do wonder if they based the model on the French Royal Louis. As far as I can ascertain, Spain was in decline for most of the 17th Century, and the largest ships she produced seemed to have no more than 70 guns at most. San Felipe certainly looks like it is based on a vessel built during the last quarter of the 17th Century.