Jean-Pierre

Beautiful job.  I dare say that this is the best president around!!!!

Your dad's question is typical and mostly is the friendliest a non-initiated can do!  tThe underlying question is rather "how can you spend so much time on such a futile project... but there usually also is some respect in the question.  Coming from your own dad, maybe the best answer would be: "dad, you know pretty well where I got the patience from..."

Well done, and now: back to work!

JP

There is one point to consider about the sails, I think: the "high" rig that you prefer will also be very cumbersome and require a huge glass case. I would personally go for the 2nd type which is also very beautiful in my opinion and need a considerably less high case.

I should add to my former post that I do use partial length planks... to save on wood strips.  This has had the advantage that I have never run out of hull planking wood so far.  But I have taken care to have the butt joints only where the planks are full width.

On 19/07/2017 at 4:21 PM, Chuck said:

Not really any out there.  Basically there is little demand but,  in order to design them there needs to be hundreds if not thousands of hours of work.   There are plenty of plans which have already been researched by renowned modelers and naval historians.    They include the drawn frames and frame parts etc. But they never had the desire to go into the kit business.  It would be very easy for a legit kit maker to reach out to these authors and pay them a royalty for their work.   But it would push up the cost for the eventual kits which are already expensive.  The Chinese, unlike the companies with ethics never reach out to these authors and that is why you see versions of Ancre Kits on the market from them but nowhere else.   Just because there was never a kit doesnt mean the company can use the plans and research from an individual without paying them or even asking for permission.

 

I couldnt afford to pay Ancre a royalty would love to produce a kit of their projects....or possibly one of AlexM's designs or even Admiralty models or even Harold Hahn's son.   I would love to make a kit of EdT's clipper project.  But its too expensive if you do it on the up and up and recognize the author's contribution and creation.   What cost $1000 in China would cost $2500 made anywhere else.  Those Hahn kits are verbatim copies of of the plans he created.  I suspect you will see all of the aforementioned projects at some point available from China.  

 

That being said, I am hopeful Greg and David at Admiralty and Syren will reach some sort of agreement in the near future to produce an actual legitimate square rigged POF model kit.   I will talk to them very soon about it.   Speedwell look like a wonderful project.   All they could say is no....it doesnt hurt to ask.

 

 

Why not upgrading an existing model:  I mean the model Shipways Flying Fish, a beautiful ship, and a potentially beautiful model, but rarely finished! (Probably because the kit is not quite up to modern standards)

On 19/05/2017 at 9:38 AM, wefalck said:

I gather using full length planks has the advantage of making it easier to get clean strakes and hence to look neater on a model. Whether this is prototype-fashion is another question in addition to the scale plank length. The problem is to get the butting ends aligned properly. Perhaps the best way is to fit a full length plank and then to cut it into shorter sections before attaching it. This ensures that the planks have exactly the same wiidth at the butt.

I agree with this, of course, but why making it extra difficult by cutting the planks, while scoring them would give a safer butt joint and will look exactly the same?

I love this model, and the way you are building it is outstanding.  I am sure, once finished, you will have a superb rendering of an excellent kit.

By the way, there is a little point I think you definitely could and should improve, and that is the position of the figurehead, which sticks out a little too much.  Have a google at other Berlin models.

Get on with the fine job.

JP

My experience as a clumsy ship builder is that small size letters are very, very difficult to align properly.  Furthermore, small letters seem to be only available in sans serif characters, like Helvetica, while the letters used on period ship were mostly of the serif type (Times...).

I personally used my computer and printed the required words on photo paper and protected the deskjet print with a few layers of matte varnish.  Two small difficulties here are: first conceal the paper edges; second: reproduce the right hull colour as a background on your print.

JP

On 07/07/2017 at 2:05 PM, EJ_L said:

Cheers Don! That rudder work alone is deserving of a drink or two in my book! Another excellent addition to you build.

A drink or two?  I tried this while planking my last deck.  But then for some reason, the quality of my planking decreased progressively....

What a beautiful build!  What a beautiful ship.  Your model proves once again that there is no necessity of a bunch of guns to make a spectacular model.  I look forward to the rest of your build.  Thanks for sharing.

Happy modelling

JP

Nice and unusual choice of model.  This ship surely looks quite detailed and will be impressive. About the cannons, I had the same problem when I built the plastic Soleil Royal, and I had to close a few gunlids because their cannon had gone adrift.  In this case I would certainly wrap a thin blackened metal thread around the gun, pass the ends through the bottom of the carriage, through the deck and fix it underneath.  Could easily be made invisible.  Otherwise, you could put the guns on their carriage only when rigging is completed.

Oh, just a little detail: the name Roter Löwe is German, so I suppose the ship is from one of the German states, and not Dutch (from the Netherlands)

I look forward to your progress: happy modelling.

JP

Isn't this cutter based on the "Cutter Alert" plans, a ship that has been described in an"Anatomy of the Ship" book?

JP

This is not the only Artesania kit where the lateral deck camber has been omitted, I'm afraid.  Suppose they do so because their plywood (?) false deck would be difficult to bend in both directions.  I suppose that the upper deck definitely should be cambered, but the lower deck could stay flat, except if you are building the model with the open side.

Anatomy of the ship is a generally most reliable source, I think.

Happy modelling

JP

I suppose everyone has met them at some point: these commercial model parts or accessories which for me are a pain to look at.  I would really like other modelers to tell me what they think about them.

Ship wheel: it seems pretty impossible to find a wheel of the right thickness: I just saw in the build logs an absolutely beautiful model built with extreme care and attention to detail, but with a thick, clumsy white wooden(?) wheel.  Then you have the metal wheels in the Caldercraft kits: beauiful kits of course, with a wheel in the right size, but much too thin.

Barrels:  their metal bands are molded in relief but could better be replaced with black paper strips (at least three each side of the barrel.  And yes, this is fairly easy to correct

"Bubble" pins: Caldercraft seem to have delivered thinner items as from their Victory kit, but it seems to me that all commercial items are way too thick not only to look good, but also allow lines to pass between them easily.  OK, it is possible to sand them a little, but it would be damn difficult to make a full row of them exactly the same size, I think.

Gun carriages: I will not comment on the metal items that are almost impossible to rig, but rather on the wooden items one finds in most kits, the sides of which are parallel, which is a gross and quite visible mistake.  It seems to me that this would be quite easy to correct, but I have never seen a build log description of, it, and never have done it  myself.  I suppose one could cut the bottom of the carriage lengthwise, and reglue it after inserting a (very) thin triangular strip.

Anchors:  while most manufacturers have excellent anchor parts in their kits, some still deliver items which are either out of scale (ex.: Sergal's Dutch Whaler) or very clumsy (ex.: Euromodel's Renommée, an otherwise superb model.

Red lights and blue windows:  these definitely should look transparent (ship lights) and gloss black (windows)

Has anyone comments?

JP

I agree with your choice.  Caldercraft would certainly be well inspired to change their Mary Rose according to the last findings: I suppose this would require added superstructures both fore and aft, and also a revised beak.  What would also be a big (but expensive) modification, would be to correct the gunnery in accordance to what is on display in the Mary Rose museum at Portsmouth.  Now I wonder if the original Mary Rose kit could not fairly easily be modified as required.  Have you considered this, or would this be beyond feasability?

JP

Nice pictures of what is becoming a great model.  Special congratulations for the slightly curved waterline, just as it should be!

you're right.  It's about time some etchings specialist finds a way to produce lengths of linked chain at 1/200 and, why not, at 1/350 scale.  Plastic modelers would be thankful.

My model was in fact a Victory Ship, a superb ship that was both larger and faster than the Liberty's. But their general arrangement was similar.  They were discarded mostly during the sixties because they rusted very fast, and their turbines used huge quantities of fuel (some 75 tons a day at sea!).  But their speed of up to 18 knots would have made them a tough challenge for U-Boats.

The Bluejacket kit I bought had its superstructure made of mere blocks of wood that had to be piled up, and the general detail was rather simplistic.  I suppose the kit was (is?) a reissue based on plans by a Mr Boucher.

As a collector, I had bought in the past plans of this ship, which later appeared to be the ones of the kit.  And I was lucky to have done that, because the toner used for the plans in the kit was not burned in thoroughly, and I soon had large blind spots on my plans.  I'm sure Bluejacket would have replaced them, but I then used (much more carefully) the other set of plans.

you did a super job on your gun and on the windlass (as well as the rest of your build of course).

I think I remember that there are some linked chain available for a reasonable 1/100 scale.  Didn't you consider this?  I used some on a Flying Fish model at scale 1/96 and they look great (better than the rest of the (unfinished) model.

I'll love to watch the rest of your project.  I personally started a Victory Ship by Bluejacket but I got stuck although I had already corrected quite a few inaccuracies (prow is wrong, chimney as well, railings not the right type, correction of the half finished one piece hull a pain for me (partly due to poor tools on my behalf). A plank on bulkheads would have been far easier to build I think.

But you  are doing a great job on this one!

Nice job! A little question.  Doesn't your plan show an access to the latrines on the beak.  You know, all that gaspacho, and zarzuella and paella and bocadillos have to find a way out, caramba.

(As you can see, I am revising my spanish

Another "touch of class"!!!

Thanks, gentlemen, for your replies.   Your advice for the paint makes sense.  In any case, some serious trials for the "blurred" effect will be necessary. 

Thanks for the replies, gentlemen.  I thought these 3D copies were always made of resin, but now I'm not sure any more.  Is it so that copies made out of metal (soft aluminium, for example) or maybe even wood, are possible?

I don't know if the subject has already been treated before.  If not, I really think this is worth looking at.  To duplicate guns, or gun carriages, or ornamental figures, make extra anchors, or to replace a lost, missing or broken piece.

The first "3D copies" I saw were rather rough looking, but I am sure the technique has improved in the meantime.  One question though: how small duplicable detail can be rendered?  At what cost?  

I recently was rather surprised to see such a printer on sale in a warehouse (Makro in Belgium) at around 1000,-€, but I have no idea what the actual cost of materials is.

My questions: has anyone tried this new technique?  Are there any 3D copy shops, and was is the resulting quality?

I'm not sure, but I think that while the Lady Nelson is a little more expensive than the Sherbourne, it had a wooden base included, which I think is worth considering.

There is also a nice Anatomy of the Ship book named "The Cutter Alert", which allows fantastic super detailing of either kit.  Ther are (were) several build logs of the SQherbourne, some going to the extend of making a clinker built hull which most cutters seem to have featured.

There is yet another kit by Euromodel of Como, which has a lovely shape, but I wonder about its authenticity.

Happy modelling!

JP

I still have in my waiting room a rather nice half built model of a 17th century Dutch whaler, based on Sergal's Baleinera Olandese.  One of my first jobs will be to paint the lower hull off white.  I know that the waterline will NOT be parallel to the keel (the stem should be a little higher) and I will also try to have the waterline a little curved, that is raising fore and aft. 

I have been studying some paintings of Dutch merchant ships (especially flutes, as this is the type of ship I'm building, and indeed, the waterline is a little lower amidships.  Now I also took the precaution of looking at paintings by different artists, and also noticed that the waterline is always blurred, not sharp like the one I would obtain with masking tape.

I've never seen this done on a model, but I would find it another challenge to try to realise this curved, blurred line.  Biggest problem for me is that I do not work with a spray, only with brushes, and I suppose I shall have to make quite a few trials before I start on the hull.

Another problem is the colour:  I am aware of the poor coverage of white (or off white) paints, and would like to try with acrylic "one-layer" wall paint.  Has anyone tried this?  Any tips from other happy painters?

Thanks in advance.

JP