juhu

IMHO, although period ship kit with all guns out like an angry hedgehog is the most typical way how to build the kit, in reality I think the ship did not have enough crew to control the guns on the both sides at once, so I would assume even in ideal position, just before the shot, only one side would be out. Also, in the heat of battle I assume it may well happen that only some guns are out: the gun, if barrel loaded from the front needs to be in, then moved to the outer positien just before the shot. I think if you keep the lids closed or opened and just left a pair of guns out, cannot be an issue. But let's see what will others suggest...

Hi Allison, just a remark: waiting for Caldercraft's Surprise could mean you will wait forever. Seems they stopped the development of the kit years ago. Remember, Surprise became popular only because of that famous movie - and this is now almost forgotten in the past, hardly can be a selling point for the kit, if finished. Also, Suprise IMHO is not the best looking or interesting ship that one could buy. If you want to stick with Jotika and have some really beautiful Frigate, why not to gof for their Diana? I have never build it, I know it may require considerable skills I do not have, but her lines and overall appearance are outstanding. The best english frigate replica one can buy now possibly.

Shortly: neither of these resembles any "Surprise" once existing: AL - huge kit that would look great just because of its size, if you have a room for it. If looking as you say for details, what details do you mean? If it does not represent any real ship, we can speak only of factographical errors and AL is really weak when it comes to historical accuracy. Still, finished must be eye catcher. Mamoli - nasty cheat on customers IMHO, nothing more. If you search for Mamoli's model of "Gloire", does not it look like 100% copy of their "Surprise"? I would say so. What is cheaper than to repack the old kit, put there a new, popular name on the box and behold, we have a new kit to sell. Bottom line: Both kits appeared shortly after famous "Master and Commander" movie, both companies tried to make the best money out of the popular "Suprise" ship, not taking any care for poor modellers wanting an accurate replica. So the kit were produced, were produced as fast as possible and this is the result. If seeking for Surprise, check Jotika's web page. Unfortunatelly, they were never able to finish the kit and probably never will :/

Well, indeed, but sails can be added. And often more realistic than what is offered directly in the kit. But of course, it is up to you. :)

Hi Russ, Two options: 1. What is meant by length? Length overall, length on the waterline, ....? It is quite possible that you have just taken two different data and both can be correct. The best would be to have good blueprints. 2. common issue with European kit producers: their kits are often just a distant resemblance of the original. 1:54 is odd scale anyway. It is very possible that it really does not match as you calculated. Also it is possible, that if you start to measure also other dimensions, you get even more various scale proposals. I had this experience with model Lynx from Panart: they give the scale of 1:62 (sometimes it seems like a competition who comes with the strangest scale :) ). I obtained the copy of the original plan of the real ship and start to measure.... Well, I ended up at scale varying from 1:57 to 1:60, even worse when I compared the overall hull shape and profile, deck arrangement, opining position etc etc.... Sometimes it really seems to me like first the kit is designed and then only the manufacturer thinks, what scale will he print on the box.... Endeavour is quite a popular kit subject. If you want accuracy, go for Caldercraft kit. If you want to build Occre, I would recommend to build it but not to measure - what you get may not please you then.

Pleasure to see such a master work. Again and again I am assuring myself, that wooden model ship left in natural wood color is the best looking option, even if the original is painted. Thanks for sharing your build.

Nice idea these sailors, indeed. Although I cannot tell how popular they will be - 1/72 scale is not so common for ship models (like e.g. 1/64) Also, if they were in "admiralty" 1/48 scale, I would probably take one set - not much choices there, I believe just some metal casted sailor set I saw somewhere online from other manufacturer...

Beautiful! The ultimate kit in my stash, still waiting for its time - hopefully it comes! Will follow this thread, this is one of the most bueautiful ships ever depicted in model ship kits - and so rarely seen!

Thanks for adding the scale and wood. Now I can vote All 3 subjects are great, and am sure there can be dozen others proposals as seen also here For I can imagine to get either Boeier, because it is so unusaual and not covered in this scale by any commercial kit Or I would pick the cross section - only chance to get at least a piece of such a ship, because due to the enourmous size, no chance to ever have a full kit Although great, I would not vote for Chebacco - just because in 1/4 scale one can find several other american fishing vessels from other manufacturers. No Chebacco of course , but more appealing to my eye (e.g Gloucester schooners). Just my oppinion.

Hi Chuck, very interesting topic, but what I miss here is the clear scale of the proposed options. Example: I am interested in 1/4 scale (1:48 in metric) scale models, I would vote for dutch little, but 1/2 scale makes it out, but what are the scales of other two? Or did I overlooked some info? If yes am sorry, just thought it could help also the others. Thanks

Do not know this re-release, but I was curious to see the content after I saw it in AL catalogue. Well, AL never cared much about any historical accuracy or overall design. It seems from what you wrote, that as with all their newer kits they are simply following their policy: make it cheaper, cheaper, cheaper, but in nice package, so it would sell. Strictly aesthetically speaking, I consider this new longer bowsprit version more eye pleasing than the previous one. Yes, probably due to cheap materials, painting would be necessary though....

Will follow. When I saw those pics of Mamolis's cutter in preview I first believed it is already finished Cheerful, great craftsmanship!

If I remember correctly, BJ offers two very different kits: the larger one POF (being built here) and the smaller one which is POB (or solid hull?). The key point is that the smaller one is not a "native" BJ production, but overtaken kit from some other no more existing producer (cannot recall the name). Therefore the kits are not just resized coppies of each other but two different designs. And the smaller one is supposed to be very inferior in all aspects. No personal experience, just repeating what studied elsewhere.

I can look through these pics over and over again, just amazing! (Although I must admit, boat layed on the beach with set sail? Would be strange if not dangerous in case of wind blow... ? )

Just amazing. Again and again I am learning that these small boats are so appealing to me. Thanks for sharing.

Hi Don, no exact publication, I have just hit the google for the fastest solution. And now I see I should have looked more carefully: Here is the lynx with this type of gunport lids http://ids.si.edu/ids/deliveryService?id=NMAH-2007-13914 The only thing missing is the centre hole. Or I just cannot imagine how would be the gun secured inside, if this representation is correct The scuppers could have been leaded pipes also on 1812 privateer I guess... But as said previously, I would not call current Lynx "replica" (= exact copy of the original)

Hi Don, you can choose - see attachment. More experienced shall correct me but I would call for the marked option. I assume, on this kind of ship the gun was not retracted fully in and not then elevated as was done on "multideckers". As I learnt, for such an option the bulk wards with no deck above would not allow this. I believe the contemporary era solution was double lid, split horizontaly. When closed, the gun protrudes through the hole in the middle. Sometimes, to save weight, cost, only the lower half of the lid was installed. I have seen mane model featuring this or that, just have not any pic by hand now.... (Does not also well-known MS Syren kit feature this?)

Hi Don, no scuppers either in her Admiralty plans... But I assume they were there, at least around the lowest main deck section / masts? I do not believe gun ports would serve as scuppers, or? I would like to learn if it was a practise. Anyway, it seems they were covered by double lids, one down one up, gun protruding through the hole in the middle. I would assume during the sail they would be secured as tight as possible, not to let the water in - and out too!

Hi Jean, actually, no surprise here and very little to say: Kit producers are just doing businness. They simply make and sell, while people are willing to pay for what they offer, why to improve quality? You are writing about gun carriages - in kits they have parallel sides, because this error does not stop people to buy them and are easier to produce and the guns are easier to be build for modeler too. Anchors? Same type and size for several models, way out of scale but again, who cares? When you look through this forum, there are lots of builds for ships that never existed or do resemble the original only from a distance. Kits with ficticious names, history, out of scale etc. etc. If people are willing to spent money on them, hours building them and are happy with them, why shall be they bothered with some innacurate details, if they do not mind that the whole thing is simply out? How many perdiod ships kits shows curved deck planks or mention plank joggling? Period ship kits are not easy and some things are simply engineered to simplify the builds. If people were demanding accurate models and not buing what is available, the situation would be different. See the world of plastic scale modeling. There you have reviews, very critical views, sometimes actually too critical counting every single milimeter or rivet on the plane or tank, comparing them with blueprints. Of course, for period ships we have rarely such accurate resources to compare with, true. Still, the technical aspects are known, researched. Why are we so tolerant to simplifications and innacuracy, if we pay for wooden ship models much more than our fellows for plastic kits? That's the question. Maybe for the majority just the wooden big thing with sails is enough, no need to investigate and spent even more time on it. Also, I believe, there would be possible for producers to make every kit a unique, to have dedicated all those details just for one particular model, and make them more accurate. But then the price would go automatically higher. And who would buy such a "perfect" kits? Were few people. As said, majority simply does not care and is happy with the current status. That is not a criticism, just a fact. Actually, kits offer what they could offer to keep the ratio between price and content. So you have some "general" deck furniture, fittings etc. Still it is possible to find a kits were these things are set to higher than avarage level. If you wish more, scratch build is the way.

Hi Don, in my opinion, there are more differences, not only at stern. Actually, due to the all safety regulations, I believe it is not even possible to built a modern replica of these fast but also quite unstable vessels. Still. I believe Pride of Baltimore (II) looks more like original built "Baltimore clipper" (although the first (doomed) of this name was probably closest ). See attached picture of the now and then: Regarding the transom, yes, it is incorrect in the kit, you need to do something with it to make it look more real. As I do have the original plans from Admiralty (copy of course), as I wrote, this is not the only issue, the overall proportions simply do not match (length, width), none of the deck opening positions matches the original etc etc.... actually, after hours spent over the plans with the ruler and calc I have decided to putt this kit on a shelf.... I am not sure it will ever come to realization. Wish you good luck with yours, she rises up to a beauty!

But beware, this nowadays Lynx has very little in common with the original 1812 privateer. Although the connection with her surely looks interesting, the design is very different. Actually, only common maybe a name and written story of the original....

Hi Frank this is beautiful build. I admire your eye for "functional" detail. Those winches and all the hardware returns me couple of months back when sailing in Netherlands and spotted one of Johan Anker's design: Iduna laying in our harbor. Although different class of boat, wooden beauty and graceful lines are so similar and appealing! Will keep an eye on this build!

Splendid metal work and great details!

Wonderful and clean. I like the busy look of the deck of these modern schooners. Eager to see it finished

Thanks to USS Frolick as said, am surprised and have learnt something new. Indeed, I cannot find any note on coppering in my books (sadly only old Chapelle's "Baltimore clipper") and although Kemp's Lynx was a very fine vessel I did not expect so high level of construction. Even for a Mosquidobit under british flag, no note on coppering, at least as I have found so far....