Chris Watton and Vanguard Models news and updates

[chris watton]

Have been back onto the Speedy over the past couple of days, after sorting some stuff for the third kit. Have been building the little cutter - damn why did I think it was a good idea to include this, they are so fiddly! Almost finished though, two a half days! I think that if I had the right software, I would design the shell to be cast in resin and offer it as an alternative, hate doing these, but they do look nice on the model when complete..

[bruce d]

Chris, it's me again.

Harold Wyllie painting “Launch of the 'Agamemnon', Buckler's Hard, 1781”

 

Again, don’t know what you have already seen so apologies if this is ‘old news’.

Bruce

[chris watton]

19 minutes ago, bruce d said:

Chris, it's me again.

Harold Wyllie painting “Launch of the 'Agamemnon', Buckler's Hard, 1781”

 

Again, don’t know what you have already seen so apologies if this is ‘old news’.

Bruce

Cheers

 

I have all of these paintings (well, copies), and they all show 8 windows on the lower tier. But the original plans show 7. I have seen plans for the same class of ships, for example the Swan class, and all have the same stern framing with only superficial changes to the tafferal.

 

Did they elect to draw the Indie stern because it was different, I wonder?

 

[Morgan]

I would hesitate to trust Pocock he consistently painted Victory after her 1803 refit, yet with her original stern which disappeared during that refit, despite having seen the ship for himself and having sketched her re-modelled stern, he liked to ‘bling-up’ his ships.  Wylie had similar faults and was painting 100 years after the event.

 

Some of the latest research is captured here https://julianstockwin.com/2017/10/10/agamemnon-the-darch-model/

 

Even this though shows 8 lower windows, it has some research provenance from what should be reliable sources.

 

Gary

[bruce d]

It was about the time that the powers-that-be started to get serious about standardization and, who knows, it may have reached the subject of framing/windows? 

The Pocock painting in post #289 above has some merit as a source: it was a contemporary work by an artist who was famed for doing research on his subject. He may have 'blinged up' some aspects but there was no profit in changing such details as windows. If he included eight windows he probably did not think the ship had seven.

Has anyone looked at the logs of the ship? Details crop up, especially around the time work in a dockyard happens.

HTH

Bruce

 

Edited August 3, 2019 by bruce d

[chris watton]

This is the page for the full Indie lines, complete with stern:

 

https://prints.rmg.co.uk/collections/ship-plans/products/indefatigable-1784-j3954

 

Now, there is another Ardent (64), but slightly later at 1782, although around the same time frame as the launch of Agamemnon and Indefatigable with almost the same dimensions:

 

https://prints.rmg.co.uk/products/ardent-1782-j3028?_pos=5&_sid=00da2bde1&_ss=r

 

What do you trust, though, several drawings and paintings, many not entirely contemporary, or the original Admiralty lines for the class of ship but a different name?

[bruce d]

51 minutes ago, chris watton said:

What do you trust, though, several drawings and paintings, many not entirely contemporary, or the original Admiralty lines for the class of ship but a different name?

Trust is hard to come by in research. I hope that my prodding of the subject is welcomed, but feel free to say if you have already covered all sources.

Until recently, I earned my crust as a researcher. Now I have retired it is difficult to break old habits so I dug a bit.

Have you asked the NMM about the contents of folio ADUB0340? The description of this folio is sparse but includes a misspelling of the ship's name and may not have come up in routine searches.  With no dates, it may or may not be your Agamemnon.

As the only other class ship produced at Bucklers Yard was Agamemnon, I see why the Indefatigable plans are such an appealing prospect.

Bruce

[chris watton]

31 minutes ago, bruce d said:

Trust is hard to come by in research. I hope that my prodding of the subject is welcomed, but feel free to say if you have already covered all sources.

Until recently, I earned my crust as a researcher. Now I have retired it is difficult to break old habits so I dug a bit.

Have you asked the NMM about the contents of folio ADUB0340? The description of this folio is sparse but includes a misspelling of the ship's name and may not have come up in routine searches.  With no dates, it may or may not be your Agamemnon.

As the only other class ship produced at Bucklers Yard was Agamemnon, I see why the Indefatigable plans are such an appealing prospect.

Bruce

Bruce, I do not mind at all! This is why I put it to you guys on here, who may have more ideas or information than me. Getting the stern right on these ships is important, I just want to ensure all bases are covered regarding research and the correct conclusions - or, as correct as one can hope for.

 

Right, I think I have gone as far as I can with the Speedy build, as I am waiting for the missing 0.4mm PE parts that include the pump, deadeye strops and other things. Here is where I am at, the cannons are not glued in place as I need to add deadeyes and chain plates first. I have my painted Cochrane figure standing on the deck.

 

The cutter took around two days, and I have positioned it between for the fore and aft hatches, on chocks high enough that the keel clears the combings by a healthy margin. Should I keep this in the kit, does it look OK?

 

I took a couple of shots almost side on, so you can see the great curves, more elegant than the later variants. The stand should be crystal clear, but it is a sacrificial building stand, and I sprayed varnish on it... 

[druxey]

With all due respect, that painting shown in post #293 is not by Pocock but a comparatively modern one by Wylie. Viewer beware!

Edited August 4, 2019 by druxey

[chris watton]

4 minutes ago, druxey said:

With all due respect, that painting shown in post #293 is not by Pocock but a comparatively modern one by Wylie. Viewer beware!

What would you trust more, the original plans or paintings? I cannot help buy feel Agamemnon would have had seven window openings on the lower tier, as shown on the Indefatigable Admiralty plans. I know most ships, most third rates at least, had 8, so perhaps the artists just assumed this, as this is what they were used to seeing?

[Blue Ensign]

The boat looks good Chris, in scale terms what size is it?

I like the inclusion of a deck boat on a model, and had to scratch them for my Pegasus build, so a 1:64 scale boat included with a kit would appeal to me.

 

B.E.

Edited August 4, 2019 by Blue Ensign

[bruce d]

7 minutes ago, druxey said:

With all due respect, that painting shown in post #293 is not by Pocock but a comparatively modern one by Wylie. Viewer beware!

Hello druxey. Maybe I am not seeing something. It is described as Wylie in the post.   I know it is more modern (Wylie died about 1974?).

Bruce

[chris watton]

1 minute ago, Blue Ensign said:

The boat looks good Chris, in scale terms what size is it?

I like the inclusion of a deck boat on a model, and had to scratch them for my Pegasus build, so a 1:64 scale boat included with a kit would appeal to me.

 

B.E.

It is a standard 18 foot cutter, frames and base in 2mm MDF, thwarts and knees in 1mm wood and the floors, oars and pikes in 0.4mm PE. Planking is in 1x3 wood strip.

[Chuck]

The Speedy looks fantastic Chris.   Well done!!!   It will make an excellent project. 

 

Chuck

[Morgan]

Having spent a lot of time, money and the Admirals patience in researching what ships actually looked like I would be hesitant to rely on late 18th / early 19th century paintings. As you say many were not actually contemporary, and often generic. Some used Admiralty models as a basis, but these were not often ‘As-built’ but merely indicative with details such as actual decoration / carvings being decided upon at a later date, unless included on the Admiralty plans.

 

What I believe can be relied upon are Admiralty records and plans, and also contemporary artists preliminary sketches, where they still exist as these were the best eye witness accounts, but are difficult to come by. Often the paintings derived from these sketches changed the subject significantly to conform with Georgian allegorical ideals as demanded by their patrons, so indeed “viewer beware”.

 

Gary

[Jim Rogers]

Chris The Speedy is a work of art. I would include the cutter. 

 

I may be wrong but it was my understanding that the British Admiralty had drawings and plans for everything. I would go with the plans on “Official” paper rather than an artists rendition.

[chris watton]

Thank you guys. I will keep the cutter in for the kit. This one I have tried to design to be as easy and as painless as possible to put together, but at the same time, keep all of the detail. This does mean it will be a little more expensive though (especially with the 34 cast resin cannon barrels and laser engraved deck..), but I think it's worth it if people enjoy building it, and it looks nice once complete.

 

Regarding Agamemnon, I think I am edging towards the idea that it did have 7 windows, rather than 8. I know that when I designed my first one 2 decades ago, this info wasn't so easily accessible, so we ordered the Aggy plans, which have no stern detail, and I used paintings and the Bellona book to fill in the gaps. I would never do that now. Hell, I even ordered the Speedy upper deck plan after the main lines because I couldn't quite make out what the hatch was near the stern (turned out to be the bread hatch). I know Bristol (Portland class 50 gun ships) had 7 windows, but that is a full 14 foot shorter in keel length. I have double checked all available plans on the NMM site, and the Indi is the only one of the Ardent class of 64's that shows the stern. I feel that logically, knowing this, I should go with that. If there were alterations after the drafts, then surely they would have been highlighted on the plans?

 

How many paintings, even the most famous, have we seen of ships we know well, Victory especially, where the details show them at a much later stage in their careers than they should be at the time of the battle depicted?

 

I have attached a copy of the full lines plan for Indie.

Edited August 4, 2019 by chris watton

[Morgan]

Chris,

 

Mindful of the 'viewer beware' caveat, have you seen the image below?  It is a little naive, but does show 7 stern windows.  This is from RMG collections PAD5498, it does capture the fact that the captains accommodation was on the quarterdeck so has some basis in fact rather than just a generic frigate.  Not sure about the decoration though, it looks too ornate for the times.

 

Also, and again you may have seen this, Robert Gardiner's book Frigates of the Napoleonic Wars gives a good account of how Pellew influenced the fit-out of the ship that varies from the drafts, such as ordnance, captains accommodation (foreshortening) and rig (64-gun ship).

 

 

Gary

[chris watton]

Hi Gary,

 

Thank you. Yes, I have that book. Each new subject I choose, I get as much information as I possibly can for that particular ship. I am sure my book collection has increased by 50% in the past year, especially for frigates, 50 gun ships, etc. I also make sure I order the correct suite of plans, even looking at sister ships to see if they have any info that may be missing from the named ship plans. For Bristol, Royal George, Indefatigable, Royal Oak and Flirt and Speedy, I purchased everything that is available. Those, with the books, give me a wealth of info. I did buy The First Frigates, The Heavy Frigates, and the one you mentioned, which does give a lot of valuable into on the Indie. Will look a little odd with he shortened poop, and an extra gun port will have to be added to the quarterdeck, abreast of the main mast, both not shown on the plans, as they were Pellew's mods.

 

Because I have been reading a lot about Cochrane, I would like to do this at some point, Imperieuse (1804), a large captured Spanish frigate, which Cochrane used to great effect in the med, helping the Spanish against the French. I thought it would be great if I included all of his special boats, and show them with the small carronades, that he used for his many inshore exploits..

 

 

Edited August 4, 2019 by chris watton

[Morgan]

Books can be addictive, over 250 at the last count excluding periodicals and naval fiction (all mainly around the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars period) thankfully after retiring I binned all work related books so still have some room to expand  - although the wife may have other ideas.

 

The Imperieuse would make a great subject, the Spanish hullform would distinguish it from other frigates on the market, plus the historical prominence in naval literature helps with the attraction to it as a subject.

 

Gary

[bruce d]

3 hours ago, chris watton said:

and the Indi is the only one of the Ardent class of 64's that shows the stern.

... and Indi and Aggie were both from the same yard, subject to the same decisions and whims. As the only two of the class from that yard, the odds are certainly with you. The NMM folio I mentioned in an earlier post is a  long shot but worth a phone call. I have usually had such queries answered within a week, quicker if it does not require a physical check. 

Imperieuse would be a great subject.

Bruce

[chris watton]

7 minutes ago, bruce d said:

... and Indi and Aggie were both from the same yard, subject to the same decisions and whims. As the only two of the class from that yard, the odds are certainly with you. The NMM folio I mentioned in an earlier post is a  long shot but worth a phone call. I have usually had such queries answered within a week, quicker if it does not require a physical check. 

Imperieuse would be a great subject.

Bruce

Yes, I think Agamemnon did have 7 windows, rather than 8. It is not unheard of, here is a 74, Hero from 1759 with 7 windows along the lower tier:

 

https://prints.rmg.co.uk/products/plan-of-hero-1759-j2835?_pos=3&_sid=15324756a&_ss=r

[Morgan]

Chris,

 

Come me at it from another direction to corroborate the 7 window theory in the absence of direct evidence. Anson was ‘cut-down’ at the same time, as was Magnanime and Indie. As a 64 Anson had 8 lower windows, but paintings show 7 - see below left hand ship (capture of Pomona of Havana by Thomas Whitcombe). The rationale would have been to have a razee look like a frigate, and 8 windows were a give-away that it was a razee which would be avoided, you wanted the enemy to see a lesser ship of force.

 

Other instances would assist in the provenance of the 7 window proposition.

 

 

Gary

 

 

Edited August 4, 2019 by Morgan

[chris watton]

Cheers Gary

 

I am sure that Magnanime was another (different) class of 64 (Magnanime/intrepid class, perhaps, Williams design, whereas Ardent was Slade), and not 74? I thought the second round of razees were 74's, the first three being 64's. Being a different design, Magnanime and all others in her class could well have had 8 windows. As the reason for these razee's was to save money and get powerful frigates as quickly as possible, I am not sure the shipyards would have spent time, or the navy money, on altering what didn't require altering.

 

Problem is many of these ships look more or the same!

 

ETA - the Magnanime/intrepid class did have 8 windows:

Edited August 4, 2019 by chris watton

[Morgan]

Chris,

 

My bad, it’s the Anson I was looking at in the painting - Not the Magnanime. All 3 were razee’d at the same time (Gardiner p.41).

 

I've not looked at the 74’s razeed during the war of 1812, but the same may apply. I’ll edit my post above to correct the names.

 

Gary

[chris watton]

Easily done, Gary, as I said, it is very easy to get lost with these things, and I do really appreciate your input, which I think is very important for getting things as right as they can be, given the information we have!

 

OK, the Lord Nelson figure is now available to buy on the website, if anyone's interested:

 

https://vanguardmodels.com/lord-nelson-164th-scale

[Edwardkenway]

These figures are great Chris! The detail is superb.

Correct me if I'm wrong but they look like they have been sculpted and painted by Alan or Micheal Perry??

[chris watton]

2 minutes ago, Edwardkenway said:

These figures are great Chris! The detail is superb.

Correct me if I'm wrong but they look like they have been sculpted and painted by Alan or Micheal Perry??

Thank you.

 

No, they were digitally sculpted using contemporary portraits/paintings as reference. Because they are in digital form, the scale can be changed. However, there is still a cost involved, as each master has to be 3-D printed in very high definition, so no details are lost for the production resin castings.

[Edwardkenway]

Ahh, I had just wondered as the Perry brothers do a lot of Napoleonic miniatures for wargaming mainly 28mm which would equate to 1:64.

Thanks 

[hollowneck]

Ed/Chris,

 

Ed: Might you have a web address for the "Perry Brothers" miniatures?

 

Chris: attached is a view of my HMS Ardent (64) that shows the 7 stern windows; I highly modified your Victory Aggy kit in 2014. Indy was a razeed 64 of the Ardent class as you/others have noted; as such, 7 windows would be accurate according to Rif Winfield's reference. If you produce the Indefatigable, you'll sell at least one to a Anglophile in Connecticut. Until then, if Amati/Victory decide to sell your Vic1/64-scale before the Indy is available, I remain interested to modify a big Vic into the HMS Temeraire.🤨

 

Speedy looks very nice. Good second kit choice IMHO.

 

I'm in the hull planking stage with yummy pear on your Alert at the moment. It's tricky business with the stem and stern piece configurations, but not unmanageable (with some finesse).

 

When I'm finished with the hull planking, I'll post a shot or two of the results.

 

Ron