Chris Watton and Vanguard Models news and updates Volume 2

[chris watton]

The good thing about the base (and I was given a choice of intergrated base or no when these were done for me), is that 99% of all supports for the 3-d printing process are limited to the underside of the base, meaning the actual figures have little to no unsightly support 'poc marks'

[oakheart]

6 hours ago, Blue Ensign said:

sandpaper until it is very thin

Thanks for the tip BE @Blue Ensign the base is pretty thick on this figure. 

 

 

What ever I end up doing, I think I will leave it on the base while I paint it.

 

Tim

[oakheart]

5 hours ago, Thukydides said:

I did this and you have to be really gentle as resin is brittle. First I used a saw to cut off most of the excess, then once there was only the small bit near his feet I used a craft knife to carefully shave it off the bottom in thin layers.

 

The key is to go slow, especially as you get nearer the feet

Thanks for the advice @Thukydides you are right, power tools are best avoided in this case.

I have a jewellers frame saw which may be best to get rid of most of the base.

 

Tim

 

[oakheart]

5 hours ago, Pitan said:

scenery below the knee

Hi Pitan @Pitan if he is on deck it could look a bit like something from an alien movie if I did that.

 

Thanks for the tip about supporting the leg/foot while removing the base though.

 

Tim

[chris watton]

A little update.

 

I am now out of machined pear block sets for the kits. I cannot buy any more because I sourced these from Russia, which, as mentioned before, a sanctioned country.

 

However, I have been in contact with HiSModel, and have ordered 20 Indy kits worth of machined walnut blocks - although these are costing me a little more than the pear machined blocks I had before, but I figured better to have the option than none at all.

 

I will order sets for the rest of my kits that had this option in due course. (Next will be Sphinx and Duchess)

Edited April 15 by chris watton

[chris watton]

[ccoyle]

I love it already!

[chris watton]

First checking of brand new designs, and much fettling/fine tuning still to do...

 

But overall, quite happy...

[Theodosius]

When it is grown up, what will it be? 🙂 But it looks very interesting and promising 🙂 Like! 

[chris watton]

27 minutes ago, Theodosius said:

When it is grown up, what will it be? 🙂 But it looks very interesting and promising 🙂 Like! 

HMS Harpy (1796) - Wikipedia

[Ronald-V]

Exciting stuff again!  

[GrandpaPhil]

Excellent!

[ccoyle]

2 hours ago, chris watton said:

HMS Harpy (1796) - Wikipedia

 

So, if you consider instituting double shifts and flogging, how quickly do you think you can get your 'lackey' to have the prototype built? 😉

[James H]

2 minutes ago, ccoyle said:

 

So, if you consider instituting double shifts and flogging, how quickly do you think you can get your 'lackey' to have the prototype built? 😉

 

Indy should be finished in the next month, so that'll be the right time to start on this one.

[chris watton]

I think I have another 2-3 months on designs and building hull to check everything, maybe longer. Those pics are literally the very first cut of the very first designs, and much needs amending. The end result will be a kit of an 18-gun brig with great history in real life, and with partial lower deck detail, including stove, scale spaced deck beams (all pre-cut in pear, and with the correct curves/camber, as usual) - and always trying to make it as painless to assemble as I can, but keeping the detail.

I remember doing Snake/Cruiser 25 years ago, that was the last time I did an 18-gun brig. To me, the Diligence Class has more pleasing aesthetics, with a sleeker hull and rake - like a much larger Speedy, but with a much bigger bite* - you can see the natural progression from the Childers and Speedy Class to the Dilligence Class almost 2 decades later, followed by the 'less curvy' Cruiser Class.

 

*Childers/Flirt/Speedy had a single broadside weight of 28 pounds, whereas the later 18 gun brigs like Harpy had a single broadside weight of 262 pounds

Edited April 16 by chris watton

[BrochBoating]

Looks very nice. Much 'sleeker' hull than before. What length hull is this roughly? Around 700mm? Thanks

[chris watton]

5 minutes ago, BrochBoating said:

Looks very nice. Much 'sleeker' hull than before. What length hull is this roughly? Around 700mm? Thanks

700mm! Cripes, Sphinx hull is only just over 600mm long! Harpy was 95 foot along the main deck, so overall hull length is around 526mm (With Speedy being around 440mm) - but with the bowsprit and main boom, I would think well over 800mm

[BrochBoating]

11 minutes ago, chris watton said:

700mm! Cripes, Sphinx hull is only just over 600mm long! Harpy was 95 foot along the main deck, so overall hull length is around 526mm (With Speedy being around 440mm) - but with the bowsprit and main boom, I would think well over 800mm

 

Hah should really have looked at some of the existing kit measurements first. Thanks.

[Beef Wellington]

This is definitely going to give the Caldercraft Snake/Cruiser model line a run for its money!  Maybe this will show whether CC have completely lost interest in new static kit development when some of their established legacy models comes under direct competition.

[James H]

25 minutes ago, Beef Wellington said:

when some of their established legacy models comes under direct competition.

 

...Sherbourne.

[Nipper]

Now I'm really flung into doubt!  My next build is going to be the Dutch brig of war "Irene" from Petrejus' book, and I was planning to buy a Caldercraft  Cruiser for the basic hull ("Irene" was converted from HMS Grasshopper - a Cruiser class brig) and then scratch build or buy in (from Vanguard as much as possible) the fittings, and bits and pieces.  Now I'm wondering whether Harpy would make a much better starting point, because it will have the up-to-date quality of Vanguard models, and the "legacy" kits from Caldercraft do not compare.

But perhaps the hull shape of Harpy is too different from the Cruiser class brigs, as Chris intimates above.  Chris - I'd be grateful for any thoughts.

 

Nipper

[chris watton]

Cruiser Class was only 5 feet longer along the main deck, and 2 foot broader - both classes carried the exact same armament, but Harpy definitely had the more elegant lines. In 64th scale, hardly noticeable, size wise, but I am sure the nicer rake of Harpy will be.

 

The old kits I did were really just keel, bulkheads, main deck, and lots of planking. The new kits have many times more pre cut parts, with planking usually relegated to the lower edges of the main wale down (for the small to medium size kits at least)
 

Edited April 16 by chris watton

[Nipper]

24 minutes ago, chris watton said:

Cruiser Class was only 5 feet longer along the main deck, and 2 foot broader - both classes carried the exact same armament, but Harpy definitely had the more elegant lines. In 64th scale, hardly noticeable, size wise, but I am sure the nicer rake of Harpy will be.

 

The old kits I did were really just keel, bulkheads, main deck, and lots of planking. The new kits have many times more pre cut parts, with planking usually relegated to the lower edges of the main wale down (for the small to medium size kits at least)
 

Yes, that confirms what I was thinking.  Thanks Chris. 

So I'll base my Irene on the Caldercraft Cruiser hull,  and then I  won't feel so bad about hacking it about!

 

Nipper 

[Vane]

4 hours ago, Beef Wellington said:

This is definitely going to give the Caldercraft Snake/Cruiser model line a run for its money!  Maybe this will show whether CC have completely lost interest in new static kit development when some of their established legacy models comes under direct competition.

Caldercraft hasnt done anything to their Nelson Navy series since the beginning of the 2000s so I dont think we can expect anything from them at all. They have a great line-up of kits but IMHO they are in desperate need of updates but they simply gave up on product development. Just take the plans and manual for the Diana kit as an example. Without seeing others builds on this site, I would be completely lost. 

 

The Harpy look indeed very interesting. Taking a first glance at the plans it indeed looks very much as Speedy... but it is much bigger in size. 

I really need to start the rigging of my Speedy but been caught up in plastic models for a long time now.     

[uss frolick]

Were Harpy's carronades 32-pounders or 24-pounders? Wiki says 32's, but that's a lot of metal for a brig of a fifth less tonnage than a Cruiser to carry.

[chris watton]

6 hours ago, uss frolick said:

Were Harpy's carronades 32-pounders or 24-pounders? Wiki says 32's, but that's a lot of metal for a brig of a fifth less tonnage than a Cruiser to carry.

16 x 32-Pounder carronades and 2 x 6-Pounder long guns - typical armament for all the 18-gun brigs of this period (1796-1815). Harpy was built for such – and don’t forget, carronades are much lighter than long guns.

 

ETA - Although the larger Dasher and Bermuda Class of flush decked ship sloops, which had a main deck length of 107 foot, 12 foot longer than Harpy, only had (officially) 16 x 24-Pounder carronades..

Edited April 17 by chris watton

[navarcus]

A while back you mentioned 17th century.

I know you designed the HMS Prince, but I hope it will lean towards a smaller nicely ornamented 6th rate.

There are some simple plans from the Maritime Museum of these I've liked for many years.

 

[chris watton]

2 hours ago, navarcus said:

A while back you mentioned 17th century.

I know you designed the HMS Prince, but I hope it will lean towards a smaller nicely ornamented 6th rate.

There are some simple plans from the Maritime Museum of these I've liked for many years.

 

At some point I shall

[chris watton]

Many innocent sheets of material died to bring you these pictures...

 

This is the fifth hull I have made up, with incremental changes with each new version. I usually just remove and replace the parts I change, but there are many interlocking parts with this one, that I felt more comfortable restarting the whole hull assembly with all updated designs, so that I know all fits as they should. This will not be the final form, however, but am comfortable continuing using the hull form (which is final) to get more information for parts that fit onto it.

 

Hull has been sanded, ready to take gunport bulwark template (which are next to design)

 

(This will be thrown away once all info has been garnered from it...)
 

[ccoyle]

1 hour ago, chris watton said:

Many innocent sheets of material died to bring you these pictures...