CSS Alabama/ Kearsarge Revell

[NoelSmith]

This is a question a bit like which came first, the chicken or the egg?

 

OK ! A typical Revellism as I call it using the same hull for both these enormous 1/96th scale kits.

Can someone put me wise about whether the Kearsarge or Alabama was released first.   I have heard and read that one is more correct than the other regarding the overall hull length.

So which hull shape is correct for what ship. as one is obviously incorrect? Plus does anyone know about any other deficiencies in one or both?

 

Why do Revell time and again attempt to cut corners and kid everyone by trying to use the same hull mouldings for different ships  eg Cutty Sark, Thermopylae/Pedro Nunes.     Bounty/Beagle?

They must think that ship modellers cannot see the difference and just want an interior decorator style object instead of a correct scale model.

 

I often wonder if Heller might have done the same as they churned out a lot of sailing ship models back in the 70's/80's.  Who knows?

[mtaylor]

1 hour ago, NoelSmith said:

Why do Revell time and again attempt to cut corners and kid everyone by trying to use the same hull mouldings for different ships  eg Cutty Sark, Thermopylae/Pedro Nunes.     Bounty/Beagle?

They must think that ship modellers cannot see the difference and just want an interior decorator style object instead of a correct scale model.

Most builders don't know the difference.   They just want to build a ship that looks nice on a shelf.  

[NoelSmith]

Airfix at least never resorted to those practices, and have not produced anything new in their classic ships range except a miniature Mary Rose kit.

I think I might lobby them to make the CSS Alabama in 1/192 scale. Half the size of the Revell one dating back to the sixties. Airfix could make a fabulous model, not too big and not too small given modern techniques in design, research and moulding.

Edited September 4, 2023 by NoelSmith
Typo

[gsdpic]

I find the website scalemates.com very useful for this sort of question.  I have no idea where they get their information from or how reliable it is, but when you look at a kit there, they show the history of when it was released, under which brand names, when it was "reboxed", etc.   I searched there for Kearsarge and Alabama, and found the following, which I believe are likely the two kits you are referring to.   According to scalemates, both were released in 1961.

 

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/revell-05603-civil-war-steam-ship-uss-kearsarge--103477

 

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/revell-5621-css-alabama--143850

 

[NoelSmith]

Gary, I too have looked at Scalemates.

It is I agree a good timeline resource as to when kits were first made and when subsequent reissues were made.

However they tend to have little information about kit accuracy and reviews etc.

 

I see are building the Artesania Latina  Sopwith Camel.     Impressions so far?

Edited September 4, 2023 by NoelSmith

[shipman]

Unfortunately Airfix have no interest in ships of any kind, especially sailing ships.

Their classic kits must have been designed by probably one or two guys who had some influence.

No doubt they were shown the door or retired. They did a good job, probably on a tight budget. It's a shame we'll never know who they were.

I've been sporadically lobbying them for years with viable suggestions, yet never had the courtesy of a reply.

[gsdpic]

8 hours ago, NoelSmith said:

Gary, I too have looked at Scalemates.

It is I agree a good timeline resource as to when kits were first made and when subsequent reissues were made.

However they tend to have little information about kit accuracy and reviews etc.

 

I see are building the Artesania Latina  Sopwith Camel.     Impressions so far?

Yea, I should have been more clear in stating that scalemates will help answer your first question, but not so much on the others.

 

The Sopwith Camel has been on the shelf for 6 or 7 months while I do other projects.  Overall I have a positive impression of it though (as always) there were some frustrations and some negatives to the kit.  I still don't like the 2-d photo etched "turnbuckles" but was not ambitious enough to replace them with something more realistic.  A few of the other bits and pieces annoyed me as well.  But, as I said, overall it seems to be a fine kit and one of these days I'll get back to it and finish it off.

[NoelSmith]

Getting back to the gist of this thread about the accuracy of the Revell Alabama/Kearsarge kits.

Basically what hull is correct for which ship out of the two? One of the ships is longer than the other, so one has to be totally wrong.

Also I read somewhere some time ago that the Kearsarge model is how the ship appeared after a refit that was done later than the battle with the Alabama.  Is this correct?

[alross2]

The hulls are quite different between the two.  I developed 1/96 scale kits for both using Bocock's reconstruction drawings (based on yard drawings) for ALABAMA and copies of the yard plans for KEARSARGE from NARA.  During the ACW, KEARSARGE had only a short forecastle deck and a flush quarter deck.  The raised quarter deck and extended forecastle deck were not added until her 1870s refit.  I'll see if I can find the lines drawings for each and upload them.

 

[michaelpsutton2]

I would love to see the Kearsarge plans! How did you get them?

[mtaylor]

1 hour ago, michaelpsutton2 said:

I would love to see the Kearsarge plans! How did you get them?

He's one of the developers if not the developer, at Bluejacket.....   

[alross2]

2 hours ago, mtaylor said:

He's one of the developers if not the developer, at Bluejacket.....   

Just me...🙂

 

[Roger Pellett]

There is a lengthy series of articles in the Nautical Research Journal, perhaps 20 years ago of the research that went into the construction of a model of Kearsarge.  Anyone wanting to build a model of this historic would definitely benefit from these articles.  I recall that it was not a straightforward process.

 

Roger

[NoelSmith]

Thanks for the further feedback guys. One of those Revell kits has got to more correct. Just a question of which one?

[alross2]

These are the BlueJacket kits.  The stem on the ALABAMA is quite straight with a smaller radius at the bottom.  The stem on the KEARSARGE has a large radius.  The propeller on ALABAMA was in a frame that allowed the prop to be retracted into a well in the hull while the KEARSARGE prop was fixed.  The forecastle of the ALABAMA had a relatively fine entry while that of KEARSARGE was more bluff and decked over.

 

ALABAMA

KEARSARGE

KEARSARGE

ALABAMA

Edited September 8, 2023 by alross2

[Roger Pellett]

Spectacular models!  Alabama’s straighter stem and small radius forefoot would produce finer forward hull lines.  

 

Roger

[NoelSmith]

Those two Bluejacket models are reputed to be historically very accurate, so thanks for sharing the pictures of your models alross2.

 

The retracting screw on the Alabama is an interesting feature. 

Does this feature on the Revell kits where the hull mouldings are shared to determine what ship they based the kit on in the first place? In which place, one of them has to be wrong. Can anyone who has compared the two Revell kits shine some light on this?

[Roger Pellett]

The basis for any ship model worth displaying is a correctly shaped hull. Correctly shaped means that it reproduces the “lines” of the actual vessel in miniature.  The noted Naval Architect L Francis Herreshoff once wrote an article where he noted that models representing particular named vessels with misshapen hulls are evil things.

 

If Revell used the same mold for both Kearsarge and Alabama one is not worth buying, at any price.

 

Roger

[NoelSmith]

Absolutely agree Roger.

It's why I am trying to find out if the Revell kit hull is correct for Alabama or Kearsarge.

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

6 hours ago, NoelSmith said:

Absolutely agree Roger.

It's why I am trying to find out if the Revell kit hull is correct for Alabama or Kearsarge.

  Your inquiry had me searching for a Revell Kearsarge build log ... but I did find one for the Alabama from the Revell kit 'bashed' for better conformity ... CSS Alabama by Jonathan11 - Revell - 1/96 scale - kit bash 90% historical accuracy

 Looking at the Revell hull of the above build, the bow shape is definitely curved - much like the 'Aberdeen bow' of the clipper Thermopylae - and not like the 'sharper shape' noted in pervious posts on this thread that the Alabama had.  These posts also note the more 'angled' stern of the Alabama, versus the more upright stern profile of the Kearsarge.  For comparison, Revell made a pretty good 1:96 Cutty Sark hull (with sharp bow and upright stern) that was used for their 'clone' kit of Thermopylae ...  Unfortunately, the 'Big T' had a curved bow and an angled stern, so their clone is inaccurate not just in those easily spotted areas, but also in the hull lines - which are not as easy to spot.

 

  The conclusion is that the Revell hull is pretty good for the Kearsarge (with curved bow and upright stern), but less so for the 'cloned' Alabama.  It is easier to file or grind away surplus plastic than to build it up in layers.  For a Thermopylae clone, the sharp bow can be rounded easily enough, but the angled stern would have to be modified by building up (permanently bonding by glue, which 'melts' (welds) plastics together - then outgasses to regain solidity) - then modeling by filing/grinding to get the desired profile.  If course, there's not much that can be done for hull line differences elsewhere.

 

  So the Revell Alabama clone would have to have material built up both at the bow and the stern - tricky to do, which is why the referenced build just ignores these two areas and focuses on everything else that can be done.  Most likely, the Revell Kearsarge hull is closest for that ship.  Not being an expert, I can't say just 'how close' - but likely closer, but definitely closer that using the same hull for Alabama, which is what they did because it would have been too expensive to make an entirely new injection mold for the second kit (same thing withe the two clippers).

[NoelSmith]

Thanks for the further feedback Snug Harbor Johnny. Your response certainly made interesting reading.

I understand too from something I may have read somewhere that one ship was a bit longer than the other by a number of feet.

 

Going on to your current build of the Vasa. A few years ago before the Covid restrictions I got to see the Vasa for real whilst doing a Baltic cruise. It was absolutely breath taking to see how the ship is preserved. That leads me on to something that you might find useful. If you look on the Artesania Latina website for their Vasa kit, they have downloads of their instructions, part of which is a good photographic guide to painting all those intricate carvings.

An added bonus whilst on the cruise, being a small ship it.docked right in the heart of St.Petersburg for a couple of days that coincided with the Russian Navy Days, so got to see some of their modern stuff, a frigate, fast patrol missile boat and a submarine were there.

Their pre revolution cruiser the Aurora was permanently moored nearby.

Our lady tour guide had a wicked sense of humour and said about the Aurora that it fired the first shot of the revolution and brought their country 50 years of misery!

Edited September 9, 2023 by NoelSmith

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  Thanks, Noel.  Obviously I've suspended the Vasa build for some time, but hope to get back to her in the New Year.  (Right now I'm trying to restore an old Gorch Foch scratch-built model I came across in an antique shop - and learn some about rigging a clipper in the process.  That and a partial log of busting a Great Harry model don't appear on my signature as I don't want the signature to get too long or bogged down stuff.)  As the Vasa log points out, there are MAJOR problems with the old ca. 1960's version of the kit at 1:100, and my efforts are to try and make the best of the 'sow's ear' and end up with something that will be recognized as the Vasa in 'standoff scale' ... in other words, don't look too closely.

 

  The Vasa kits available today are FAR better in that a couple are somewhere in the 1:70 to 1:75 scale range (much easier to do the detailing than at 1:100), and one is a little larger (1:65 ?).  They all have molded figures (some plastic, some cast metal) to go on the ship ... and there are MANY of them, whereas mine had no figures at all, a well as relatively crude printed outlines on mahogany sheet stock ... some very difficult to cut out and not really suitable to use anyway.  I'll use a variety of little military figures painted to 'resemble' earlier period people ... These figures in no way conform to those on the original ship and will be fewer in number, and only in approximate locations.  I just want to try and save what I can of something started in my teenage years, and end up with a partially rigged 'ship still under construction' well prior to its launch.

 

  If I ever go on a European vacation, I'd LOVE to see the Vasa museum in Stockholm and the Oseberg (when put in the new quarters planned).  Smorgasbords and saunas might be nice also.

[NoelSmith]

Johnny, I missed out on the Oseberg ship as the cruise I was on could not do Oslo due to adverse weather. So we got to see Helsinki instead as an unscheduled stop.

If you get to Europe some time the UK has much to offer too in maritime history.

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

1 hour ago, NoelSmith said:

Johnny, I missed out on the Oseberg ship as the cruise I was on could not do Oslo due to adverse weather. So we got to see Helsinki instead as an unscheduled stop.

If you get to Europe some time the UK has much to offer too in maritime history.

  My 'dream trip' would definitely include stops in London (V&A), Paris (Louvre) and Amsterdam (Van Gogh Museum) to name a few - but a tight budget and inclination (we are fretful homebodies with plants, parrots and other commitments)  mean we will remain 'armchair' companions on Rick Steve's televised world tours.

 

  Gosh, its funny how one word can bring something back to mind - long covered in dust - in this case Oslo.  There was a mock rhyming feast-Saga titled the 'Thong of Thor', based on the premise that Thor's hammer did not magically return to his hand, but was attached by a long leather thong to his belt.  One tug on the lanyard would bring the hammer back after it was hurled.  Lets see, it went something like this ...

 

In days of yore the Norse God Thor would run around creation,

And drink a pint, then slay a giant and save the Nordic nation,

Or kill a worm to watch it squirm and vainly try to fang him,

Or lock up Loki in the poky and on the noggin bang him.

 

Once he did brawl through Thurdvang hall that on a trip he'd wander,

In a disguise from prying eyes, in Midgard way out yonder.

So all his slaves and Carls and knaves packed up his stuff and gear-o,

And off they strode on Bifrost road, the perfect Arian hero.

 

In Midgard land he joined a band of hearty Viking ruffians,

And off they sailed, and rowed, and bailed among the awks and puffians.

Each foreign beach that they would reach they stopped to rob and plunder,

Each Nordic brute got so much loot their longship near' went under.

 

But though they rolled in coins of gold they had one joy forsaken,

For on each raid Thor's party made, no women could be taken.

Each drab and queen fled from the scene when Viking sails were sighted,

And Thor felt needs for certain deeds that had gone unrequited.

 

Thor's brows were black as they got back to Oslo's rocky haven.

Unto his crew he said, "Beshrew me for a Frankish craven,

If I don't wrench some tavern wench, or else may Frigga damn her."

Replied one voice, "You've got first choice.  You've got the biggest hammer."

 

Into an inn this crew of sin after their great landing,

Each tavern maid was sore afraid of pirates of such standing.

But golden coins warmed up their loins, and soon their ale ran free.

Thor's motley crew poured down the brew and made an all night spree.

 

Thor's glances strayed unto a maid with hair as gold as grain,

A lisp so shy, a downcast eye, and not a trace of brain.

He swept her charms into his arms and to an upstairs bower,

And did not rest or give her ease the whole night plus an hour.

 

When Thor got up to drain a cup, she looked like one near death,

Her limbs were weak, she could not speak and only gasped for breath.

"You ought to know, before I go, I'm Thor !" he bade adieu.

"You're Thor?", said she, "Conthider me, I'm thorer thir than you!"

 

[NoelSmith]

Nice poem recollection. Not heard that one before.

If you ever get to the UK, I see you mentioned that the V&A is on your list. The Science And Natural History Museums are nearby. Literally a minute walk across a road. Lots of exquisite ship models in the Science Museum. Greenwich however is the other side of town but also amazing. London has some incredible museums and galleries to visit, suiting all tastes. Oxford and Cambridge our two most famous university cities have some really interesting museums too. We have two organisations, the National Trust and English Heritage who are custodians of many interesting stately homes, castles and countryside.

Edited September 11, 2023 by NoelSmith

[Frank Burroughs]

On 9/3/2023 at 2:46 PM, NoelSmith said:

Can someone put me wise about whether the Kearsarge or Alabama was released first.   I have heard and read that one is more correct than the other regarding the overall hull length.

In this video he say the CSS Alabama length is correct.  Revell's Kearsarge was released first .  2:38 in the video.

 

Edited September 14, 2023 by Frank Burroughs

[Frank Burroughs]

Are your rigging instructions separate than your assemble instructions?  I am looking for rigging instructions.

[NoelSmith]

Thanks for putting the YouTube video up Frank. It will be most helpful.

 

Incidentally, I have not long received a copy of Andrew Bowcock's book on the Alabama on Ebay.

It must be the most comprehensive treatise about this ship I would imagine. His research is just incredible.

[Frank Burroughs]

CSS ALABAMA: ANATOMY OF A CONFEDERATE RAIDER By Andrew Bowcock is way above the budget for this model.  If I remake this ship in wood, I'll spring for it.  CMS Alabama: Builder, Captain, and Plans by Charles Grayson Summersell and Wolf of the Deep: Raphael Semmes and the Notorious Confederate Raider CSS Alabama by Stephen Fox are my purchases for this go around.

 

Are you going to replace the plastic mast and yards with wood?  I will probably not because this kit off Ebay is a mess.  It is going to be raffled off when finished.

[NoelSmith]

I agree Frank that the Bowcock book on EBay is generally very expensive.

 

Having constantly checked the site for a long time one suddenly came up at well under the sort of prices normally being asked for and reasonably priced shipping too from the US, so I went for it. Before that I was reluctant to buy at the prices being asked for. I also have a book titled Shark of the Confederacy that is an account about the history of how the ship was secretly built and a dialogue about its two years at sea. Fascinating account of its voyage.

 

The Builder, Captain and Plans book you already have is the other book I have often seen recommended as an alternative to Bowcock's book for details of the ship itself. I have never seen a copy of it but I guess from what I have read about the book it may be all you might need in any case.I

 

Andrew Bowcock I learnt was on the committee that was looking to build a full size replica of the ship to be placed on display a Birkenhead in Liverpool where the original ship was built. The project unfortunately was shelved, but a copy of a brochure for the project was published that can be obtained from the museum in Liverpool.

Edited September 17, 2023 by NoelSmith