Phantom 1868 by Greg Davis - Model Shipways - 1:48 scale - New York Pilot Boat

[Greg Davis]

Slowly adding strakes to the port side - now half is done.

[Greg Davis]

I've completed planking the port side of the ship. Most of the exterior planking work is done.

A bit of sanding coming my way! But before that is done, I will be addressing the stern (and that small triangular region). Here I continue to ponder: why the does instructions / prototype build not address planking the stern? In the instruction manual, pictures show the stern smoothed with the aid of filler prior to painting. Personally, I think a few planks would look nice back here, so they will be going on soon. Then the sanding / smoothing process will commence. 

Bulwark planking will go on once I'm satisfied with the rest of the hull's appearance, but prior to painting.

[yvesvidal]

I would definitely plank the stern, as it will look so much more realistic.

You are doing a great job on this beautiful model. And yes, 1/48th is the scale Model Shipways should have authored that kit, 35 years ago.

 

Yves

Edited November 1 by yvesvidal

[Rick310]

 Beautiful job planking!

Rick

[Greg Davis]

The transom has been planked and is partially faired with the rest of the hull.

I used 3/16" planks for all of this planking except for the top plank which is from 1?4" material. This time I remembered that the top plank needs to be positioned high enough so that the top edge fairs with the deck - been caught out on this type of situation a few times over the years! So the next picture is mostly a personal reminder.

[Greg Davis]

I gave the port side of the hull a good sanding today and then brushed on a coat of 50% white glue to seal that side. Soon I can start working toward a nice smooth surface to paint and copper.

Thoughts for future steps in the build: Starting to think more about the bulwarks and deck. Currently I am thinking about a natural finish on the inner bulwarks, deck, cabins and such. Because of this, I am planning on replacing the kit supplied wood for the bulwarks and decking with something nicer. Probably Costello boxwood for the bulwarks and timberheads. Swiss pear may make for a nice contrasting margin planks and then C boxwood for the deck planking (I'm also considering maple for the deck). I also want to modify the deck so that the cockpit is dropped under deck level. I understand way this wasn't done on the 1/96 version, but would not  have been hard to work in for the 1/48 kit. Also, I not be using the PE brass for the sides of the deckhouse, etc. 

[juhu]

Great progress, will keep watching this thread for sure. Since I first noticed wooden static ship models and ME company I have admired their 1/96 Phantom kit and only wished it was available in 1:48.  Yesterday I have found it just by accident. First I though there is just an error on the web with the scale

From what I see I agree with the notes - to enlarge the kit from 1/96 to 1/48 should involve something more than just "enlarging", i.e. adding the detail appropriate for the scale and proper plans. . From the pics available I think the cockpit area just sitting on the deck looks strange. As you said I would also suggest to burry it little bit. I am just not sure, to achieve this, would not it be better to cut space in the bulkheads before assembly? Or maybe I just see it wrong from the web photos.

 

Edit / added: I have been going through those few pictures from manufacturer website. If possible I would have one more question: how does the kit handle the whole anchor mechanism? I mean, I would expect this boat having anchor chain, but I see no windlass, no storage box for anchor on the deck, nothing. There are apparently some small winches directly at, I think called Samson post, but not sure this would be the answer for heavy anchors. Totally unfamiliar with pilot boats design, they still do resemble fishermen from Gloucester I have researched little bit, so am just wondering... Thanks a lot!

Edited November 10 by juhu

[Greg Davis]

On 11/9/2024 at 2:04 AM, juhu said:

Great progress, will keep watching this thread for sure. Since I first noticed wooden static ship models and ME company I have admired their 1/96 Phantom kit and only wished it was available in 1:48.  Yesterday I have found it just by accident. First I though there is just an error on the web with the scale

From what I see I agree with the notes - to enlarge the kit from 1/96 to 1/48 should involve something more than just "enlarging", i.e. adding the detail appropriate for the scale and proper plans. . From the pics available I think the cockpit area just sitting on the deck looks strange. As you said I would also suggest to burry it little bit. I am just not sure, to achieve this, would not it be better to cut space in the bulkheads before assembly? Or maybe I just see it wrong from the web photos.

 

Edit / added: I have been going through those few pictures from manufacturer website. If possible I would have one more question: how does the kit handle the whole anchor mechanism? I mean, I would expect this boat having anchor chain, but I see no windlass, no storage box for anchor on the deck, nothing. There are apparently some small winches directly at, I think called Samson post, but not sure this would be the answer for heavy anchors. Totally unfamiliar with pilot boats design, they still do resemble fishermen from Gloucester I have researched little bit, so am just wondering... Thanks a lot!

First - thank you for the positive comments!

 

I do plan on opening space for the cockpit prior to planking the deck. I'm not sure exactly how all the work will be done - one thought is to model the cockpit and its enclosure as a unit and then 'dropping' it into the model; this may be easier for me to handle than putting in a floor and then planking the cockpit and finally adding the sides. I have been giving this some thought!

 

I am no expert on the actual workings of this ship but as far as I can see, for anchor handling, there is a small windlass / winch that is attached to the forward bits, it is to have removable hand cranks. From the drawings / plans it appears that raising the anchor would be a two man job. There is a single anchor davit that is removable and can be placed on either side of the ship. It appears that a single anchor was used and that it would be stowed on deck. Some of this can be seen on the plans included with the model,  the rest of this information is based on the practicum that Chuck Passaro wrote for building the 1/96 scale Model Shipways kit:  https://modelexpo-online.com/assets/images/documents/MS2027-Phantom-Practicum-Complete.pdf - and I'm fairly confident his work is very well fact-checked.

[Greg Davis]

I'm done smoothing the bulk of the hull as I am going to do. Time to install the bulwarks. I did decide to go with Costello Boxwood for this structure. Here is some material that I've milled / cut for the next steps:

I need two strakes (each side) of the 1/8" x 1/16" material. This will go from the bulkhead 9 to the front of the ship. The 1/4" x 1/16" material is to be bent into a u-shape that will fit from bulkhead 9 back to the stern region.

[Greg Davis]

Working on the bulwarks yesterday and today. I have the first strakes of the thinner material attached. It went on quite well - one strake to go. 

 

While letting the above work dry, I released the four pieces of material that are to form a mold for the stern bulwark. I was a bit disappointed as I worked on the mold. In each pair of pieces for the mold, there are four registration holes to align the pieces while gluing them together. Unfortunately, the registration holes do not nicely match. I eventually found the best matches that I could by flipping / stacking the pieces. Even then, the holes for the alignment toothpicks is not great - only good enough to sort of get the points in. Thus in this picture you can see the toothpicks pointing in various directions:

The edges of the pieces don't make as good a match as expected either:

So a bit of sanding / filing to even out and true up the edges and finally I've a got a mold to try out:

I cleaned up the laser char quite a bit so that when I mold the bulwark the wood won't get stained by char. The outside doesn't matter so much because it will be painted, but the inside will likely be left natural, so char dye would be bad. You can see in the instruction manual, that the char was not cleaned up and some was transferred to the wood.

So the mold is ready - wood is soaking as I write this - but it is a disappointment in the age of CAD and laser cutting, that the pieces that make up the mold needed so much work to get them ready for use.

 

 

[Greg Davis]

Quick update! Successfully got the C Boxwood to conform to the mold. Tomorrow the result can be seen - hoping for the best!

[hamilton]

Just catching up on your build, Greg - was that Corel's La Couronne behind Phantom? She looks nice too!! You are sorely tempting me (and my pocketbook) with this build....

hamilton

[Greg Davis]

9 hours ago, hamilton said:

Just catching up on your build, Greg - was that Corel's La Couronne behind Phantom? She looks nice too!! You are sorely tempting me (and my pocketbook) with this build....

hamilton

Yes it is the Corel kit. I've been picking away at it over the summer / fall. I started it quite along time ago and just let it sit. Now I would like to finish it - I am looking forward to the rigging aspect of the model.

 

Greg

[Greg Davis]

The mid / forward portions of the bulwarks have been installed successfully - this is the part that used two 1/8" high strips of the c. boxwood.

The aft portion made from the 1/4" strip came out of the mold nicely (with no char marks)

 

I need to now remove the bulkhead extensions (or at least the last one) so that this piece can be trimmed and mated to fit the rest of the bulwark.

[Greg Davis]

The aft portion of the bulwark attachment went well!

I think I will now work on the deck for a while. It is either the deck or painting / coppering the hull. I have the feeling that I have a better chance of messing up the hull when working on the deck than messing up the deck when working on the hull!

 

 

[Greg Davis]

Popped off the bulwark molds, smoothed out the bulkhead tops along the quarterdeck. I then made a copy of the deck plan provided with the kit. I cut it out to place on the deck to help position the cockpit and other features on this part of the boat. I matched up the mast location and big surprise:

 

Quite a plan / model mismatch! Looks like the 'plans' are going to be a 'guide'. Not insurmountable, but not a good look for Model Expo's new offering - another missed opportunity for a good check before kit release.

[Greg Davis]

I think I've discovered another 'issue'. This one is a bit more serious and I don't have a good solution.

 

In relationship with the bulwark planking, the top of the bulkheads and part #13, the stern deck underlayment, are already at deck level. That is, no space was engineered into the model for the thickness of the deck planks.

 

Now if the deck is planked with 1/16" material as called for, the inner sides of the bulwarks will be short by that distance. If the bulwarks are then extended, they will be too high on the exterior of the model.

 

The deck profile / height at center and side are clearly marked on the kit plans (drawn by Campbell), but apparently were not conformed to in production of the model.

 

Ideas? Any would be welcome!

[Dr PR]

What was the surprise in post #46? Something to do with the mast but you didn't say what.

 

In post #47 are you allowing for the thickness of the cap rail on the bulwarks for determining bulwark height above the deck planking. If the cap rail is also 1/16 inch thick will the height be correct above the 1/16 inch deck planks?

 

From your photos it looks as if part 13 (the subdeck at the stern) is cocked up at a pretty sharp angle.

[juhu]

Hi,

I was also scanning the pic from #46 post, not sure first what was meant, but I think the idea was that the size/shape is way off? I mean the copy of the plan, particularly in the aft part does not match the hull / transom / deck at all and is too short? If this is the case, that is pretty bad.

 

As far as deck planking is concerned, very good point comes from #48 - would the cap rail fix the missing height? If yes, great, if not I would suggest to try to use less thick planks. Something like 1/2 or even smaller of the suggested strength with careful sanding then might do the job and even make deck planking easier. At least from my last build it helped me a lot. The other option would be to raise the bulwarks as you mentioned. Not sure how much it would hinder the hull appearance, but considering the shown mismatch and distortion compared to plans, the question is if it matters anymore...  I mean, is it possible to build scale replica from this kit? I have it in my shopping cart already, order and delivery to Europe is by no means cheap, but am more and more reluctant and not sure if I will commit the purchase.... It seems to be like with plastic kits: while downscaling a kit is relatively(!) easy, you are omitting details, upscaling must not only consider additional details but also their effect on the proportions and build overall. I have several ME kits in my stash, they are beautiful, looking forward to building them, this new Phantom seems to me well, like some different approach. Will keep an eye on progress and wish all the best with it.

 

Edit: One more question I forgot. From few pics on the web it seems to me that this ship also has the stepped up deck, i.e. thick beam (called grub beam?) divided main deck and quarter deck? If so, I wonder that there is actually no corresponding rail step, meaning that the rail height must be lower at quarter deck than at the main deck? But as said, this might be just my misunderstanding of the given ship design, I have never build smaller Phantom.

Edited yesterday at 06:32 AM by juhu

[Grateful409]

I have been following along and I must say I am very impressed with your beautiful build.  I had considered taking this model on myself but have been a bit discouraged as I have seen you run into a number problems which I would have no idea how to over come.  

[Greg Davis]

The surprise in #46 is that the deck plan didn't match the deck length by quite a bit - 5/16" in fact. 

 

I now realize that a portion of that discrepancy is my own fault - when I planked the transom, the deck length was extended by 1/16". The remaining differential of ~1/4" is a miss between the model and the plans. I was rereading the Volk / Davies-Garner book 'Working techniques for model shipbuilding" and the discrepancy is noted there as well; in fact, it is a discrepancy from the original 1/96 plans that remains after enlargement to 1/48 scale.

 

I made template of the aft deck using 1/16" plywood and have repositioned the deck plan slightly. 

The mast hole is over the slot in the framing. The space between the mast and skylight was increased by 1/8" and the space between the skylight and deckhouse / cockpit by 3/16". I couldn't move the cockpit / rudder house back any further without having a severe mismatch in location with the rudder post. At the end of the day, it will look OK as the proportions have not changed drastically.

 

I've marked a 3/16" waterway on the template and will probably line off the planking as well. I am considering planking directly on this template and fastening it to the model as opposed to gluing the planking only to the bulkheads in the front portion of this deck.

[Greg Davis]

With respect to the bulwarks, I've made a sketch to better explain the situation.

According to the plans, the bulwark height - distance from planking to under the rail - should be a constant 1/4" along the aft deck. This measurement is for both the inner and out bulwark . Before planking the aft section this is how the measurements are. If the aft deck is planked with 1/16" material the outer bulwark dimension remains 1/4" but the inner becomes 3/16" and is shorter than it should be. If 1/16" of material is then added to the current bulwark, the inside dimension is corrected, but the exterior dimension becomes too large by 1/16".

 

There are ways to correct this - but it would take more work than I care to do at this point. In the aft portion of the vessel, if part #13 had been made 1/16" thick, then a 1/16" piece could have been used as a waterway and the bulwark planking could have been positioned over it. This would also have required that the remaining bulkheads had been made 1/16" lower to accommodate the planking and waterway. 

 

I think this would have been a good place to have used laser-cut parts in the kit. The waterway could have been laser cut with locations for timberheads precut. 

 

Due to how the kit was manufactured, the distance between the fore deck and the rails will also be too small. According to the plans, the distance between the deck planking and the bottom of the rail should be 7/16". The way the kit is constructed the distance is 3/8" before planking - this will be reduced to 5/16" after planking with 1/16" material. Down the road there may be some issues due to the missing 1/8" - I am most concerned about what this will mean for locating the hawse holes.

[Greg Davis]

15 hours ago, Dr PR said:

What was the surprise in post #46? Something to do with the mast but you didn't say what.

 

In post #47 are you allowing for the thickness of the cap rail on the bulwarks for determining bulwark height above the deck planking. If the cap rail is also 1/16 inch thick will the height be correct above the 1/16 inch deck planks?

 

From your photos it looks as if part 13 (the subdeck at the stern) is cocked up at a pretty sharp angle.

I am also concerned about the transition between the subdeck and the rest of the ship. Fortunately, it is not quite as extreme as the photograph seems to indicate. I've already gone after the region with a good deal of smoothing to help with the transition.  I am considering the plywood deck underlayment partially because it will additionally smooth out some of the junction angle. I might need to add a small amount of material to the top of the bulwark to have a nicer flow.

[Greg Davis]

14 hours ago, juhu said:

Hi,

I was also scanning the pic from #46 post, not sure first what was meant, but I think the idea was that the size/shape is way off? I mean the copy of the plan, particularly in the aft part does not match the hull / transom / deck at all and is too short? If this is the case, that is pretty bad.

 

As far as deck planking is concerned, very good point comes from #48 - would the cap rail fix the missing height? If yes, great, if not I would suggest to try to use less thick planks. Something like 1/2 or even smaller of the suggested strength with careful sanding then might do the job and even make deck planking easier. At least from my last build it helped me a lot. The other option would be to raise the bulwarks as you mentioned. Not sure how much it would hinder the hull appearance, but considering the shown mismatch and distortion compared to plans, the question is if it matters anymore...  I mean, is it possible to build scale replica from this kit? I have it in my shopping cart already, order and delivery to Europe is by no means cheap, but am more and more reluctant and not sure if I will commit the purchase.... It seems to be like with plastic kits: while downscaling a kit is relatively(!) easy, you are omitting details, upscaling must not only consider additional details but also their effect on the proportions and build overall. I have several ME kits in my stash, they are beautiful, looking forward to building them, this new Phantom seems to me well, like some different approach. Will keep an eye on progress and wish all the best with it.

 

Edit: One more question I forgot. From few pics on the web it seems to me that this ship also has the stepped up deck, i.e. thick beam (called grub beam?) divided main deck and quarter deck? If so, I wonder that there is actually no corresponding rail step, meaning that the rail height must be lower at quarter deck than at the main deck? But as said, this might be just my misunderstanding of the given ship design, I have never build smaller Phantom.

Thinner planks are certainly an option - I think I may get away with 1/32" planks. As you note, not much room is left for error / sanding! But if I use a subdeck, smoothness of the initial planking job should be reasonably good. 

 

As for the overall accuracy of the model when completed - I think a very nice model will be the result, one that will be great to display, and one that is certainly a good value for the investment (both material and time spent).

 

Will it be a perfect replica? - probably not, but this is most often the case with models, especially those from kits. My disappointment is in the discrepancies between the plans and the kit pieces. Quite frankly, I have no good idea if the plans themselves are truly accurate and I don't think there is any way to proof-check them. I believe that right now, I'm doing something I shouldn't be doing - being overly concerned with each and every deviation. I should be reserving these feelings for a 1:48 scale frame model built to ANCRE plans or similar and being made for competition and/or a wealthy client (wish I had one of those!).

 

Its like many Model Expo kits - a really good starting point, with lots of potential, and a good deal of room for frustration because the kit could be so much more for not much more thought and / or production cost.

 

Yes, the ship has a stepped deck, so issues to address up front as well!