U.S.R.C. Ranger 1852 by Small Stuff - Corel - SM 55 "1:64"

[Small Stuff]

Dear friends, am I  "on a completly wrong steamer"?

 

My thread is a little bit surrealistic because the kit is standing before my feet. But I have stifle the wish to start to built imediatly, because of a row of unfinished work/unanswered questions..

 

So I have forced myself to put her in the signature as "shelfware" as we call it in the IT:

 

U.S.C.G. "Ranger" 1852

Corel-Kit No. SM 55 1/64 vel 1/48

L.: mm - 465 W.: 390 mm - H.: 220 mm

Name & Authencity questionable

 

The last line is most important for me. These doubts come from these few lines:

 

 USRC Ranger (1852)   Corel   Only Ranger was an early 1800s unarmed LHS schooner
 Corel's model has the lines of an early 1800s cutter, but the name is wrong      Available

 

coming out of the following source:

 

www.coastguardmodeling.com/10_Questionable-Authenticity.html

 

 

I have consulted these article in here: modelshipworld.com/index.php?/topic/801-usrc-ranger-by-trippwj-corel-164-scale/

 

I bought the kit as an 1:50 one with the idea to change it "up" to 1/48 - but now I've to do a much longer step 1/64 to 1/48. I want to use the moulded GK boat kit as a ship's boat for the revenue cutter - so this tww discussions are interwoven to each other.

 

So I think about two ways to scale the cutter:

 

Wayne took the kit as a 1/64 and is going this path with good progress - I could follow his way. Life will be fine! So I'm unhappy because I'd like to go to the bigger scale.

But I think I might built these cutter in 1/48 as a smaller one and have to change the ergonomic details as stairs, doors, hatches, stancions, &c. And so I have consulted my Chapelle books and have till now no conclusion if I may be right. So what du YOU think abeut my idea - am I  "on a completly wrong steamer" (that's German idiom for thinking in(-to?) a outright wrong direction)?

 

And I also think aboiut the two ways to build them:

I prefere the Alert stile - as a realistic used ship - on the othrhand the lines may stand out better to a clear background. 

What is your answer to this question how to show the attractive lines of the hull.. (Oh - this may be a questions to the girls aboard.)

 

I allready know it's just a wooden kit and definitly not an oviparus fleece-giving and UHT-milk-producing fattening-sow of European Conformity (see bootom picture.)   But I'll try to get most of my money.

 

So thanks for reading and your intrest.

Edited December 9, 2013 by Small Stuff

[mtaylor]

Stan,

 

The only thing I can think of one of two choices... ok.. maybe 3.

 

1) Build it as is but scale the ergonomics to 1:48.  It would require some serious study of the plans as everything humans use would need to be almost doubled in size...if it is actually 1:64 per Wayne and I trust him.

 

2) Take the plans and enlarge everything and scratchbuild (nasty word) everything. 

 

ok.. the third: Sell the kit on Ebay and buy a different kit that is actually 1:48.

 

 

For choice 1) you, at a minimum, would be looking at reworking the wheel or tiller, binnacle (if there is one), free standing pinrails , etc.  Probably not much more.. or maybe lots more.   Or maybe not at all... kits are notorious for being out of scale on standard items like wheels, etc.

 

Choice 2) takes you to the darkside and this log would need to be moved (any moderator can move it).

 

Either way, build as you want and name it anything you want... 

[Small Stuff]

Thanks Mark,

 

I abused my H.I.Chapelle "The History Of The American Sailing Ships" not to stabilisize my table - I really read. So I figured out that there were plenty of Revenue Cutters and Heraphrodithe-Sloops in the coast guard.  But when I start to lay the hatchet on "the root of scale" - I'll've to change really any- & everything - from the masts diameter up to the rigging.

So you're absolutly right, Mark, I could allready scatch it. (I've got no reaI idea of interpunctation in British grammar, with out the "," infront of ",too" - so I put your name into commata as I'm used to in German.)  

 

And there is the fourth unpretentious way :

 

"Go three fields back. Take that kit as it came along to you. Go ahead and get the best out of what you find inside of it." 

 

And with your help I may be able to get some more detailing "into the box" or do you call it  "out of the box"???

 

I found a plenty of things to change and add:

- the transom's tin c®ap

- the window frames

- the gratings

- the galleys chimney

- the anchor buoys

- handrail

- ship's bell

 

It may sound I'm hard to please - but I payed a plenty of money for a kit with a scale lying to me and I want it back! So I'll try to reform it in a well done model!

 

This is the very beginning of my list. I saw over the 1/24 Article of Daniel's "Alert" and got a plenty of stimuli and suggestions what could be done... and the scale 1/64 makes it easier to hide my faults (as Mondfeld and Zimmermann would call it)    .

So I'm going to change the threads name as it is called in latin "in prudenciam".

 

Hopefully I haven't wearied you by "giving a view iinto my mind"...

 

I didn't fell in love to the carronade.

As I have to change the nonexisting name allready. So I think about some light modigications as the Use of o long barrel gun instead of the carronade. But I don't find any number of her tons. She's quite small  Chapelle shows on p. 202 fig. 35 a quite similar design - of 1829. So if I call her just "U.S.C.G. Revenue Hermaphrodithe Brig"  adding something like "Arround 1850" in a second line. Can this be wrong?

[Small Stuff]

...in between dealing with Chapelle's books: "The Baltimore Schooner" and "The History Of The American Sailing Ships" - very usefull stuff. So I'll go ahead...

[mtaylor]

I think you've got a pretty good handle (grip? mindset?) on this project.  I love a good kit-bash so I'll be following along. 

[Small Stuff]

Hy Mark,

the wortd kit bashing told me you are not a real friend of kits.   So I hope I could "sex up" the kit to bring it up to a realistic but half-scratch-built model.

So I had to learn the material is not worth the money I payed for it - because the material is not to scale! I spent the same money for the kit in vaneer today to get a finer vein. So I bought wood of pear because the given vein isn't fine enough in 1/64 in my view. I don't think this is fastidiosness - I just try to get the best out of the box!

 

Am I right?  What do you think.

 

Pics will follow!

[mtaylor]

Hi Stan,

 

'Kit Bashing" is a generic term for reworking any kit.... some have minor work, others major work.  My Constellation was pretty major..  My Wasa was minor in that all I did was replace the hull planking with cherry.

 

I think you'll do fine.  You're thinking well ahead and that's a big step in the right direction.

[Small Stuff]

Okay let's start folks!

As I bought some vaneer slips of pearwood to sex up the vein from anyscale   to the given scale - I pick it up today. So I start with the transom to show why I think the wood has be to scaleed down to 1/64, too. And I also try to proof why I'm right with my expensive pear and Corel is wrong with it's "ceddar like" plywood. I hope my enlarged except will show what I speak about.

 

As I now know there never has been any "Ranger" in the Revenue Marine I can only built an unnamed

 

"A Revenue Marine's 30 ton Cutter of 1829 after H. I. Chapelle"

 

Why suddenly "after Chapelle"? Because I'll try to work the lines and details nearer to his drawing of a 30 t Revenue Cutter dated 1829 as shown in his book "The History Of The American Sailing Ships" on page 202 / Figure 35if possible. And to bring the kit "into more realistic waters". Now I'll go to the copy shop to enlarge this drawing up to 1/64 and then I'm going to make some more photos for you- perhaps I'm really right with my assumption...

 

As the impressing book is first printed in the 30th of the last century - is there any newer book with good drawings about the Revenue Marines Cutters?

 

 

Edited December 13, 2013 by Small Stuff

[Small Stuff]

Now I glued the first pice of wood - vamping up the transom by two planks of pear

 

I scaled the Chapelle drawing of the 30tons RM-Cutter up to 1/64 in a 2h session in the copy shop...

 

...and it doesn't fit to the kit!!!

 

The galleys chimney seems to belong to an other 1/48 kit 

 

...and the carronade isn't the same as drawn by Chapelle (Edit: evidence photo attached)

 

Should I to trust the literature more than the kit's parts?

Edited December 13, 2013 by Small Stuff

[Small Stuff]

Here the direct comparsion of the 1/48 and the 1/64 drawing for you:

[Small Stuff]

More & more I dislike this kit!

 

Here the keelson placed on the 1/48 scaled sheet - nothing fits even in this scale.

But the withe wood glue on the pear & transom combination in dried through - here the result for you.  

 

Again my central question:

As Chapelle's impressing book is first printed in the 30th of the last century - is there any newer book with good drawings about the Revenue Marines Cutters?

[mtaylor]

I know of no new book.  You might ask this question here:  http://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/forum/13-ships-plans-and-scratch-research-general-research-on-specific-vessels-and-ship-types/   If you end up scratch building by following the plans, (making this "after Chapelle", we'll move this to that area.

 

I like your research.  As with many kits, they have a certain amount of fiction in them.  They also use "standard" fittings. You could use the kit and then scratch build the fittings. 

[Small Stuff]

  blood & bone is the price of skill

 

Dear Mark,

 

no I don't think we'll need to move it  into the scratch area - because as much as I'll add and change it will still be a sexed up kit.

 

Let's get a little bit modelling-dogmatic : And even if I replace 99% of the kit it wil  be never ever a scratched model! I do not want to hide it's roots coming out of a box's pre-manufactured content. I think it is good to keep a clear line between kit-bashed and scratched builded models. This limes is importent because with as many parts of styropore and gallons of colour you can't change a motor-skiff into any supertanker - it will still be a blimped up skiff looking like a supertanker.

And I think bashing a kit after Chapelle isn't also enough to lift it up into the scratch builders "Olymp"    between the all the Hahn's and Boudriot's. Here I may be a little bit of too much prussian-german straightness to stick the lable "after Chapelle" on it and to claim credit for scratch building.

EDIT:

Or take the example with the air bag...

Yes it is a bag filled with air infront of the driver -  but it isn't  a driver's air bag!

 

 

I'm now out of order by cutting my self in my finger at the very first sexing up - act!

Edited December 15, 2013 by Small Stuff

[Small Stuff]

Getting a little bit OUT OF TOPIC:

 

I found within Chapelle's book a little drawing of a 66 ⁵⁵/₉₅ tons schooner of the revenue marine can give an intersting project:.A ship with extraordenary feature of two dropkeels, only a hand full of guns, limited dimension of 60 ft/281mm length, possibly I could show the hoisting mechanism through a open hatch and she has a schooner rigging of limited complexity.

 

[pete48]

Very Cool Stan, Nice Build

Edited December 15, 2013 by pete48

[Small Stuff]

"The more I work on this crap of a kit

the more I regret to have payed money for it!"

 

  Even the "backbone of all" is NOT flat, straight or erect!

 

You can see it from the gap betwen cutting pad and wooden keelson - my old trainer in the company would have said: "A gap - you could throw your bonnet through it!" So I'm forced to bash the kit here to get in in the right/straight order!

 

Will it be enough to put square pices of wood between the stations? Port and starboard? So I will cut them out from pinewood 40x5x1000mm and fill them orthogonal between the bulkhaeds? Here shown redly in the picture- certain' the will be orthogonal to the slot for the bulkheads (it was easier to show it in this way).

 

Please tell me what do you think may help?

[mtaylor]

Hmm... you could try several methods as this is not uncommon.  

 

1) Soak the wood heavily (if plywood, soak lightly) and then weight down the center area.  Might even slightly raise the bow and stern such that it's overbent the other direction.  When dry, it should be straight.  Steam and heat will also work.

 

2) Lightly score inside the curve to relieve the stress.

 

3) Cut a new piece from some straight wood.

 

By all means, clamp that keel when installing the bulkheads and add some spacer blocks.  You'll be glad you did.

[Small Stuff]

Thanks, Mark!!! Starting to do so...

[Small Stuff]

Hello friends!

 

Do I have to bash to transom with pear vaneer from the innner side, too? How many planks do I have to show/imitate?

 

At Karl's wonderfull building report I found these "Tansom Knees" do I have to add those, too? To strenght  the transom against waves coming from after?

Edited December 19, 2013 by Small Stuff

[Small Stuff]

Next step forward:

Due to my pherensis to build the staircases doors open I'll habe to change some parts of the hull. If I look into some "reference" drawings (Chapelle The Baltimore Clipper) I have to create a staircase (both sides encloses by vertical running panel wood) a pice of the floor of the hull (alike the decks manner?) and the illusion of the space of the hold!!! 

So I'll have to give the eye a deep line of sight into the hull. (As I saw it here within severeal scratched models.) So in the case to push the  superstructure I'll have to cut deeply in the backbone and the stations...This has to be done without any lost of stability!

 

Here my first drawings by paint into the manual... What do you think about this - does it make sence???

 

EDIT:

And No 4 to show the hole room needed to "disappeare" i.m.h.o. - okay so?

Edited December 19, 2013 by Small Stuff

[Small Stuff]

IMPOSSIBLE DREAM:

To all of us a little hymn:

 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkAA91jlmms

 

I.

Everything I tryed was ended by realitys in the construction of the kit! I would have changed the constructin from PoB to PoF - Something impossible to me!

 

And so I've to turn back to my native modesty...

 

II.

But I did some progress the outside of the Transom is ready.

But the notch between the two planks is a near to a castle moat...

Edited December 19, 2013 by Small Stuff

[Small Stuff]

After this rout I want to do a.s.a.p. the very next step towards any progress!

And so I cut octhogonale pieces to length to force the bulkheads in to the right order:

Edited December 19, 2013 by Small Stuff

[Small Stuff]

As I saw Daniel' Syren MS kit - I saw his cap rail for the sterns:

http://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/topic/1070-uss-brig-syren-by-dubz-ms-kit-164-18-gun-brig/page-6

This will cover the plywood between the pear faces! Thanks Daniel.

[Small Stuff]

After all this theoretical and navalhistorical brainwork a little bit of yardwork tonight. Just cutting squared wood to pices by a brandnew japanese pull-saw,addanigng it gliding to the grooves kerb and glueing it onto the backbone...

 

Now keep it alone 'till tomorrow.

 

Good night to all of you - exspecialy to those down under sitting in the sun!

[Small Stuff]

The squarepices are still drying... 

No remarkable news - without a single breakfastvisitor:

[Small Stuff]

Holidays are coming towards me! So I'll stay in a openfireplace hearted small hut in the middel of the quiet out in  the Brandenburg woods for a week - and just taking some literature and drawings with me. Just to study and to colaborate to my wife to get the book review for you.

 

Edit: Now the glue is dry so here're my result for this year.

 

So have some nice days and a...

 

 

Edited December 29, 2013 by Small Stuff

[trippwj]

Stan -

 

Off to a fantastic start.  Knowing now what I did not know when I started mine back in 2012, I would make many of these changes as well. 

 

Looks good so far - best wishes for a Very Prosperous 2014!

[Small Stuff]

Hy Wayne,

 

hopefuly I can hold on in this course...

 

We should allways remember:

 

Our next model will allways be better than the one before could ever have been due to an everlasting inherent leck of experience.

[Small Stuff]

Friends!

Today my libary got an additon:

Lennarth Petterson Rigging Period Fore-and-Aft Craft... Bought for the pages 66 upto 111   ...and compared with the manual's drawings from the kit som alterations must bedone:  there is no in- or outholer for the sails ending at the jibsbooms or bowsprit to tell my first exposure to you.

 

Tomorrow I may find some time to work in my shipyard with wood to complete the hulls skeleton, doing some alteration and  and add the deck.

 

The deck is not smooth  surface tge formers upside will give me s.th. that it is more like a hindulating landscape!

 

EDIT:

No digicam-USB-wire found 'tii now...

 

Good N8 to all of you,

 

yours

 

Stan

 

And for our friends from Downunder starting a hole day of work:

Edited January 10, 2014 by Small Stuff

[Small Stuff]

Still no wire found - beginning to complete glueing the blocks of softwood further onto the backbone on both sides. And sticking the sections in the nuts - so I can sand the  decks  underside easier - leaving section 10 and 8 out because of their edges for the superstructure.