SAILING SHIP MODELERS!!!!!!

As sent to Airfix, via their customer contact email address:

A couple things, first off, congratulations and many cheers for your revival, and I wish you all the best in this regard!  Second, I would like to put in a request, that should fill a market segement that has been sadly ignored for the past 20 years, in which YOU are supremely qualified to fulfill!  The market I am talking about is the sailing ship kit market!  You have done splendid work in the past, kits which have become the standard by which others have tried (and mostly failed) to reach.  As so few model manufacturers are currently producing kits to fufill this market niche (if any!), it seems to me that THIS is a cornerpiece in which you can A, dominate a relatively untouched market, and B, use this as a profitablility springboard to eventually expand into other market niches not currently serviced by the dominant (and mostly Asian!) producers of model kits.

Allow me to explain:  While any number of manufacturers are producing kits in various or multiple scales of a wide variety of automobiles, armor, aircraft, modern and WW2 ships, NO-ONE is producing kits of sailing ships, and very few are producing any ship kits from WW1!  With the amazing popularity of the 'Pirates of the Caribbean' and 'Master and Commander' films, not to mention the HUGE interest in the various 'Tall Ships' and traditional maritime events, it seems to me inconceivable that no model manufacturer has sought to exploit this obvious interest!

Based on your previous efforts, it seems to me that you are one of the best company's to exploit this interest, and if you would take some advice, you might well wish to consider the production of the following ships (note; there is a huge profit margin currently in limited production resin kits, especially those of 1/350 scale for 20th century warships.  These kits typically ask, and receive up to and surpassing $200 per kit, so we are not taliking 'chump change' here!  'Plank on Frame' kits of high quality ask and receive up to $1000.00 per kit!!  Surely there is more than enough profit margin here for some Tall Ships kits for the same demographic?):

As a preliminary, I suggest kits in the 1/150 scale range.  If these are successful, then an increase to 1/100 might be contemplated:

HMS Agammenon, British '64 gun ship,' Nelson's favorite

French 80 gun ship 'Bucentaure' flagship of the French at Trafalgar

Spanish 110 gun ship ' San Josef' Spanish flagship and taken by Nelson

Spanish 'Santissima Trinidad' largest warship of the Napoleonic era

Dutch 80 gun ship 'Zeven Provincien' (Admiral De Ruyters flagship)

HMS Coronation 100 gun first rate

HMS Resolution, 80 gun British flagship, Anglo-Dutch wars

USS Essex, American frigate

HMS Shannon, British frigate, 1812 war victor over USS Chesapeake

'Black Pearl'  Jack Sparrow's beloved pirate ship

This is not a comprehensive list, only a few suggestions that are sure to engender market share, and will dominate a market ignored by every other manufactturer!  A quick peek at /forums/7/ShowForum.aspx will show you the very large potential market that is out there, yet unserviced by model manufacturers, and YOU could be the ones that could capture that trade!  I hope this has given you some inspiration, and look forward to a speedy response.

Best Regards,

Eric Husher

And here is the response I got back.... Obviously we need to keep pestering them!

 

Thank you for your email. I have passed it on to our marketing department for reference, although they may not be able to reply to you directly, but it is something we are looking into over the next few years.

Yours Sincerely

Mark Lodge

Airfix Customer Care

Eric,

Thank you so much for that letter! You are quite right that we must keep pestering them!  Nobody ever caused change by accepting a qualified "maybe" as an answer.  Please, please, please keep the pressure going!

Bill Morrison

Not to thump on you too much but:

Why 1/150th scale? Why not 1/144?

Why in the WORLD would you suggest that a grand would be an acceptabe price? Even the BlueJacket kits top out at $650. The most expensive sailing vessel model they have is under $600.

I don't think that either of us has suggested that $1,000.00 is a reasonable price for a kit. On the contrary, I specifically state that it is beyond the affordability of most modellers.  The entire point is that, as JTilley would call them, the HECEPOB kits can top that price range and yet, people still buy them.

No, what we are advocating is that the plastic manufacturers emulate the HECEPOB companies by manufacturing new products but at affordable, plastic kit prices.  The plastic kit manufacturers should not emulate the HECEPOB companies by releasing some grossly inaccurate ships.

As for scale, 1/144 is as good as 1/150. There are several kits available in both. The point is that we the hobbyist start getting some real variety in our hobby.

Bill Morrison

For better or worse, Bluejacket (a company for which I have a great deal of respect) is far from the most expensive manufacturer on the wood sailing ship kit scene.  Lots of the notorious HECEPOB (Hideously Expensive Continental European Plank-on-Bulkhead) kits go for well over $600 - and apparently somebody (not me) is buying them in considerable numbers.  Calder/Jotika kits are in a different ballpark - genuine scale models, designed by people who know what they're doing.  (Some recent - and expensive - kits from Amati/Victory Models and Mamoli are in the same category.  Those companies, it seems, have recently discovered what a real scale model looks like.)  Calder/Jotika kits, as noted above, do indeed cost as much as $1,000.

It should be remembered, in fairness, that these kits take a long time to build.  To build the Calder/Jotika Victory out of the box, with no additions or improvements, probably would take at least a couple of years - during which the typical plastic/resin warship kit enthusiast might well spend at least that much money on the hobby. 

Personally I'm not in a position even to think seriously about paying $1,000 for a ship model kit.  But I do understand how the delicate balance of design time, materials, profits for everybody concerned, and a relatively small potential market leads to high prices.  Whether the kits in question are "worth" the amount of money the manufacturers charge is a decision the individual modeler has to make.  For me personally, that question is irrelevant.  From my standpoint, the overwhelmingly relevant fact is that I can't afford them.

1/144 has never been a popular scale among sailing ship modelers.  (Off the top of my head I can't recall having seen one, either in kit form or in a museum, to that scale.  Maybe one or two of the old Airfix kits, which were designed to fit standardized boxes, happened to come out somewhere close.  [Later edit:  I checked the Airfix website, which says the Wasa kit is indeed on 1/144 scale.  I'd want to confirm that by measuring it; plastic sailing ship kit manufacturers are notorious for making mistakes about such things in their literature.  In any case, if it is on that scale I suspect it's largely coincidence.  When that kit hit the market Airfix was making all its sailing ships fit the same size of box.]) 

Much of the sailing ship kit market is European, and European modelers are accustomed to the metric system, in which 1/150 makes sense.  It would be hard to explain the choice of 1/144 to anybody who isn't acquainted with aircraft or armor modeling.  So far as I can tell, 1/144 came to prominence in those realms because it's half of 1/72 - which, in turn, came to prominence (I guess) because an average human figure in 1/72 scale is an inch tall.  (I think the first massive use of 1/72 was for the aircraft recognition models of World War II.  But I may be wrong about that; I seem to recall that FROG picked that scale for its "Penguin" range of kits, which started appearing shortly before the war.)

British and American sailing ship modelers for many years have inclined to pick common scales on the basis of standard fractions of an inch:  1/4"=1' (1/48), 1/8"=1' (1/96), 1/16"=1' (1/192), 1/32"=1' (1/384), etc.  And a few non-conformists (like me) have always liked 3/32"=1' (1/128).  Continental European modelers probably find those numbers clumsy. 

Bottom line:  to each his (or her) own.  But I would not like to see sailing ship model companies suddenly start standardizing in 1/144.  That scale has no real tradition in sailing ship modeling.  On the other hand, I'm not going to complain if a major manufacturer starts producing genuinely new, reasonably accurate sailing ship kits in any scale.

I agree.  What is the possible benefit of 1/144 scale?  I suggested either 1/150, or 1/100 because there are already other quality plastic ship models out in those scales (and anything that can be done to standardize scales would be a big plus as far as I am concerned!).  1/96 has also been suggested, and perhaps that has some virtue, but I think from a business perspective, it might be better to start a bit smaller, see how it goes, and then expand if the market looks favorable.  My point in demonstrating the prices of ship kits these days is to show that there IS a good profit margin to be taken advantage of, and that the market will bear a price of $100-$200 for a good-sized kit if the kit is high quality, and is of an interesting subject.  Yet another repeat of HMS Victory would be a very poor return, but if you see how people are lining up and pre-ordering the new 1/350 scale kist from Aoshima, Fujimi, Hasegawa and others, I think you (and hopefully Airfix) will agree that there is an untapped market that they could grab with both hands, instead of simply trying to compete with other companys for subjects that are already way ahead of the pack (I am thinking of both Aoshima and Fujimi both producing a 1/350 'Kongo,' with little to choose between them but the price).

Amen!  It seems odd that the manufacturers seem to be resisting this point; sailing ship modeling is an untapped field that is wide open!  The fact that people are paying the exhorbitant prices for the quality wooden kits shows the interest in this subject.

The funny thing is that, decades ago when I began a similar campaign to add to the then contemporary standards of Bismarck, Tirpitz, Yamato, etc, everybody had the same excuses; ship modeling represents only a small fraction of the modelling population, few really want to put in the effort to build a quality ship model because they are so difficult, etc.  Look at the hobby now!

I have a feeling that we sailing ship modelers will flock in droves to purchase new and quality offerings!

 Bill Morrison

Well, it certainly seems that the older manufacturers are afraid that they might 'put the cart before the horse,' and thus lose money in an unprofitable venture.  Of course, if the cart is never built, there is not much chance of finding out if the horse will pull it either, so therein lies the conundrum!  The Japanese and the Chinese do not seem to approach the issue in the same way.  Instead of looking to produce a single kit, they look at producing a range of kits in the same scale.  This does two things, the first of which is to ensure themselves a fairly dominant position in such a market by having lots of follow-up kits, and second, this sort of production generates a 'buzz' of its own, which feeds back into people buying more kits.  I think the current craze for 1/350 scale WW2 warships is a good example of this.... Contrast this with the very muted response from the older Western manufacturers, and you can see why they are not grabbing the kind of market share they might be.  In fact, most of them seem quite content to follow along on the coat-tails of the Asian manufacturers, with very little commitment or contribution of their own (ROG produces a 1/350 'Bismarck.' Nice kit, but hardly stickin' yer neck out there!).  It requires a bit of committment, a fair bit of capital investment, and the marketing and confidence to push the product range not just a specific kit.

A similar sort of paradigm CAN be produced with sailing ship kits IF a manufacturer makes a conscious decision to follow the precepts as successfully established by the Asians.  Produce an outstanding kit of popular appeal (say Jack Sparrows 'Black Pearl,' or Master & Commander 'HMS Surprise'), and make sure the buying public understands and knows that this is only the first of a line of further kits produced to the same scale and quality, and then get those kits out there too, on a regular basis, and to similar quality.  I would think Revell would certainly understand the success of this, if for no other reason than the results of their range of 1/72 and 1/144 scale submarines (which I notice Lindberg has now jumped on in its own modest way!!)........

I'd love to see more new sailing ship kits in styrene too - so will contact them.   Especially new Nelson era ships such as HMS Belleisle and the massive Santissima Trinidad.

Just a quick note on the issue of scale.  The Airfix Victory has a stated scale of 1/180.  The Revell Victory is listed at 1/146. Yet, the Airfix kit is significantly larger, even though it states a smaller scale!

Anyway, please keep the letters going! The only way for our hobby to get new kits is to let the manufacturers know that we exist, that we buy kits, and that we want NEW products!

Bill Morrison

The frequency with which manufacturers - even reputable ones - mislabel the scales of their products is really remarkable.  The problem seems to be especially acute among sailing ship kits.  Many of them, as we all know, were originally designed to fit standard-sized boxes.  In recent years, when those old kits have been re-released, the manufacturers have given the impression that figuring out the scale of an existing kit is simply beyond their capacity.

Some time ago our good friend and fellow Forum member MichelVRTG attempted to sort out the scales (and heritage) of all the H.M.S. Victory kits on the market.  It's quite a story of ridiculously mislabeled products, reissues appearing under the labels of multiple companies, and bizarre misrepresentations of what the ship actually looked like.  (One of the Japanese manufacturers omitted one level of windows on the transom and quarter galleries.)  Michel set up a website that includes his discoveries:  http://www.hmsvictoryscalemodels.be/ .  Recommended.

John,

Thanks for the link. Unfortunately, he left out one wood model of which I am aware . . . the 1/180 scale HMS Victory by Aeropiccola, which is part of their SUPERMEC series.  It is a beginner's plank-on-bulkhead model that has little to offer serious modellers.

Bill Morrison

Yup.... It is to be hoped that when that Great Gettin' Up Day finally arrives (Hallelujah!) when the model manufacturers start producing new sailing ship kits, they will put the same sort of effort into proper scaling and accuracy that they have done all these years with modern warship models..... It is a little dream that I have!

    My answer to the limitations of plastic model sailing ship kits, the over expensive  Calder/Jotika kits that are excellent, but way over most people's budgets and the infamous HECEPOB European kits that Professor Tilley levels his tirates against, with its processions of the same old Constitutions, H.M.S. Victorys, Mayflowers, Bounties and  pseudo-Spanish gallions, is to ignore all of this and scratch build your own models!

   Years ago when Abe Tubman was alive and still in business of selling sailing ship plans, I bought several of his plans and those of Harold Hahn and built two without the use of kits. At the moment, I am constructing the 30 gun French frigate, La Renommee, (The Fame) launched in 1744. I know that the plans of this vessel is authentic, as the drafts were drawn from the original ship after her capture by the Royal Navy in 1747. This frigate will never make a big  splash in the annals of naval history , but it is a departure from the HECEPOB syndrome in that she is accurate, unlike generic Spanish galleons. Just the fact that this ship is unknown, makes it to me a more interesting model.

     Montani semper liberi !  Happy modeling to all and every one of you.  Crackers

Crackers has raised a major point that unquestionably is worth discussing.  We've taken it up in several Web forums.  Rather than labor over yet another insufferably long post, I'll take the liberty of copying and pasting one that I wrote in the Modelshipworld forum last summer.  The thread was entitled "Plastic kit builders, are we second class?"  Clicking on that link will take you to the whole thread, which extends over several pages.  Quite a few people, from several countries, posted thought-provoking responses.  My first one was as follows:

"I've gotten into quite a few arguments about this one over the years. I do have some strong opinions about it; they can best be summarized by the phrase, 'to each his own.'

"I also think it might be useful to rephrase the question slightly, and consider the relative 'merits' of building from scratch and working from kits. That one also stirs up a lot of emotions.

"I don't think anybody who's ever built a model from scratch will deny that scratchbuilding offers a level of satisfaction that kits don't. There's something special about being able to tell onesself, 'I did all that myself.'  I'll go so far as to say that in my opinion, all other things being equal (as they rarely are), a scratchbuilt model is superior to a kit-built one. (I hasten to add that in my case any such relative evaluation is completely academic. I don't believe in model competitions; I've entered and judged enough of them for one lifetime, and I'll never judge another one.)

"There are, however, lots of arguments in favor of working from a kit. Those arguments have to do with experience, time, equipment, space, and the modeler's reason for taking on the project in the first place.

"It's generally true that - assuming the kit in questions is competently designed - working from a kit is easier than working from scratch, especially for the newcomer. Scratchbuilding requires that, before you start, you have a pretty thorough understanding in your head of what the finished model is going to look like. It requires that you be able to read plans in more depth (e.g., be able to interpret hull lines), and, unless the plans are extremely well-detailed, that you know what to do in order to fill the gaps in them. A good set of plans is a big asset in building from a kit, but there's probably a lot of information on those plans that the modeler won't need.

"Building from a kit is, by definition (assuming again that it's a reasonably good kit), quicker than building an otherwise identical model from scratch. The importance of that factor will vary from person to person. For most of us, model building is a hobby to which we can only devote a limited percentage of our time. C. Nepean Longridge built his famous, scratchbuilt model of H.M.S. Victory after he retired, and, according to the book he wrote about it, worked virtually full-time on it for quite a few years. Most of us can't do that.

"All other things being equal, a model of a big, elaborate vessel takes longer than a model of a small, simple one. A model of a ship-of-the-line
will take longer to build than a model of a pilot schooner to the same scale and standard of detail. I don't think people who have limited time for their hobbies should be categorically restricted to building models of pilot schooners. A well-designed kit can make various modeling subjects available to the hobbyist that otherwise, for entirely practical reasons, would be beyond his/her reach.

"My little scratchbuilt model of the Continental frigate Hancock  (http://www.hmsvictoryscalemodels.be/JohnTilleyHancock/index.html ) took me six years of extremely part-time work (with frequent lengthy interruptions and two changes of residence). I really think that's enough time to spend on one model. I hope to finish at least one more of that standard and complexity in the time that's left to me on the Orb, but probably not till retirement (which is not so many years down the road). In the mean time, I'll stick to either less elaborate scratchbuilt projects or to kits.

"Generally speaking, building from a kit requires less equipment and workspace than working from scratch. There are exceptions; Harold Underhill said he built his famous scratchbuilt, plank-on-frame model of the brig Leon on a folding card table in his living room. But I think most experienced modelers would agree that scratchbuilding to a reasonably high standard requires some fairly expensive tools and a dedicated space in which to use them. I wouldn't have tackled that Hancock model if I hadn't had a Dremel Moto-Tool and my trusty old Unimat lathe/drill press, along with a workshop where I could leave things set up during the long periods when I wasn't working on the model. (I didn't have a power saw when I started that model; I got one before the model was finished.) I don't think apartment dwellers, people with unsympathetic spouses, or people who lack the funds and/or inclination to invest hundreds of dollars in tools ought to be banned from ship modeling. Kits make it possible for those folks to take part in the hobby.

"I personally happen to find a wide variety of ships and boats extremely interesting; in fact there are few ship and boat types that can't hold my interest. In fifty-two years of model building I've become reasonably knowledgeable, I think, about certain types and periods; about others I'm almost totally ignorant. A couple of years ago I bought, and built, a 1/700-scale resin kit replicating a Russian battleship that fought in the Russo-Japanese War. I knew virtually nothing about Russian battleships. The kit gave me an excuse to read several books about the subject, and I think the model, which took me a couple of weeks, came out reasonably well. Building a model of such a ship to that standard from scratch would have been beyond my capacity - and frankly my interest in Russian battleships wouldn't have justified the time it would have taken. Does that little model represent the same level of achievement and craftsmanship that a scratchbuilt one would? Of course not. But I think it's a nice model, and I now know a lot more about Russian battleships than I did when I started. I fail to see how building that kit did any harm to anybody.

"The point of the preceding paragraph is that people have different reasons for building models. If one of your motives is learning about ships, you're likely to learn more by building several models than by building one. For most of us that means, in practical terms, working from kits. Some people (including me) get a great deal of satisfaction from devoting hundreds or thousands of hours to one subject. And some people (also including me) derive satisfaction from studying a variety of subject matter and building up a collection of models. I'm don't think I'm entitled to say that either of those approaches is more "legitimate" than the other.

"As for the 'plastic vs. wood argument, as far as I'm concerned there's no "right" or "wrong" to that one either. Again, the question of why the model is being built needs to be considered. Some people get into ship modeling because they like woodworking. Others get into it because they like ships. It's not for me to pass judgment on any of them. I do have some strong opinions, though, about the matter of scale fidelity as it relates to kits.

"I worked my way through grad school in a hobby shop, and rather frequently had to wait on people who wanted to get into ship modeling. I had two standard speeches (both of which, of course, usually got ignored). Speech #1: 'Start with a relatively small ship on a relatively large scale.' (Typical result: the customer walked out with a Constitution or Cutty Sark kit, and we never saw him again.) Speech #2: 'If you're interested in building an accurate model of a real ship, consider a plastic kit. In terms of scale fidelity, most plastic kits are garbage and most wood kits are worse.' (I got in trouble more than once for delivering that oration when the boss was around.) I left that job almost thirty years ago, but I still think that statement is true.

"Four wood kit manufacturers seem to understand what a scale model is: Model Shipways, Bluejacket, A.J. Fisher, and Calder/Jotika. The vast majority of the other wood kits fall into the HECEPOB category. (That's Hideously Expensive Continental European Plank On Bulkhead. For several lengthy rants on the subject of HECEPOB kits, go to the Finescale Modeler forum, http://www.finescale.com,/ and do a Forum search on the word "HECEPOB." Also check out this well-known article from the Nautical Research Journal: http://www.thenrg.org/displayarticle.html?id=4 .) Whenever I get on this particular soapbox I feel obliged to offer a couple of big caveats: I haven't seen every HECEPOB manufacturer's product, and I'm sure there's a good deal of variation between them. And in recent years at least two of the HECEPOB firms, Amati and Mamoli, have given encouraging indications that they're learning what a scale ship model actually looks like. But I continue to contend that most of their products are over-priced junk. And there's just no way that any of the HECEPOB versions of H.M.S. Victory can compete, in terms of scale accuracy, with the Heller 1/100-scale plastic kit.

"One of several things that bother me about the HECEPOB phenomenon is that people who've built a couple of those...things...often seem to feel entitled to turn up their noses at (sneer) plastic modelers. I quit taking part in another ship modeling web forum because it categorically rejected all posts having to do with plastic models. (I had a lengthy e-mail discussion with the operator of the site; it quickly became obvious that he knew virtually nothing about plastic modeling. But that's another story, probably best forgotten.) One reason I like Model Ship World so much is that such prejudices seem to be completely absent here.

"Here are some photos of my model of H.M.S. Bounty: http://www.hmsvictoryscalemodels.be/JohnTilleyBounty/index.html . It's based on the 1956-vintage, 1/110-scale Revell plastic kit. It's extensively modified; in fact only about a dozen pieces of the kit made it into the finished model. (In this case, scratchbuilding might actually have been quicker - but I didn't know that when I started it.) I built it almost thirty years ago, and I'm quite aware of various things that are wrong with it. (Starting with the crew members' complexions. Where on earth did I get the notion that eighteenth-century British sailors suffered from anemia?) But I do contend that it resembles the real ship more than any of the various HECEPOB versions do.

"This post has gone on far too long, and I suspect most readers have quit reading by now - for good reason. But I'll end with two personal observations. One - to each his (or her) own. Two - I'm not a plastic modeler, and I'm not a wood modeler. I'm a ship modeler."

As should be obvious by now, I'm a firm believer both in scratchbuilding and in the value of kits.  As a practical matter, I think I'm going to concentrate on relatively short-term, kit-based projects for the next few years.  After retirement (probably four or five years down the road) - well, I have a couple of long-term scratchbuilding projects in mind. 

I agree that scratch building offers many opportunities.  But, considering the price of reliable and thorough plans, the wood, the power tools (jig saw, lathe, etc), and the prices of various blocks, cannon, etc., one can soon find himself spending at the HECEPOB level!  I had advanced my comments concerning these kits simply as evidence to show that sailing ship enthusiasts are out here; we will go to great lengths, even resorting to buying these kits for something new.

Additionally, many of us prefer to build in plastic.  It is no less a valid medium than scratch building in wood.  We simply want the manufacturers to begin offering a greater variety of quality kits at fairly standard scales just as they do for modern ships, aircraft, armor, and cars.  The hobbyists will respond.

Bill Morrison

I agree with Bill, I've gone back to plastic in recent years partly because I was getting an allergic reaction to the boxwood and other exotic woods I was using and partly because my office is now full of computers and the like - not the place to be knee deep in sawdust!

Having done both I cannot say that one is less problematical than the other, and it is very easy to ruin a plastic kit with a momentary lapse of concentration.

There is a lot of satisfaction to be derived from the artistic applications and scratch building aspects of plastic, but without the lengthy preparatory work involved with a wooden scratch or kit build; even so my last plastic kit build took three years of fairly regular working, longer in fact than my last pob kit.

...And in any case, the point of this thread is to encourage the model manufacturers to once more produce NEW sailing ship kits in plastic, to a decent level of accuracy, and in a common scale!  If you want to scratch-build a shipmodel, by all means have at it!

I like John's point that, " I am not a plastic modeler. I am not a wood modeler. I am a ship modeler."

But, Eric also hit it on the head when he rightly pointed out that the purpose of this thread is to encourage the manufacturers to fill this glaring gap by producing new high-quality plastic kits of sailing ships.

So, at the risk of becoming overly repetitive . . . please keep those letters and emails going! No manufacturer ever gave us what we wanted without our becoming major pests and gadflies.  Indeed, I have a sense that Airfix is listening.

Bill Morrison

   Dear Bill Morrison: Hell would freeze over before modeling companies releases reasonable priced sailing ship models to the public, or present other modeling subjects, rather than the same ol' Mayflowers, Constitutions and H.M.S. Victorys. Before paying exorbitant amounts for HECEPOB European kits that Professor Tilley casts his negative opinions upon, I prefer to scratch build my own sailing ship models.

   The above photos of my work make my point. The unfinished up-side-down model of the Bounty follows the Harold Hahn method of construction. The sequencial numbered ribs are seated on a masonite jig and planked below the waterline. Above the waterline will be planked later, using the black wale as a referance point from the Harold Hahn plans. After the planking was completed, the model was seperated from the jig at the drawn deck line, decked over, masted, and spared, with sails added later.

   The second photo of a scratch builted long boat and pinnace for my present model of the 30 gun French frigate, La Renommee (The fame), that is now under construction . Both boats were molded with Sculpey modeling clay on a carved wooded form, then baked in a kitchen oven at 275' F for 30 minutes. After baking, the hardened boats were sanded, painted and seats and oars added. The two anchors are from lead casts from discarted lead auto tire balacing weights. After the anchors were released from their plaster of paris molds, they were sanded and shaped. Since lead is toxic, precaution was used by wearing latex gloves, a face mask and working outdoors so as not to breathe lead dust. All, deck furnature  and blocks are hand made. The exception are steering wheels and deadeyes which are purchased from Model Expo.

     The final photo is the completed 1/4" (1/48) scale scratch built model of the Bounty now on permanent display at the Jerome, Idaho, Public Library. Four years were required for the completion of the entire project. Scatch model building is not for the impatient or for those afficted with Attention Deficit Disorder. But those individuals willing to make the effort, the rewards are worth it.

  Montani semper liberi !  Happy modeling to all and every one of you.   Crackers

 

 

 

Crackers - many thanks for showing us your fine work.  I'm sure we'll all be anxious to see your French frigate in due course; if the rest of the project is to the same standards as the boats, it will be an outstanding model.

Crackers brings up a couple of extremely valid points.  Scratchbuilding, among other advantages, liberates the modeler from the frustrating symbiotic relationship that plastic kit builders have with the manufacturers; for the scratchbuilder there's an unlimited range of subjects.  And I think anybody who's ever built a ship model from scratch will agree that the experience offers something that kit building doesn't. 

There are, however, lots of perfectly legitimate reasons to build models from kits.  But one factor that, I'm afraid, all too often plays a role is not so legitimate:  fear.  Lots of modelers who've grown up on kits, I'm afraid, are literally afraid to work from scratch.  They shouldn't be.  Scratchbuilding does require more knowledge of the subject than kit building does; the scratchbuilder won't get far if he/she doesn't have a clear understanding in advance of what the finished product is supposed to look like.  But I know plenty of kit builders who have more than enough knowledge of their subjects, and more than enough skill, to work from scratch.  Somehow or other, though, the thought of breaking loose from the expertly-manufactured contents of a box seems to intimidate them.  Or they think that wood and metal are just too difficult for them.  (The reverse also happens:  people who've built nothing but wood models fail to recognize the potential of styrene.)  I say to all those people - give it a shot.  Maybe you won't like scratchbuilding; if you don't, go back to kits.  But don't hesitate because you think you just can't do it.  You probably can.

I have to confess that I'm not optimistic about the prospects of new sailing ships from the big companies - though I don't think Bill's letter-writing campaign can possibly do any harm.  One depressing piece of evidence regarding Airfix in particular:  the disappearance of the ex-Heller 1/100 Victory.  In that product the company had at its disposal one of the best plastic sailing ship kits ever released.  (Many would describe it as the best.)  The subject was, at least so far as the company's home market is concerned, just about the most famous one in existence.  As I understand it, the kit appeared in its Airfix box for a little while around the time of the Trafalgar bicentennial, when public consciousness of the Victory was as high as it's ever likely to be.  And now the kit is gone from the Airfix website.  The explanation surely is obvious:  it didn't sell.  Hardly an inspiration for more large-scale sailing ship projects.

I also find myself wondering whether, from a practical standpoint, a new line of sailing ships from a company like Airfix is really an option.  The other night, in conjunction with another Forum thread, I took a careful look at the old Airfix H.M.S. Prince kit.  I was struck by the subtlety of its design - not only in terms of the "carved" detail, but in such things as the hull planking.  As we discussed in yet another Forum thread not long ago, putting countersunk plank edges on an injection-molded kit is quite a challenge; as the planking turns under the bilge, the grooves between the planks make it impossible to eject the part from the mold.  On the Airfix Prince kit, the grooves gradually turn into "steps" as they approach the keel.  It's done so skillfully that one has to really study it to see how it works.  I daresay not many customers would notice that feature; I wouldn't have spotted it if I hadn't been looking for it.  The person or people who designed that kit clearly had something in mind that went far beyond profit and loss figures.  Does Airfix - or any other kit manufacturer - have people working for it nowadays who are capable of that sort of thing?

If we do see a renaissance of the plastic sailing ship kit, I'll be among those cheering the loudest.  But I'm not holding my breath.  In the mean time, I'm glad to see some of the "golden oldies" coming back on the market.  The Airfix website is currently promoting the old Endeavour as a "new product," and a Forum participant in another thread saw faint signs that the old Revell Charles W. Morgan may be on the way back.  That, as far as I'm concerned, is good news.

Well, notwithstanding all of the above, I am not giving up hope on the model manufacturers yet, but will continue to prod them to reexamine the sailing ship niche.  From a producers standpoint, it is pointless to produce a single kit and expect it to make much of a 'splash' (pardon the pun!).  In order to be successfull, a whole line of kits to scale needs to be considered.  Tamiya didn't do particularly well with its line of 1/350 kits, and did little, or nothing to expand its line, mostly because no-one else grabbed the bait to produce additional kits in this scale for many years.  Not because there wasn't a market for them, they just thought there wasn't a market for them, and so dismissed the whole idea for 30 years.....!

Looking at the market right now, it is amazing how many new 1/350 kits are spilling off the shelves, and a large portion of credit for this goes to Trumpeter, who made a huge effort to produce a LOT of kits in this scale in a very short period of time, and at a very reasonable price.  Didn't take too long before the Japanese and even the Germans soon followed suit!  Trumpeter looked at the very small, but very persistent 1/350 resin kit producers, who made small runs of very expensive kits (they still do!) that consistently sold, and used that as the basis for their expanded and very successful business model.

If a few model manufacturers looked at the sailing ship market in the same way, using the various very expensive wooden kits in the same way that Trumpeter looked at the expensive resin 1/350 kits, they might see a similar opportunity!  And of course, every time someone like Airfix re-releases one of their ancient standbys, they sell too, and long articles are written about them (see JTilley's missive above on the 'Endeavour').

In other words, we can all sit around bemoaning 'the good old days' (which by the way, based on the still existing products, weren't particularly good!), or we can GET UP and make our desires known in no uncertain terms, and eventually we will see some sort of response.  Remember, 'The customer is always right!!'

Crackers,

No one is denying the advantages of scratchbuilding. You do very nice work; you should be proud of your efforts.  But, I will not acknowledge that there is absolutely no hope that the plastic kit manufacturers  will produce new kits; it is in their vested interest to do so.

Decades ago, I conducted a similar letter-writing campaign on behalf of ship modeling in general.  That was in the days when nobody produced anything other than Bismarck, Tirpitz, Yamato, Musashi, Missouri, and Iowa, and Enterprise.  Granted, Revell also produced Arizona, their line of destroyers and horrible cruisers, Renwal had their respective line, as did Aurora.  We know what happened to the last two companies.  The only comments that I ever heard back was that ship modelers made up only a very small percentage of the modeling population as evidenced by sales figures.

Then, the wonderful decade of the 1990's hit.  At first, the effort by the manufacturers focused on aircraft and armor (surprise, surprise, surprise!)  But, ship modeling went into a renaissance.  Look at the hobby today! Lo and behold! Our community is upholding our end by buying fantastic new products, thereby giving the lie to that old argument of small population.

I sincerely believe that sailing ship modelers now face that argument on the part of the manufacturers; they believe that we only make up a small part of the hobby.  In fact, look at what is happening in the HECEPOB world; new kits find buyers.  Sailing ship modelers somehow manage to support that singular dedicated industry.  Yet, the plastic kit manufacturers ignore that solid evidence of a thriving hobby community. They conduct no surveys; they are assuming that we are few because we refuse to buy the same old products that they keep offering, just as they did prior to the 1990's for modern ship modeling.

No, we will not get new products if we refuse to demand them.  We might not get new products if we do make our demands, but it is a certainty that we will get nowhere if we remain silent.  The only way to make our interests and desires known is to constantly voice them to the manufacturers! 

Bill Morrison

  My opinion on why plastic kit manufacturers decide to limit the quanity of sailing ship kits, is a matter of economics. Tool and die makers are one of the highest paid blue collar workers. It is a skill that takes years of experience. To make dies that stamp out the plastic parts of a kit, takes quite a heavy investment. If a kit does not sell well on the market and becomes a bomb, then that represents a loss for the plastic kit companies that can never be recovered. That is why kit manufacturers stick to the tried and true that sells. That means the same ol' Mayflowers, Constitutions, Bounties and H.M.S. Victorys, ships that the general public can recognize from their limited knowledge of history. Every one knows about the Mayflower that brought the Pilgrim settlers in 1620. But, do they know about the "Blessings of the Bay", a ship that later Pilgrim settlers built and sailed to England and which disappeared at sea ? Since very few people know of such a vessel, the attitude would be, "So what !" That would represent a loss to the kit manufacturers.

   Another reason for the absence of sailing ship kits, is that model makers are intimidated by idea of rigging a plastic sailing vessel. Modern ships have little or no rigging and hence little effort is required to complete a model. That is why more kits are of modern ships. This is just my thought.

      Montani semper liberi !   Happy modeling to all and every one of you.    Crackers

And yet, the very expensive wooden plank-on-bulkhead industry thrives.  It seems that ship modelers are not as intimidated by rigging as it would seem.  As for ships of little historic recognition, one only has to peruse Model Expo's catalog to see many POB ships of no historic interest whatsoever. Yet, people buy them.

That is my point . . . there is a market out there that the plastic ship model manufacturers are ignoring.  This is repeatedly proven by the sales of the POB kits.  In one thread, someone told of being involved in designing a kit for a European company for which the company asked him to come up with a name for the ship.  He did so and was given a free kit for his efforts.  He made up the name; it was marketed, and it sold!  So much for limiting kits to only those ships of historic interest!

Again, the same arguments you are making were used by the manufacturers decades ago to limit the manufacturing of more modern ships.  Yet, when new companies came along (Trumpeter, Dragon, etc.), they ran away with the market by having a solid plan.  It is now a terrific time to be a ship modeler of twentieth century warships.  Using the same business plan, so often mentioned by Eric (Searat12), one manufacturer bold enough to try could equally create and run away with the market.

Bill Morrison

Bill, I think Crackers and Prof Tilley have just missed the point, a point that has been demonstrated in recent history again and again.  Back in the '70's the Japanese launched a huge range of kits of WW2 ships in 1/700 that essentially blew all the rest and their weirdo 'fit the box' scales right out of the water and pretty much took over the whole market (and most of them were 'obscure' Japanese and other warships).  In the '80's, this was done again in the 1/35 scale armor realm, and the '90's brought on the resurrection of WW1 airplanes as a genre, in 1/72 and 1/48, and this continues with 1/32 scales as well.  In every case, this sort of renaissance was preceded by very expensive resin kits, which act as a 'water tester' to prove that a market exists.  The same thing happened in the early '0's with 1/350 warships, and continues even now.  If you look at the plank on bulkhead kits and their sales, I think there is a good comparison, and to top it off, in my latest Squadron catelog, I note that there is now offered the American sailing revenue cutter 'Alexander Hamilton,' in 1/96 scale, in resin,  at a price of $225, and I have noted a few other highly detailed resin sailing ship kits appearing elsewhere, all at huge prices.  Seems to me the trend is repeating itself once again, and all that remains is for modellers to keep pushing for the sailing ship styrene renaissance to begin in earnest, and the last thing that is needed is for a bunch of naysayers to throw their hands up and say there just isn't any market for them!

Look folks, the fact that there is this forum should be evidence enough that the market exists, let alone all the other market trends I have noted!  When you consider the technical level that the modelling manufacturers have achieved in the last 30 years, the use of CAD and other automated gadgets to ease the necessary skills that were previously required (some guy whittling in a back workshop somewhere) to produce molds, it seems to me that not only will sailing ship models be produced in the future, but they will be to a level of accuracy and fitout that will stun the modelling community, and instantly consign the present ancient 'offerings' to the antique collectors corner, along with toy boats made of tin from the '30's (and perhaps a lot of those POB kits as well). 

There are MANY sailing ships of fame and renown that can be produced, that either have been severely under-represented, badly made, or not produced at all (How about 'Bonhomme Richard?'  How about 'Flying Cloud?' How about the whaleship 'Essex?'  What about 'Santissima Trinidad?').  As far as rigging is concerned, just hand the modellers the string and blocks, and they will do the rest!  And the old excuse that there aren't sufficient reference works to produce anything with any accuracy is just not a factor anymore (Crackers, your own 'Renomee' is the subject of a lenghy monograph, as well as a whole chapter in Boudriou's 'History of the French Frigate,' with all the scale drawings you could ever ask for!).  The amazing work of Jean Boudriou and a number of others others should be enough to crank out just about anything that might be wanted. 

It's perhaps a peculiar thing, but the fans of sailing ships, just like the fans of aircraft, modern warships, armor, or what have you, are largely experts that know their ships very well indeed, and have many favorites (just look at all the disputes and discussions on this forum regarding the proper placement of a few portlights, rivets, or whathaveyou on the latest issues from the model manufacturers and you will get the idea!) that may be pretty much unknown to those outside their area of expertise.  If you ask an aircraft modeller (and there are many sub-divisions of this group alone!) to discuss what sort of WW2 warships they would like to see produced, and yes, you will see the same old ships come up (Yamato, Bismarck, etc).  But ask these same people what sort of aircraft models they want to see, and they will give you a long list of the most obscure variants you have ever heard, and chances are, there is a model manufacturer out there that will either produce it, or produce the parts necessary to make the modifications necessary to a 'standard' kit.  And really, I don't think 'those people' are any different from sailing ship modellers!   Just think of all the fun the PE guys and resin 'alternative parts' suppliers could have producing different cannons, blocks, spars, decorations and the miriad of fittings necessary for a modified sailing ship kit, and it seems to me there is another whole industry that could be produced or significantly enhanced by a renaissance in the production of sailig ship kis in styrene......

I wonder about the reason behind Airfix pulling the 1/100 scale Victory off the market.  Did it sell?  I simply don't know.  There are certainly other models of the Victory, including the 1/180 offering by Airfix currently available. Airfix has not taken that kit off of the market.

But, would the larger scale kit sell better if there were other ships in that scale?  I believe that it would.  More builders would be attracted to that scale if there were a concerted effort to produce variety in the 1/100 scale range.  Afterall, how many times can a builder be expected to buy the same kit if the manufacturers refuse to produce others?  It seems so obvious that I am surprised that the current manufacturers have missed the point!  Perhaps we need a new company to set the standard.

Bill Morrison 

Well, that model sold for about 40 years, under the Aurora label, then under the Heller label, and most recently under the Airfix label.  This kind of makes my point; how long can a kit sell without updating it??? If you listen to the WW2 warship model fans, a kit is hopelessly out of date and 'inaccurate' if it is older than about 20 years, and insist on (and get!) all new toolings.  I wonder, when was the last time Airfix, or any of the other manufacturers re-tooled any of their sailing ship kits?  Ever?  This is just not good enough!  Perhaps if Airfix re-issued the kit, with alternative quarter, transom and bow decorations (to represent the ship in her 'pre-Trafalgar' appearance, that would be a good start (after all, they would only have to produce about ten new parts!)