SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Heller Nina versus Revell Nina

5240 views
3 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2005
Heller Nina versus Revell Nina
Posted by Bigboat on Monday, February 16, 2009 3:30 PM

Hi all:

I am looking forward to spending some considerable time in building all three of the Columbus ships, starting with the Nina. In the opinion of this community, which kits, Revell or Heller, would you recommend for this enterprise based on kit quality? I appreciate your help.

Best

Bigboat.

PS I really enjoy reading the posts on this list.

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Monday, February 16, 2009 11:12 PM

I don't think I've ever seen the inside of the Revell box, but I'm about ninety percent sure the Revell and Heller Nina kits are identical.

Such kits tend to bounce around; manufacturers license each other to distribute kits in different markets.  Quite a few Revell sailing ship kits have appeared in Heller boxes over the years, and a few Heller ones have appeared under the Revell label.

I did build one of the Heller "Columbus ships" (I can't remember whether it was the Nina or the Pinta) many years ago.  I remember it as a reasonably well-detailed, if rather basic, kit that would be capable of being turned into a nice model (probably a great deal nicer than the one I built).  One big caveat:  Heller used the same hull components for both the Nina and the Pinta.  (If I remember correctly - a dubious proposition - the Pinta kit has some extra pieces to build up the forecastle bulwarks.  But the basic hull halves are the same.) That doesn't mean either is necessarily inaccurate; so little is known for certain about those ships that it's dangerous to make such pronouncements about any model or full-size replica.  But I'd be reluctant to put finished models of the Nina and Pinta built from the Heller (or Revell) kits side by side on a shelf, where their near-identical hulls would be obvious.  That's one reason I lost enthusiasm for the project after building one of them.

Revell and Heller have, at one time or another, produced different Santa Maria kits.  Revell released one in 1957.  (It was the company's third sailing ship kit - after the Constitution and Bounty.  The data is from Dr. Graham's fine book, Remembering Revell Model Kits.)  Heller's kit was of about the same size, and was released (if memory serves) in the mid- or late 1960s.  I think it may have been based on the same plans as the Revell version.  (Some modern historians have raised doubts about some features of that design, but, again, so little is known about fifteenth-century caravels that I'd be reluctant to condemn any of the various modern reconstructions.)  There was a flurry of reissues of "Columbus" kits around 1992; it's entirely possible that the old Revell kit got reissued in a Heller box at least once, and vice-versa.  I built the grand old Revell one several times, beginning when I was in grade school.  I don't think I've ever bought the Heller one, but on the basis of photos it certainly looks like a decent kit that could be turned into a nice model.

Hope that helps a little.  Good luck.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    August 2008
Posted by tankerbuilder on Sunday, April 12, 2009 9:39 AM
  HI     You have to remember , the ships of that era were strange at best . The NINA was known back then as a carrack . The books i,ve read have trouble tying any of at least four iterations to true carracks . The porteguese carrack was a different design ( slightly ) than the italian or spanish version . I think it would ,(at least in my opinion) do you best to use the heller kit .         tankerbuilder
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Sunday, April 12, 2009 10:30 AM

Fifteenth-century nautical terminology is a morass, and the surviving information about the three ships of Columbus is almost non-existent.  It seems to be generally agreed, though, that the Nina and Pinta were of the vessel type known as the "caravel."  (In one of his journal entries Columbus refers to them as "the two caravels.")  He calls the Santa Maria a "nao," which is just Spanish for "ship."  Some quite knowledgeable people have suggested that she was indeed a "carrack."

What people of the time actually called these vessels probably depends to some extent on the definitions of the various words - which apparently were pretty sloppy.  My usual approach to such problems is to look them up in the relevant volume of Conway's History of the Ship, which is the most up-to-date, comprehensive, scholarly treatment of the subject I know.  But its authors wouldn't, I'm sure, go so far as to say their use of terminology for such early periods is really definitive.  For what it's worth, here are the terms as defined in the glossary of the relevant volume, Cogs, Caravels, and Galleys:  The Sailing Ship, 1000-1650:

"Caravel, carabela, caravela, caravelle.  Relatively fine-lined Portuguese craft of the fifteenth and sixteenth century, originally a fishing craft or coastal trader, but most famously associated with the great voyages of exploration.  They were originally lateen rigged on two or more masts, and were known for their weatherly qualities, but later variants adopted square canvas for better performance befoe the wind. 

"Carrack.  The derivation of the word is uncertain:  there were small Arab karaques in the thirteenth century, and the term may have been passed to the West via Muslim influence in Iberia, but the ship type seems to owe nothing to the Arab craft.  The carrack was a development of the northern European cog...combined with some featues of the local skeleton-first and multi-masted traditions.  There are Venetian references to such vessels from 1302-1312....In English documents the words carrack or tarit occur from 1350, applied to vessels of this type and usually Genoese in origin.  The carrack seems to have acquired more sail from quite early, a Catalan contract of 1353 specifying main and mizzen, and the English captured a nuber of two-masters from the Genoese early in the fifteenth century (one was actually renamed Le Carake).  By the middle of the 1400s three-masted examples were known and the multi-decked forestage and aftercastle were becming more marked.  Carracks tended to be very large for their day, and with the application of the hul-mounted gunport, carracks became the capital ships of sixteenth century neavies, until supersded in the latter half of the century by the galleon." 

Note that this impressively erudite discourse never quite gets around to telling us just what the word "carrack" means.  That's probably intentional.  The terms was applied so sloppily, over such a long period, that it's tough to define for the modern reader.

"Nao.  One of many terms ultimately derived from navis, the Latin for 'ship'; for most of the Middle Ages in the Mediterranean it wa applied to the most common form of sail-powered merchant ship, only relatively new or unusual typaes being distinguished by individual names like cocha or caravel.  Therefore its characteristics varied, and it was used of both carracks and smaller craft in some contexts; in fifteenth-century Catalonia, for example, nao implied a vessel of one or two deck[s] ranging in size from 300 to 700 botti.  Columbus's famous Santa Maria is usually described as a nao of this type."  ("Botti" was a measure of cargo capacity, based on a barrel called a "botte.")

Bottom line:  Columbus himself clearly called the Nina and Pinta "caravels" and the Santa Maria is generally agreed to have been a "nao," but the latter term is so vague as to cover almost anything.  It's entirely possible that the Santa Maria met somebody's contemporary definition of the word "carrack." 

This stuff is, if nothing else, a great cure for insomnia.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.