Opinions of the Imai/ERTL Cutty Sark and Constitution?

Roberto, you are right, although at the time, it was just Monogram, not Revelogram.

Well, I looked at the instructions for the smaller Monogram United States and the larger Imai/Monogram United States and except for a few upgrades, they are the same.

The differences are in the details such as belaying pins, grating and using the lower gun deck carriage/rigging setup from the larger kit for the upper deck setup on the smaller.  Still a nice kit, but no where in the same league of the Imai Constitution. Bummer

Steve

The Constitution has Imai written all over it and the United States has Revell written all over it. The wood grain and molding overall reminds me a lot of both the Quick Build and the bigger 1/96 Constitution.

After looking at the pictures, my desire for the Imai Connie has increased. More so since I botched my current build a bit (first time scratch building chain links was a bit disastrous!) Thanks a lot for sharing, Steve.

John,

I have to agree with you about the differences in the Constitution and the US kits and yes, the hull is one piece. I wonder if there was enough demand for the Constitution that Monogram and Imai felt they needed another kit and rushed the United States. As this was the late 70's maybe both companies felt the need to capitalize on a perceived need from sailing ship modelers.

Wasn't this about the time that Revell stopped producing sailing ship models? I have never seen the Monogram smaller United States kit, although I believe it was also an one piece hull? And I also wonder how close the 1/120 and the smaller kit are to one another? Again, I am not sure when the Monogram United States came out in the market originally.

I will check the kits and instructions tomorrow but I believe the Imai Constitution and United States share the same mast and yard parts so that might be another clue that they rushed this kit to market.

Steve

They're air ports, providing (not much) ventilation and light to the officers' staterooms on the berth deck. At least the ones in the after part of the ship are. I think the flanges may be a bit over-done.

What are those 6 bolt flange things below the gun ports?

I'm surprised at the differences. The Constitution kit has countersunk "planking seams"; on the United States they're raised lines. And is the hull of the U.S. in one piece?

It looks like the two masters were made by different people. And I gather the U.S. doesn't have the raised quarterdeck - which was the big difference between the two ships.

I don't think there's much room for doubt: the big Revell kit has more detail than either of these. But the Imai Constitution has the potential to be turned into a first-rate scale model. (I'm not so sure about the U.S.) If, heaven forbid, I was choosing between them, I'd be heavily influenced by the size question. Would I have room for the Revell one? I don't know the answer to that; I'd have to talk it over with my wife. My fading eyesight makes the bigger kit more attractive. So do the transparent windows, the full-length gun barrels, and the War of 1812 configuration. (The Imai kit seems to represent her as she was in the late 1960s or 1970s. At that time she didn't look like she had at any time during her active service. And she doesn't look like that now.)

Since I had some pictures, I thought I would add the Imai/Monogram USS United States. If you want more, just let me know and i"ll add them. You can see the major differences are really in the hull. With the enclosed bow she looks bulkier and a bit more muscular. The hull is also one piece instead of two.

There is actually a lower and upper deck on this kit with no grating around the boat skids. I'll have to pull the kit out to verify that though.

I have a hunch that Imai used the 1858 repair photo that i posted earlier as a basis for this model, but again, it is just a hunch.

Enjoy,

Steve

My kit has a wicked warp on the starboard stern area that I will have to deal with when I build her.

The gunport lids are molded on.

The stern boat davits are molded on also.

Bill,

It is a fine kit and as an Imai kit, they actually made the kits fairly easy to build and the fits are really good. There are definitely some things I would improve on when I build this. Actually you cannot see well enough through the grating to see below so even making a deck underneath there would be redundant.

The Constitution and Cutty Sark come up on evilBay at times, it is just finding a decent price.

Dave,

I agree again, it is a beauty and you and Bill could do a really nice job on either or both! Also, I forgot to add that on the Constitution, Imai does add some single blocks but not near enough and no double or triple blocks. So I would replace them anyway.

Steve

For the seemingly small decrease in scale of 25%, the difference in volume is cubed for a difference of almost 50% from the original. That equates to work, time etc.

This may well be the answer to those bigger models being so time consuming.

David, I completely agree about the Cutty Sark, in fact I am going to look for one. I believe Dr. Tilley opined earlier that the Academy kit may be the same one. I'll give you a running start though finding one first!

Steve, that thing's a beauty!  Definitely has IMAI written all over it....I have to get one.  And Probably the Cutty Sark, too.

Dave

I know in the start of this I expressed the opinion that the Revell 1/96 Constitution compared favorably based on a few reviews of the Imai, since I've never built that kit. One versus the other I would probably still tend that way.

But wow, that is a very good looking model! I think it looks to have the making of a fine Connie as well. Certainly would be equal to or above my skill level.

I cant see a valid reason to build a complete gun deck, just the middle section under the boat beams if it doesn't come with that already.

Continued

Sorry about this last picture, I do not want to take the sprues out of the bags until I am ready to built this, since I would rather not lose anything. I am trying to show the lower cannons.

As promised, here are the photos of the Imai/Monogram USS Constitution 1/120 scale. As we discussed earlier, the molding is up to Imai's usual standards. The coppering and graining is beautiful if a bit overdone. The kit is based on the Constitution in her present (1970's) configuration.

The gun deck is absent and the cannon are molded as carriage and barrel together as they did with their Golden Hind kit. There are indented boxes for cannon placement and gun ports. If the boxes upset the purists in us, then you could either close the ports or cut the boxes out and scratch a gun deck. The upper cannon are molded seperately.

The mast are all one piece and the yards have the stuns'l yards extended as on the Cutty Sark.

The deck has the same issue as we discussed earlier on the Cutty Sark.

The windows are all molded in so again, either drill out or paint.

Steve

The Wikipedia page says one of the networks has bought Philbrick's book on Custer's Last Stand with the intention of making it into a ten-part miniseries. And Bunker Hill is to be made into a movie, with Ben Affleck directing.

I do hope Mr. Affleck can make a better movie about that battle than that gawdawful mess, "Sons of Liberty," that aired on TV not long ago. It wouldn't take much.

Yes you are right. I didn't know he wrote about Little Big Horn or the Wilkes Expedition. Let me ammend my comment to say that he's a great American Historian. I guess my implied comment is that it's often better to know a lot about something as opposed to a little about everything, which apparently is an affliction on me.

Oh and one other thing. The marital infidelities I referred to were on my side of the family, not his.

I think Mr. Philbrick's range is remarkably broad. He's written about the Pilgrims, the Battle of Bunker Hill, the Wilkes Expedition, Custer's Last Stand, the history of Nantucket Island, and the wreck of the Essex. I have trouble thinking of another author who's taken on such a range of diverse subjects - in such a short time.

My nearest brush with a famous nautical scholar came when I was a freshman in high school. My parents took me on a vacation trip to Washington, DC, and of course I made a beeline for the Hall of Maritime Enterprise at the Smithsonian. I asked one of the guards if it might be possible to speak with Howard I. Chapelle. The guard said he was sure Mr. Chapelle would be happy to see me, and called his office. Chapelle had just left for the day, so the guard told me to try again the next day. I got there bright and early - to discover that Chapelle had left on vacation.

Several people who knew him have assured me that Chapelle undoubtedly would have treated me like an important guest; that he was always happy to meet young people who were interested in ships. Well, I came close. He died a few years later.

The Wikipedia entry for Philbrick says he has books about the Battles of Saratoga and Yorktown in the works. I'll certainly look forward to them. And to the movie version of In the Heart of the Sea - which, as I understand it, is now due in December.

Nate Philbrick is a great scholar of a very limited range of subjects, for which I respect him greatly. He wrote the book on the Essex sinking. By a series of events of marital infidelity and so forth, he is a distant cousin of mine. 15 generations on Nantucket- Comstock/ Macy/ Coffin and the other usual suspects.

When I did my one admittedly short research into the Globe mutiny at the Nantucket Maritime Museum, he'd been in earlier that day to look at a couple of the same documents. In the shadow of greatness.

docidle

Bill,

Which book was this? I would love to read it if possible.

Steve

Reviewed by me in the Ready Room (sort of).

Arnie,

Do you know if the term originated in the Royal Navy or French Navy and was later incorporated into the American Navy?

Steve

Derived from brigantine, which apparently was the primary kind of ship used for "jails". You got sent to the Brig(antine).

Also note used only by the Navy and Marine Corps, the army and air force sent their prisoners to the stockade, both terms still used today.

Bill,

Which book was this? I would love to read it if possible.

Speaking of Wiki, I was doing an Upper Division class on the American Civil War and on the first paper, 80% of the students not only used Wiki but copied the entry verbatim. It was rather interesting seeing so many papers exactly the same. The Internet version of Cliff notes being used unwisely.

Steve

Naval officers are a varied lot in terms of their college educations; wardrooms having a healthy mix of English, History, Literature majors among the BBAs, Engineers, and the like.

So, the topic of naval lingo will crop up in bull sessions, or in those quiet spots between tasks.

Having heard--and participated in--many of these, I ascribe to the notion that the verb came first, that naval miscreants were "brigged."  Whether that comes from a sense of "razee-ing" the seaman from a full ship to something cut down to less; or from being put among brigands, I've no firm answer.

The way English will transmogrify verbs into nouns is far too well demonstrated to fuss much over.

That, and the verb sense is still in use, too.

Oh it's probably something that diminishes in the face of the fact that there's even a willing audience.

I work in a 1876 building, where certain events in 1906 San Francisco happened right across the street.

General Funston blowing up buildings etc.

Probably two or three guided tours stop under my window every hour during tourist season.

Incredible stuff, mostly sort of kind of maybe a little right.

But I enjoy the fact that folks come from all over the world to stand below my window.

Just don't call it Frisco.

Yeah but in the defense of that, Steve, I usually find Wiki pretty useful when the footnotes are fairly complete.

Speaking of, Dr. Tilley is in the bibliography of a book I just read.

John,

That is both amazing and so sad at the same time. Makes me wonder who gave the guide that information or if they used their mind numbing intellect to come to that conclusion!?

I reckon they didn't know nothing about birthing no babies...... Bad pun I know, but I couldn't help myself.

Bill, I agree that using one of the smaller Revell kits and scratching a Receiving Ship would make a very interesting model.

Steve

With my very own ears I once heard a seaman/guide on board the Constitution solemnly inform a tour group that the berth deck was called that because the sailors' wives were allowed on board in harbor nd that was the deck on which they had babies.

Gawd help us all.

The Internet never lies....... Wink wink, nod nod.....

I'm not contemplating a prison hulk, a receiving ship, a powder hulk or any other such beast in the near future as a subject, but it would be an interesting use of one of the smaller scale Revell ships.

Now a Liberty as a cannery in Alaska, hmmm.

I had to search out the histories of all the USN ships that were in commission between 1815 and 60, for a chapter in a reference book that the Conway Maritime press planned but never published. That was quite a few years ago, but I certainly don't recall any reference to a USN vessel being used as a prison. I don't think the person who wrote that Wikipedia article knew what he/she was talking about. The British used plenty of former ships of the line for prison hulks. There wasn't any connection, so far as I know, between the brig rig and the use of the word to refer to an on-board jail. And it's not an American term; the British used it - and still do.

That's the trouble with Wikipedia. Nobody really checks out the credentials of the authors.