SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Airfix royal sovereign 1/168 ?

9447 views
7 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November 2005
Airfix royal sovereign 1/168 ?
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, April 30, 2005 2:08 AM
I'm really new at modeling and I've got some questions here. I've heard there is a airfix royal sovereign (with listed scale of 1/168) out there, has anyone dealed with it? How would you rate it? I think royal sovereign and HMS victory is from the same period and are both 1st rate ship-o-line. What is the difference between those two? Is there other good plastic model of royal sovereign out there which is about the same size? How does it compare to HMS victory 1/146 by revell germany? Any help would be greatly apreciated, Thanks!
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, April 30, 2005 5:12 AM
The difference is (iirc) about 150 years of warship development. Royal Sovreign (c. 1640?) has a "galleon" look with a long beakhead and multiple stern decks. Victory (in a different scale so both models are about the same size) is much "stubbier" with a lower stern.

Airfix also made "HMS Prince" from about 1700 to show the transition between the types. The three models made a very interesting timeline of sailing warships

Tom
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Saturday, April 30, 2005 6:28 AM
The Royal Sovereign was launched in 1637, the Prince in 1670, and the Victory in 1765. Models of the three of them would do a good job of illustrating the history of the sailing ship of the line.

The Royal Sovereign (originally named the Sovereign of the Seas was one of the most elaborately decorated ships in history. Her hull was virtually encrusted with gilded carvings, from the figurehead (an equestrian statue of King Charles I) through a "frieze" of heraldic carvings along her bulwarks to the spectacular carved figures on her transom. She's always represented a challenge to ship modelers.

The Airfix kit was one of the first sailing ships the company made. (I believe the Endeavour may have been the first, but I'm not sure about that.) It came out sometime in the early sixties. I built it several times when I was younger, but I haven't seen it for years. My recollection is that it was a basically sound kit in terms of hull shape, spar proportions, etc., but pretty basic by modern standards. The Airfix moldmakers made a valiant attempt to reproduce the carved decorations, but the results were sort of blobby. With some extra work on the deck details and the rigging, and a careful paint job, it could be turned into a nice model.

The "Airfix Classic" range of sailing ships was relatively small (compared to Revell's and Heller's), but pretty good - and the kits got better over the years. The Airfix H.M.S. Prince that Ossian mentioned is a really nice kit, with much crisper detail than the Royal Sovereign. I think my favorite of the Airfix kits, though, is the Wasa. That one was designed with the collaboration of the Wasa Museum in Sweden, and has some of the nicest "carved" ornamentation the plastic kit industry has yet produced. My recollection is that there were nine other kits in the series: Endeavour, Revenge, Discovery, Great Western, Cutty Sark, Bounty, Golden Hind, Mayflower, and St. Louis. Maybe some other forum participants can remember some I've omitted. (I'm not counting the series of tiny sailing ships from the fifties.)

The big problem with the Airfix sailing warship kits, from the standpoint of the serious scale modeler, was that the company took the chicken's way out when it came to the guns on the lower decks. On all but the weather decks the gunports were represented by recessed squares, with holes in their middles to receive stubby parts representing the gun barrels. In the earlier kits, such as the Royal Sovereign and the Victory, the recesses were only about 1/32" deep, and the results looked pretty phony. As the years went by the recesses got deeper; those of the Wasa are deep enough that if you squinted and the light wasn't too good you could convince yourself that there actually were holes in the sides. Two solutions to the problem were available: glue all the gunport lids shut, or cut out the ports, install some sort of deck inside them, and fit them with guns from the spares box or the aftermarket.

Revell took a different approach to the problem. The first Revell sailing ship, the U.S.S. Constitution (the 18" version, originally released in 1956 and still on the market), had a little integrally-molded shelf inside each gunport, on which the modeler was to mount a full-length gun with an integrally-molded carriage. By 1956 standards that was quite sophisticated. (The wood kit companies were using solid hulls and "dummy guns," rather like the Airfix approach.)

The Revell and Airfix H.M.S. Victory kits demonstrate that same difference, with a twist. The Airfix kit (still on the market) has full-length guns and carriages only on the forecastle, on the quarterdeck, and in the waist, where the carriages are visible. The ports for all the other guns are in the form of shallow recessed squares, with "dummy guns" plugged into them. The modeler does have the option of gluing the port lids shut. Revell provides full-length guns for the full length of the upper deck. Most of the ports on the middle and lower decks are molded shut. A few of them, though, are open and have little shelves molded behind them, and full-length guns with carriages.

In my personal opinion the Revell kit is marginally better. It's a little older and smaller, but the detail on some of the parts is really remarkable. The hull planking of the real ship, for instance, is quite elaborate. Some of the planks are cut in the "anchor stock" pattern, with tapering ends. Revell's reproduction of the hull planking is a little heavy-handed (it's an awfully small model), but a touch of sandpaper and a careful paint job would give an excellent result. Airfix's rendition of the planking, though not bad, is coarser and more simplified.

The Airfix kit has another problem that would be difficult to fix. One feature of the Victory that everybody who's seen her remembers is the bow. It takes the form of a series of subtly-curved wooden rails that sweep up artistically to the figurehead. Airfix did a good job on the figurehead itself (better than Revell did), but somehow managed to make an utter mess of the bow structure. The error is hard to describe verbally, but instantly obvious if you compare the kit to a photo or a set of plans. The whole structure of the bow is too low. The figurehead sits almost one deck lower than it should, and the curvature of the headrails is a travesty. Revell simplified the bow structure a bit, but got the basic shapes right.

One other point. I don't know who at Revell started the claim that the kit is on 1/146 scale, but it isn't. It's considerably smaller than that. Another member of this forum measured some of the parts against a set of plans and came up with the figure 1/220. I think that's about right. At any rate, the Airfix kit is quite a bit bigger. In those days (the late fifties and sixties) manufacturers tended to put their ship kits on scales that made them fit standard-sized boxes.

Regular participants in this forum know that I have a tendency to get long-winded about stuff like this. This post has gone on too long. Hope it helps a little. Good luck. It's a great hobby.

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

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Switzerland
Posted by Imperator-Rex on Saturday, April 30, 2005 7:50 AM
Speaking of sailing ships, one could also check out Heller's models, which in my opinion are better than the two you mentioned...
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Saturday, April 30, 2005 9:41 PM
I tend to agree with Imperator-Rex, but it behooves us to be careful with generalities. Heller's H.M.S. Victory is generally - and in my opinion correctly - regarded as one of the finest plastic sailing ships ever released. Several of the company's other sailing ships are almost as good. (I'm thinking, for instance, of the Gorch Fock, Preussen, Pamir, the chebec, and the galley La Reale.) Other Heller kits, unfortunately, are, in terms of historical accuracy, disasters. The firm's moldmakers and designers seem to be enormously talented artisans whose understanding of ships is decidedly sketchy.

One Heller kit that particularly disturbs me is the huge (and expensive) Soleil Royal. In my much younger days I spent an enormous amount of time building it. Then I got a look at some photos of the contemporary model on which the kit was based, and practically dropped my teeth. The Heller designers had made a real mess of the highly-ornamented stern, and the proportions of the underwater hull were ludicrous.
Heller also has a nasty habit of recycling parts for multiple kits. The hulls of the Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria have shown up masquerading as several other vessels (the Nina and Pinta shared the same hull in the first place), and a vaguely sixteenth-century-looking hull has had three or four different piles of ornamentation slapped on it. The Heller rendition of the Oseberg Ship (originally issued with the name "Drakkar Oseberg") is a caricature of the real thing - and has reappeared at least once in an even more ridiculous guise as a "ship of William the Conqueror." (We dissected that one in another thread in this forum.) The Heller "brigantine" is the steam exploration ship Pourquois Pas with its stack, screw, and superstructure removed.

Other companies have pulled similar stunts - or worse - over the years. Revell may be the worst offender. The Revell Germany website is currently announcing that its H.M.S. Beagle is about to be re-released. The thing is a slightly modified version of H.M.S. Bounty. (The real Beagle resembled the real Bounty only in having a hull, a deck, and three masts.) Other utterly phony Revell kits based on recycled parts are the Thermopylae (recycled Cutty Sark), Stag Hound (recycled Flying Cloud), Seeadler (recycled Eagle), and C.S.S.Alabama (recycled U.S.S. Kearsarge).

Unfortunately this sort of thing is common in the world of plastic sailing ship kits. (Perhaps I should say "was," rather than "is." The plastic sailing ship kit is almost dead.) I can't help comparing this phase of the hobby to the world of scale model aircraft. A year or so ago Trumpeter issued a 1/32 F4F Wildcat whose fuselage contours were inaccurate by about 1/2". The modeling fraternity raised such a howl of protest that Squadron Mail Order refused to sell the kit - and Trumpeter took it off the market and redesigned it. But few people seem to mind when major manufacturers release sailing ship kits that bear little or any relation to reality.

On a more positive note, I don't think Airfix has ever been guilty of such behavior. I may be forgetting something, but I can't think of an instance in which an Airfix kit has masqueraded as something it wasn't. All the Airfix sailing ship kits are showing their age nowadays, but with one or two exceptions (their H.M.S. Bounty is pretty awful) they represented the state of the art when they were originally issued.

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

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, April 30, 2005 9:56 PM
Thank you for all of yours responses, you guys are so knowledgable, especially jtilley, i appreciate the time and energy. It is very helpful. I guess I'll go after the airfix royal soverign and revell victory then. I'm definitely not there to tackle a heller victory yet, maybe a heller golden hind or royal louis will do
  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: 37deg 40.13' N 95deg 29.10'W
Posted by scottrc on Monday, May 2, 2005 8:40 AM
I have just about all the Heller kits and also had the Airfix Royal Soveriegn. I never built the Airfix kit but sold it in a garage sale because it was molded so poorly. One thig I cannot stand is a lot of flash and blobs that represent fittings. Heller may have some incaccuracies, and their mark pins may not line up, but at least their molds are clean and I can work with the parts still instead of doing a 100% scratchbuild. The Heller kits by far are good kits. However, be assured they really lack integrity in their prints and in some cases, fit may be off.

I have built the Royal Louis and in my opinion, is my favorite kit in the Heller line. The only thing that I had changed was I used wood masts, especially for the top and royal cross trees since the kits plastic ones are just too weak to hold any taunt lines.

Another kit that is like the Royal Louis, yet is from the late 17th century is the Pheonix. Again, a really fun kit to build and experiment with using multi-mediums such as wood and metal to replace masts and yards.

Scott

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, May 9, 2005 12:36 PM
If you are really new at modelling, unless you have a lot of patience, I would stay away from the ship-of-the-line for your first build. If you go small (Revell-Germany Victory), the level of detail required to build an accurate representation can be intimidating. If you go big, it could take you even longer to build, even box stock. Then, there's the display issue. My Revell Constitution, built while in high school (yeah, I know, many years ago!) took me two years and needed a case that took up more floor space than a large coffee table.

One of my personnal favorites for a starter that is a nice size, decent level of detail, and an attractive display when completed straight out of the box is the Revell Spanish Galleon/Mayflower/Golden Hind/Elizabethan Galleon. (Did I forget any knock-offs?). This model has a good representative 16th-century rigging, and fairly easy assembly. I don't know the history of the kit, but suspect it was originally intended to be a model of the Mayflower II. Since the Mayflower had a basic galleon hull and rig, you can't go too far wrong with one of these kits. The only noticable difference I know of is the stern galleries, some minor ornamentation, and the cannon on the warships.

ERic
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.