SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Revell 1/196 USS Constitution questions

7760 views
23 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    November 2005
Revell 1/196 USS Constitution questions
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, May 6, 2005 11:39 AM
This is my first ship model. I decided to start with something small and reasonably inexpensive so that I could afford to screw it up as I learned.

The kit looks reasonable so far. The two hull halves and deck fit together pretty well with just a little sanding. The guns are tiny and removing the flash from them has been tedious, but I think I'm about there.

I'm curious to know what approaches people have taken to upgrading this kit. In particular, the stern is in need of some serious love, as the windows are molded of solid black plastic... I'm also thinking of making my own ratlines from thread to replace the flat plastic ones in the kit, but am not sure how to go about that.

Suggestions gratefully accepted, whether you've built this specific kit or another version of the Constitution.

Ralph
  • Member since
    December 2002
Posted by lenroberto on Friday, May 6, 2005 12:38 PM
Hey Ralph- you came to the right place- most folks on this board are wonderful at providing info on Old Ironsides and sailing ships in general. Much to learn from them.

Just a couple of things I learned:

1. Buy yourself a paint marker from a craft store- white and silver and gold- are particularly helpful with your kit and other ships of the era- very easy to paint the ornamentation on stern , etc

2. John Tilley's suggestion for ratlines is - thread and tie them yourself one at a time- I tried it on my recent Airfix Saint Louis and like he says- you get better and faster at it as you go- and they look great! Not that hard just takes patience.

Just 2 little tips- maybe they can help you- good luck- I 'm sure the other fellas on this board will give you tons of great advice....

-Len

PS- my build review of the bigger 1/96 kit:
http://www.modelingmadness.com/reviews/misc/robertoconst.htm
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, May 6, 2005 1:04 PM
Len,

Thanks for the advice. Your 1/96 write-up is amazing! I'm planning to do just the static rigging, as trying to get all of the running rigging on a ship this small (and my first effort at that) seems too ambitious.

Ralph
  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: 37deg 40.13' N 95deg 29.10'W
Posted by scottrc on Friday, May 6, 2005 2:48 PM
With a ship this small, don't sweat trying to be accurate, just have fun. Try the running rigging, it is what really makes the ship look complete. I have two of these little kits on my bench and the stern drives me nuts. I pretty much build a new one from scratch but then again, I've built about a dozen of these over the years. I like them because I can use them to practice my knot tying.

I cannot stress enough that if this is your first ship, just have fun and do what comes natural. You will enjoy it more. I would use the kits ratlines for now so that you can get used to seeing how they are set up. I would concentrate on rigging the braces instead. It's a "dimensional" thing. These kits, although basic and not that accurate, will teach you where features are dimensionally, so when you get to the point in the hobby where your are kitbashing or scratchbuilding, you can by feel know where certian features go.

Hope to see some pics.

Scott

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Greenville,Michigan
Posted by millard on Friday, May 6, 2005 6:17 PM
Ralph
For your stern windows try cutting them out.Then get some evergreen sq. stock and make the muttin bars.Then use white glue to fill in between the spaces.Let it dry over night and voila windows.

On the ratlines try using the kit deadeyes and glue your shrouds to the back of them.Then I use thin wire for the ratlines. You attach them with CA glue snip them off paint them black and your done.With the wire you can bend them to sag to look more realistic.Plus being quicker.
Rod
  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Virginia
Posted by Mike F6F on Saturday, May 7, 2005 2:48 PM
Ralph,

Scott is right, just have fun. Don't let the rigging discourage you. All ship models are done one step at a time and most steps are very easy.

There are plent of rigging hints all over this forum for you, but I would add a couple of simple ones that I wish I'd known when I started rigging sailing ships.

Don't use a super glue to fasten your rigging. It will flow up and down the thread, gluing it to things you don't want glued together and make a tangled mess. Use white glue. It takes a little longer to set, but doesn't make a mess. If you spill some on the deck, water will take it off. Don't be in a hurry to trim away the excess thread when you finish a line, let the glue set up. You'll be happier when it is finished. White glue won't discolor the tan running lines like a super glue will either.

The other real problem is attemping to make the lines look tight without warping the plastic spars with too much tension on the threads. A method I've used, with success although there are lots of others, is to rig the line somewhat "backwards."

Start at the deck, not on the mast. Tie the line to the deck fitting and put a drop of white glue to hold it. Then lead the line upward. At each point where the line passes through a fitting, or stops moving in that current direction, put just enough tension on the thread to appear tight and then glue the point with a drop of white glue. Keep the slight tension on the line until the glue sets up. Take the line to its next point and glue it there. This insures that the line will continue to appear tight from the deck to your first turn without any more "pull" being required and regardless of how many more directional changes the line must make. This keeps the spars from being warped as you would try to pull on a entire length of line from deck to mast top to tighten everything all at once.

White glue also dries clear and if requires any blending with a painted surface a drop of clear flat, or gloss, usually does the trick.

Hope you can find this helpful.

Remember have fun.

Cheers,

Mike

Mike

 

"Grumman on a Navy Airplane is like Sterling on Silver."

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, May 7, 2005 9:29 PM
Folks,

Thanks again for all of the great advice! I have ordered some of the "paint pens", which I've never heard of before now but which seem like a great idea. I'll also keep the rigging suggestions in mind, as I imagine that keeping everything reasonably tight is a challenge.

I also learned the hard way this afternoon that, once you have run Copper paint through your airbrush, it takes an incredible amount of time, turpentine, and shaking to clean all of those metal flakes out of the system. However, the hull bottom looks good, so once it's cured for a few days I'll be masking off the top part and the white strip at the gun ports.

Pictures will follow when there's something to see. How do I insert pictures directly into the forum here (rather than linking to them somewhere else)?

Ralph
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Sunday, May 8, 2005 9:17 AM
There are quite a few Constitution kits out there with Revell labels. I assume the one we're talking about here is the old original Revell kit - the one with the Andrew Jackson figurehead. If so, it's an "oldie but goodie." Here's some information on it, gleaned primarily from Thomas Graham's Remembering Revell Model Kits.

It was originally released in 1956 - the very first sailing ship kit Revell made (excluding a series of tiny ones the company had taken over from Gowland Creations a few years earlier). In its original form it had "shroud-and-ratline" assemblies made from plastic-coated thread; the modeler was supposed to lay them over a printed pattern and cut them to length. (Revell invented that system, which Airfix later copied. I fervently wish the idea had never occurred to anybody; those things were almost impossible to rig in any acceptable way.) It's been reissued many times. Mr. Graham lists reissue dates of 1958, 1968, 1973, and 1977, but his data stops at the end of the seventies. The kit has reappeared several times since then, and I believe it's still in the Revell/Monogram catalog. A couple of those reissues contained vacuum-formed plastic sails.

For its age it's a great kit. The basic shapes are right, and such details as the figurehead and the steering wheel are about as fine and precise as can be expected on such a small scale. Even in those early days of the plastic kit industry Revell was figuring out ingenious ways to outdo the competition - in this case wood kits from companies like Marine Models, Boucher, and A.J. Fisher. Those firms offered pre-carved, solid hulls, and for ships like the Constitution they invariably provided "dummy cannons" - cast lead or turned brass stubs of gun barrels that were to be plugged into holes drilled in the sides of the hull. Such fittings invariably looked phoney. Revell provided full-length guns with carriages, which sat on little shelves cast integrally with the hull halves.

The kit does have its limitations - some due to its age, some to the small scale. Ag918w35 has identified one of them: the opaque "windows" in the transom and the quarter galleries. Frankly, if I were building this kit I wouldn't worry about the windows. Replacing the ones in the transom with clear plastic (and, perhaps, white decal stripes for the framing) would be practical, but the subtle curves of the quarter gallery windows would be a real challenge. My inclination would be to paint the "glass" areas a very dark blue (to distinguish it from the black paint of the hull), apply several coats of clear gloss to them, and leave it at that. Those windows are mighty small; I suspect few observers would notice that they weren't transparent.

A more serious problem is the hatch in the middle of the spar deck - the one under the ship's boat. This is supposed to be a big open space.

The first frigates had separate forecastles and quarterdecks. By the late eighteenth century they were fitted with removable "gangways" between the quarterdeck and the forecastle, so men could get from one to the other without climbing up and down ladders. Eventually the gangways became permanent, and as the years went by they got wider. By the 1790s, when the Constitution was built, the gangways had become so wide that the quarterdeck, the forecastle deck and the gangways were to all intents and purposes one full-length deck, which came to be called the "spar deck." What had been the space between the gangways now amounted to a large hatch, spanned by permanently-mounted beams on which the ship's boats and spare spars were stowed.

That hatch, in other words, should be a big opening in the spar deck; the main deck should be visible through it. Revell, if I remember correctly, represented the hatch as a solid surface, with the beams cast in relief. (Three years later Revell released its H.M.S. Victory, which represented the waist-and-beam arrangement much more accurately. The Revell designers were learning, and getting more adventurous, as they went along. When they did their big 1/96 Constitution, in 1965, they included a full-length main deck - and clear windows for the transom and quarter galleries.)

What should be done about this problem? One approach would be to paint the "hatch" black and forget it. (Revell was a little parsimonious in providing only one boat to sit on the beams. There should be three or four. Some additional boats from spare parts box would help hide the hatch.) A more accurate solution would be to cut the hatch out and build a section of main deck underneath - just as much of that deck as can be seen through the hatch. Evergreen grooved styrene sheet would be a good material for that purpose. To be really accurate that section of deck should have a couple of hatches (probably covered with gratings) in it. But even if a simple section of planked deck - perhaps with some ladders leading down to it from the spar deck - were visible, that would be a huge improvement - and not much of it could be seen around the boats.

On small-scale models like this, shrouds and ratlines do present a problem. Sounds like ag918w35 got one of the recent reissues of the kit, which, I believe, include injection-molded plastic "shrouds and ratlines." Those have the virtue of being easier to handle than the original plastic-coated thread ones, but look even worse.

Lenroberto is right: rigging ratlines to scale is far easier than most newcomers think. On a small-scale model like this one, though, you might want to consider an old trick that's sort of a compromise between the hokey Revell approach and absolute authenticity.

Rig the shrouds first. Then arm yourself with a spool of the finest black thread you can find, and the smallest needle you can find. Cut a piece of white card (index cards work great) to fit between the channel (where the bottom ends of the shrouds are secured) and the top. Rule a series of lines on the card, to represent where the ratlines go. (On that scale the spacing theoretically should be about 1/16". If that's a little too daunting, apply the IFF [International Fudge Factor] and put them a little farther apart.) Put the card behind the shrouds. Shove the needle through the first shroud where the lowest ratline is to start. (If you're right-handed, you'll probably find it easier to start on the right and work your way to the left, at first.) Shove the needle through each shroud in turn, being careful to follow the pencil line. When you're through, put a tiny drop of white glue on the first and last intersections of shrouds and ratline. Let the glue dry, then snip off the excess ratline with a razor blade or a pair of small scissors. (That's the nerve-wracking part. If you snip one of the shrouds by accident you'll have to start over.)

As lenroberto said, there's a steep but short learning curve in ship model rigging. The first couple of ratlines will take a while; resist the temptation to heave the model across the room. By the tenth ratline or thereabouts, you'll be wondering why people fuss so much about ratlines.

One easy tip on rigging. The rigging of a real sailing ship consists of hundreds - even thousands - of lines, in a huge variety of sizes. Few modelers would try to reproduce all the standing and running rigging of the Constitution on the scale of that Revell kit (though it's been done). But the more different sizes of thread you use, the better. Generally speaking, the higher up on the masts a line is, the finer it should be. If you incorporate five or six different thread diameters in your model, you'll be much more pleased with the results than if you just use two or three.

Hope all this 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
    July 2003
  • From: Dahlonega, Georgia
Posted by lizardqing on Sunday, May 8, 2005 10:36 AM
Raplh, I built that same kit no to long ago myself as my first ship. Just went with OOB as a learning experience more than anything. Like everyone said, just have fun with it. I do remember having some issues with the rat lines lining up right though.
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, May 9, 2005 4:10 PM
So far this has been quite helpful. I just ordered a copy of "Rigging Period Ship Models: A Step-by-Step Guide to the Intracacies of the Square-Rig" from Barnes & Noble and am looking forward to trying to decipher it.

I have managed to pick up a few things about rigging in the past few days, partly from this list and partly from O'Brien's Master and Commander, which has a scene where a sailor describes the main parts of the ship to the landlubber doctor. It's now pretty clear to me what forestays, backstays and the shrouds do as far as keeping the masts in place, and how they took advantage of the lines to hold triangular sails between the masts. I'm somewhat less clear on the details of all of the running rigging, but I agree with several of the posters above that adding some of that would be a good idea.

I also want to thank jtilley for the excellent description of this specific model. I wondered about the space in the middle of the spar deck, assuming that it was supposed to contain hatches, but his description made it crystal clear. I think that for this go-round I'm just going to paint it black and hope any viewers spend their time looking at the other details :-)

Ralph
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:08 AM
Thought I'd provide a quick update on progress so far. The Rigging Period Ship Models book arrived last week and looks great! It has numerous detailed (and isolated) pictures of the rigging, blocks, etc. I'm still working out some of the details of the purposes of the various lines, but it's starting to make more sense.

Good news is that the hull is now painted. Bad news is that I forgot to wash the plastic before spraying it and as a result several patches of the copper bottom came up when I pulled off the masking tape for the top part. Guess it's back to the airbrush again this weekend to touch up the problems.

Looking at the kit again I see that I got exactly one (1) size of thread in each of black and tan. Given that lines such as the mainstay are huge while the topgallant stays are obviously thinner I can understand the advice about using multiple sizes of thread. Any suggestions as to the actual sizes of these lines and corresponding sizes of thread to simulate them?

Ralph
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 9:19 AM
The standards for varying the sizes of rigging lines are very elaborate and very technical. The basic rule, though, is: the higher up the mast, the finer the line.

It's been a long time since I've actually looked at a newly-reissued Revell kit, but my guess is that the line that came with it isn't very good. The subject of rigging materials is a complicated one, on which different modelers have different opinions. I happen to like silk thread, but it's hard to find. If you don't mind waiting a few days for mail service, a good approach might be to order some line that's intended for ship models. Two good sources are Bluejacket ( www.bluejacketinc.com ) and Model Expo ( www.modelexpoonline.com ). The Bluejacket nylon stuff comes in extremely small diameters, and I've been impressed with the appearance of the stuff Model Expo sells in its Model Shipways kits. If you order the three or four smallest sizes in both black and hemp-color, you'll probably have enough thread to do a nice job of rigging that model.

One other golden rule of ship model rigging: when in doubt, err on the small side. It's unlikely, on that tiny scale, that you'll make the rigging look too fine. But the wide variety of line diameters will make a big difference to the overall appearance of the model.

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

  • Member since
    January 2005
Posted by ggatz on Thursday, May 19, 2005 7:17 AM
Here is an example of the tables for rigging sizes..

http://www.all-model.com/wolfram/PAGE84.html

As you can see, trying to be 100% accurate would be a real challenge at 1/196

The linked site is an excellant resource for model rigging..

As with the Petterson book, you can get a good feel for what ' looks' right, and if it looks right ,it is right , as far as ship modeling goes..

As jtilley suggested; four diameters of black and tan ( hemp, etc. ) should serve you well.. Use the largest diameter for the lower stays, and running rigging; use the next largest for the topmasts and yards, the next for the top gallant & etc...

Check out Mr. Tilley's Hancock, for an example of what good model rigging should look like..
http://gallery.drydockmodels.com/album194

Of course, getting that level of detail at 1/196, may not be that practical, but you can really get a sense of proportion of the overall rigging..


To a dog, every day is Saturday. ' Roger Miller '
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, May 20, 2005 1:02 PM
Great sites! According to the notes, the Hancock is 1/128, or not quite twice my scale, so I'm going to use that as my excuse when mine comes up a little short. The notion of using varying size thread seems to be a great idea, as it really sends home the notion that some of the lines are holding the whole main mast in place while others are just to lift the royal yard into place.
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, June 2, 2005 11:47 AM
Not that anybody is holding their breath, but I've got some early progress photos to show at my project page:

http://shipmodel0.tripod.com/revell_1196_uss_cons/

As you can see, I had some problems with the copper paint flaking off under the masking tape, partly because I was remiss in not ensuring a clean surface before applying the copper layer. Also, the hull has not actually been glued together yet as I still have to paint the inside of the deck rails (they're going to be green, as the real ship is currently), but it's getting close.
  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: 37deg 40.13' N 95deg 29.10'W
Posted by scottrc on Thursday, June 2, 2005 1:27 PM
Looking good. I'm building the 1/150 United States right now just to see if I can put it in a shadow box or not. Also, Jeff accepted it in the Destroyer Group Build since he included frigates (ie: I'm sure he meant the steel kind that carry missles, hee hee) in the list. Maybe you would like to join us? Then I wouldn't be the only windjammer in the group.

My experience with copper is that it will not lift when pulling the masking tape if you put a coat of primer on it first.

Scott

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, June 2, 2005 1:36 PM
Yes, the primer idea sounded like a good one, but only in retrospect. I'm hoping I'll be able to fix up the few small spots without inducing any new problems.

I'm interested in the destroyer group - do you have a link, the name, the expiration date, or any of that?

Ralph
  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Lacombe, LA.
Posted by Big Jake on Thursday, June 2, 2005 2:33 PM
AG,

On cleaning your airbrush, I only use Acetone for a thinning and cleaning. it has several great points and one bad one. Do not use with Waterbased paints.

1. Evaporates fast, quickens' drying time.
2. Removes ALL dried paint from a surface.
3. Cleans all paint bottles and lids really well.
4. A gallon only costs $9.00 at Wal-Mart.
5. Burns really well do not use around open flame or sparks!

Jake

 

 

  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: 37deg 40.13' N 95deg 29.10'W
Posted by scottrc on Thursday, June 2, 2005 2:43 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by ag918w35

Yes, the primer idea sounded like a good one, but only in retrospect. I'm hoping I'll be able to fix up the few small spots without inducing any new problems.

I'm interested in the destroyer group - do you have a link, the name, the expiration date, or any of that?

Ralph


Since you used an airbrush, you should be able to spray the areas that need touching up without any problem. If it was me, I would still prime those areas first.

Our group build thread is in this forum a few lines down from this thread.
http://www.finescale.com/fsm/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=42823

Scott

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Thursday, June 2, 2005 10:30 PM
Looks mighty nice so far. It's hard to believe this is your first sailing ship.

I'll take the liberty of offering one small suggestion. When you touch up the copper paint, you may want to spray the rudder hinges (actually called "gudgeons") copper as well. Painting them black implies that they were iron. Shipwrights discovered pretty quickly that when iron and copper are placed in proximity of each other and submerged in salt water, the result is and electrolytic reaction that dissolves the copper. (In the first experiments with copper sheathing they used iron nails to hold the sheets to the hull. The copper dissolved in the vicinity of the nail heads, and the sheets fell off.) The rudder pintles and gudgeons, and all fastenings that came into contact with the sheathing plates, had to be made of copper. I suspect the original pintles and gudgeons, like the other copper components of the ship, were made by Paul Revere.

The boxtop painting is interesting. That painting originally appeared on the big 1/96 scale Revell kit. Both that kit and the picture depict the ship in her 1814 configuration - with lower bulwarks and a plain "billet head" for a figurehead. The 1/196 kit represents the ship in the 1830s, with the Andrew Jackson figurehead. (I rather suspect that none of the folks currently running Revell knows the difference.) I hope the instruction sheet still includes the story of that figurehead. It's quite a tale - though it's been embellished so much in the past 175 years or so that it's impossible to know which version to believe.

It's fairly well established that (a) Commodore Jesse Elliot, the superintendent of the Boston Navy Yard and a loyal Jacksonian Democrat, had the figurehead installed as a tribute to the president; and (b) a disgruntled Whig rowed out to the ship in the middle of a storm, sawed Jackson's head off, and absconded with it in a gunny sack. Just what happened after that depends on which source one consults. One version has it that the guy walked into the White House a couple of days later with the sack in hand and slammed the head down on Jackson's desk, whereupon Jackson glared at him for a minute and then said, "shut the door, sit down, and tell me how you did it." A variation on that one says Jackson called in a secretary and said "give this man an appointment in the Postmaster's Office." I prefer the third version: that throughout the rest of the Jackson administration the head was passed around among various Whig party organizations, which used it as a centerpiece on their banquet tables and "held Bacchanalian orgies over it."

At any rate, Commodore Elliot ordered a second, nearly identical figurehead carved for the Constitution and stationed armed guards around it. She now has a simple billet head again. The first Jackson figurehead, minus head, is, if I remember right, in the Museum of the City of New York. The second one, intact, is at the Naval Academy Museum in Annapolis.

I don't blame the Revell designers of 1956 for wanting to include that figurehead in the kit. And it's actually a pretty nice replica of the original - considering how small it is.

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

  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: 37deg 40.13' N 95deg 29.10'W
Posted by scottrc on Friday, June 3, 2005 7:30 AM
Good point Jake about the Acetone. It is a must if your using metalic laquers, enamels, and oils.

Scott

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Derry, New Hampshire, USA
Posted by rcboater on Friday, June 17, 2005 12:23 PM
If you're interested in learning a bit about how all those lines of running rigging are used, there are two good books you might want to look for:

Seamanship in the Age of Sail- This big book explains all of the standard maneuvers executed aboard a man of war form the Napoleonic period. This is a big, hardbound book.

Eagle Seamanship: This is a trade paperback style of book- it is the "manual" of sorts on how to sail the US Coast Guard's Barque EAGLE. The book is issued to every cadet at the USCG Academy.

Either book will give you an understanding of how and why the running rigging is used.
Both books may be available from Libraries. (I think both books were published by the Naval Institue press.)

-Bill

Webmaster, Marine Modelers Club of New England

www.marinemodelers.org

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Saturday, August 6, 2005 3:07 PM
I'm "replying" to this thread in order to get it moved to the first page of the Forum. The topic has come up in a recent post.

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

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, August 6, 2005 3:22 PM
And will again and again, there is so much to learn, JT and you are a fountain of info, please clear it with us first time ship builders before you go on holiday or other extended leaveBig Smile [:D]
I will hopefully have some images of the Victory hull soon, just waithing on some paint to arrive.
Looks good so far, it's tougher than it looks though,lol
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.