SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

New U.S.S. Contitution Build.

28357 views
26 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Pennsylvania (big state)
New U.S.S. Contitution Build.
Posted by Big Ole Bob on Friday, December 30, 2005 2:00 PM

I used to do models a ton as a teen. The 1/96 revell "uss constitution" killed that passion as it was too much in my younger days. 20 years pluss later I'm ready to tackle it again. After a warm up with a smaller HMS victory model which taught me the problems with Enamels Im ready to get working.(Im still rigging the victory now)  I've done a lot a research and I intend to make a photo-blog of some sort as I create the 1/96 behemoah. The only thing that confuses me is how the model of my youth, though the same ship, looks so differnt from the current. I could have sworn that it was the constitution, same length but much narrower Deck with a single piece deck. Though net logs report the model itself has not changed. Detail level is the same as I remember but the model is much more advance than what I remember. More detail is preffered and the way the current model is cast makes it much easier to work with than the one of memory which was 'flash' heaven. Oh well onto the build and questions I have.

First I purchased paints. I chose a more dull and muted color pallent than what was recomended. I couldnt find copper and the use of acrylic 'brass' on the hms victory proved to be too white shiney. So I got gold. Other colors are (recomended paint color = purchased paint color) all paints are Model Master Acrylics.

(black = flat black) white = flat gull grey (tan=wood) green=medium green(brown =leather &raw umber.. I bought both paints to expand the brown pallet) I also purchased "british crimson" a kind of dul burgandy for the cannons and "skin tone" which I now see is no where listed in the instructions but is on the box.

Now for the simple Questions.

A. Glues. Red tube glue Vs Blue tube glue (testors)

 Im trying to advoid vapors but at the same time I want some good strength. I dont want the mast to fall down on me. (yes i will reinforce them inside since there hollow with a wooden dowl rod or some metal)  Also How do these glues react with acrylic paint. I know that they do not bond well with Enamel paints and tend to force enamel paints off of or around the glue joint distorting any bond that uses too much glue to begin with. With items such as cannons this could cause a problem since they bond directly to a painted deck.

B.Acrylic paint gloss and washes.

Acrylic paints are much thinner. Though I used flat enamels on the smaller hms victory model anywhere i had to use multiple layers resulted in a glossy sheen. Does this still occur with acrylic paints? Also enamels had one bad problem. Applying one paint over another could sometimes reactivate it and cause blending. Does this occur with acrylics? My concern is with washes. I SERIOUSLY want to bring out the detail in this model. Heck i wouldnt mind not painting it if I could just bring out all the detail only. However I intend to paint this properly.

Washes... Can you use water to dilute acrylic paints? Or is it best to use a comercial acrylic diluting solution by testors. Also if i need to use "dullcoat" (as described above) could this be used as a diulting solution instead?  Can you dilute acrylic paints for a dark wash to go into a lighter color painted deck or is it better to paint it with the darker color first then to dry brush the lighter color on top with various thicknesses of paint and colors untill you get proper plank look? One cheap effect I used to do was to paint a large item with one color. Then once dry Ild quickly load a darker color on top of it. Then whipe it off with a paper town. This left most of the model higher points the color of the original paint job but any deep crack or crevace was left with the darker (same color but darker tone. often same color mixed with black) color in the detail crevaces. This was easy with the thick enamels but what about acrylics? Do they dry quicker resulting in the inability to do this trick?

Cabbins... Photos show white side cabbins and a wood tone middle cabbin. The model calls for white. I know there is no record of an accurate paint job but which would you choose. the middle cabbin has lots of nice little detail areas. If I can find some small enough scale doll stuff I just might use that instead for the side cabbins. a table and a chair. something other than plain.

I'm going to try to get some brass or metal eyehooks to replace the original plastic ones. Likewise with the block and tackle stuff. At such a small scale Im not a stickler for detail for a bead on a string. The bodys paint job is important to me but so is the rigging. I'll be checking out the book store for books on ship rigging. I also intend to create 'rope winds' to go onto the bulkwar pins. Found a nice web page doccumenting that. Originally for wooden kits, could easily work for a plastic kit.

Only one major question of paint job. I've seen the helm painted the same color as the gun red, but also just plain wood. Which would you guys choose?

Any tips on washes with acrylics for the hull or for the deck planking is extremely welcome. I'm thikning if I can get away with a 'wood' color deck and 'burnt umber' wash. or perhaps a 'wood' wash. Perhaps a dark grey wash for the black bulkheads outside the ship.

One last question. Currently there is a 'red stripe' on the uss constitution. Is the really used a lot these days on models or is it just another one of those 'pick your paint scheme' thing?

Any tips are extremely welcome.

Big ole Bob.

P.S. How do I post photos here?

If you can think it. Then someone has else has also thought of it. Then someone else has tried it. Then someone else tried and completed it. Then someone else tried and proved it CANT BE DONE!
  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Greenville,Michigan
Posted by millard on Friday, December 30, 2005 7:08 PM

Bob

Good luck on your build. Here's a few of my suggestions.If you can get Liquid cement instead of tube glue it works better and not as messy.Testors liquid is good but Ambroid is better. To use it hold your two piece's together you want to glue use a brush and let the glue run down your seam.Hold for a few seconds and it will stay together.Sometimes if you can after you've run the glue down the seam pull the parts slightly apart than squeeze back together.You'll see melted plastic come up from the seam.That's like and automatic filler.All you have to do is sand and the seams filled.Works great on keels.I use CA glue (Super Glue) on small hard to hold parts.Its great and ready to go in a few minutes.If you can get a CA kicker that really helps I put a drop from a brush near the CA and its done.Anywhere you have painted parts you need to scrape the paint off where your going to glue that will help it bond.whether its CA,liquid or tube glue.It dosen't matter whether its acrylic or enamel paint.

When it comes to paint I only use acrylic and artist oils other than the metalizer paints from MM.You can thin the acrylic with water,but I suggest you use distilled water it works better.I always put a dull cote over my paint before I do any washes.That way after you do a wash and you need to use and acrylic cleaner you don't mess the paint up.Personally I'm using more artist oil wash's they flow better for me.

When it comes to posting photos talk to Donnie in our group.He sent me a list of things to do(I really Appreciated that I might say.) Perhaps he'll help you.

This groups great on giving you idea's just find the one's that work best for you.Good luck

Rod

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Madison, Mississippi
Posted by Donnie on Friday, December 30, 2005 8:22 PM
Millard,
This is Donnie. Do you still have that email instructions I sent you?  I created that email at my office and I do not have a copy of that at my home. It will be several days before I get back to my office to send the gentleman the directions I sent you.
If you can find that - just email it back to me. Then I need to get Bobs email and I can send it to him.

Thanks
Donnie

In Progress: OcCre's Santisima Trindad Finished Builds: Linbergs "Jolly Roger" aka La Flore Mantua's Cannone Da Costa Americano linberg's "Cptn Kidd" aka Wappen Von Hamburg Model Shipways 1767 Sultana Midwest Boothbay Lobsterboat (R/C)

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Derry, New Hampshire, USA
Posted by rcboater on Friday, December 30, 2005 8:44 PM
Bob,

Try to get your hands on a copy of "Building Plastic Ship Models" by Les Wilkins.  It is a great book, full of tips for the builder of plastic sailing ships.  The book's featured project is the big Revell COnstitution.
The book is out of print, but is worth hunting down via libraries or used book dealers.  It will answer all of your questions (and many more) better than most of could in a few paragraphs.....


-Bill


Webmaster, Marine Modelers Club of New England

www.marinemodelers.org

 

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Pennsylvania (big state)
Posted by Big Ole Bob on Friday, December 30, 2005 9:12 PM

I wanted to give you guys an idea of my skill level. The 'Victory' I bought off of ebay. It was molded entirely in black. Spars and deck was warped enough to be noticeable. Its an 1982 MPC 22 inch long model.  I really didnt feel the need for high detail on this model having been spoiled by the level seen on the revell constitution years ago. I should have gone that extra mile. I saw the 'jolly roger' on the forum here. a Model with not as good a deail level as this victory and had an AMAZING paint job!  Here's the image link in case it doesnt show up in the post. world wide web.angelfire.com/alt2/robertkalin/VIK.JPG 

More to come. Bob.

If you can think it. Then someone has else has also thought of it. Then someone else has tried it. Then someone else tried and completed it. Then someone else tried and proved it CANT BE DONE!
  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Madison, Mississippi
Posted by Donnie on Friday, December 30, 2005 9:47 PM
You wouldn't be happening to be talkin' about my Jolly Roger - now would you ??? Smile,Wink, & Grin [swg]
Donnie


PS  I am sorry for boasting everybody - actually just kidding everyone - actually I think the other Jolly Roger by cthulhu77 here is going to be really fantastic.


In Progress: OcCre's Santisima Trindad Finished Builds: Linbergs "Jolly Roger" aka La Flore Mantua's Cannone Da Costa Americano linberg's "Cptn Kidd" aka Wappen Von Hamburg Model Shipways 1767 Sultana Midwest Boothbay Lobsterboat (R/C)

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Madison, Mississippi
Posted by Donnie on Friday, December 30, 2005 11:01 PM
Bob,
click on my name in the "post" and you will see that you can email me and I will send you instructions on how to post images.

Donnie

In Progress: OcCre's Santisima Trindad Finished Builds: Linbergs "Jolly Roger" aka La Flore Mantua's Cannone Da Costa Americano linberg's "Cptn Kidd" aka Wappen Von Hamburg Model Shipways 1767 Sultana Midwest Boothbay Lobsterboat (R/C)

  • Member since
    December 2005
Posted by MagicSteve on Saturday, December 31, 2005 12:17 AM

To understand why Constitution is not the same as the boat in Boston is to understand the history of the time.  Constituion had gone through a number refits and modifications in it's service.  The model supposidly represents the boat in 1812, or 15 years from it's launch.  This boat was still very servicable for many years afterward and likely was refitted more than once since 1812.  The exploits of Issac Hull, as laudable as they were, simply were not sufficiently significant to preserve the ship in the 1812 configuration while the ship was still on active duty. 

HMS Victory by comparison is preserved because of some very different conditions that existed at the time.  Trafalgar and Nelson were immensely significant events.  The royal navy had lots of ships, and following Trafalgar, somewhat more than they needed.  Victory was an old ship, 40+ years old at the time, and had gone through a major refit two years before trafalgar.  Economics prevented much renovation following the battle, War prevented the ship from being broken up, and Trafalgar kept her preserved.  Being an older boat, Victory was not a candidate for much active duty after trafalgar, though the prestige of nelson prevented her being neglected.

Anyhow, I too am building the big Constitution.  There are a couple things you should consider early in your construction. 

Are you going to install lights for the cabin.  Without the lights you cannot see much in this and if you do a good job with this one you will not let anyone get close enough to see in this space for fear of doing some considerable damage. 

black pens and markers are great for doing the details on the transom.  you should also invest in a white paint pen, and a gold marker for the same purpose.  Seal everything in with a good dull coat and it should look great.

What type of stand are you going to use.  It is prudent to make sure you have support for anchoring the model down when it is done.  I am currently using the kit supplied stand and it is ugly.  One of my problems is I don't really have a good way to anchor the model when it is done.

You should be looking into anchoring the chains to the hull.  I am using the kit parts but It would have been better for me to scratch fab the chains with wire.

The kit supplied dead eyes are not very good looking.  these could be replaced with small disks of plastic card with three holes drilled in them, rigged up with fine wire.

The deck sections can be glued together prior to installing.  You might consider using holly venere cut into thin strips, outline the edges with pencil prior to gluing to the deck.  What i did was using two slightly different deck shades painting somewhat alternate plancks and outline the planks with black marker.  The result is ok but not great.

You can use a light brushing of artist oils in burnt umber over tan base to give a wood effect.  I did this on the upper masts bow sprit and deck fittings with good effect. I also did this on the seats of the ships boats.  the result there was much nicer than just brown paint.

I added a ship's bell, conspicuously missing in the kit and added a simple belfry.  the bell is the cut off tip of a ball point pen.

To do the ratlins I ditched the kit stuff and built my own using a heavy cord for the shrouds and sewing thread sewn through the shrouds, actually looks good.

I am using lots of bee's wax on the lines which helps, but you may want to experiment with Varnish.  My consern with the bee's wax is that it is quite difficult to maintain a nice even tension on the ratlins when tying the knots.  with the varnish, the varnish would act as an adhesive, eliminating the need to tie the ends.

Start looking for different thicknesses of cord.  You will need them.  The kit supplied stuff is just too light for the heavier lines such as the stays and shrouds.

Kit supplied blocks, look ok to me.  I do a figure 8 when I rig them so I do not have to worry about pulling the ring off the end of them.

I am very happy with how my constitution is comming out considering that it is my first sailing model.  This is a big kit and it is very complex, doing it properly takes many months. 

Overall I would say that this kit is a much better buy than the Heller Victory which is very similar in size.  Both have excellent potential, but the Heller kit is three times the price.

Finally, don't loose the instructions.  Overall they are excellent and if you ever do the Victory, they will be a useful reference

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Pennsylvania (big state)
Posted by Big Ole Bob on Saturday, December 31, 2005 12:41 AM

GLUES

Currently I'm about to attach the preformed ratlines to the hms victory. The question is about the glues used for the atachment. so far Im only clear on 3 things.

CA (basic plastic model glue) is this safe to use on preformed (plastic coated strings not that thick plastic stuff) ratlines to adhere it to the um.. block and tackle? (im new at terms here) on the side of the ship? I've heard that it doesnt give a good grip with string or the ratlines.

elmers glue (diluted with water for knots)

white glue (ive heard refferences in this post for holding ratlines to those um.. blockntackles..) is this just elmers glue?

Superglue (the only refference Ive ever heard this used for is when metal is involved) Ive also heard it involved in adhereing string to plastic or ratlines to plastic. Is it safe? I've heard so many stories about how it fales or becomes verry brittle.

My main question is in metal eyebolts. I've found some little brass ones for jewlry necklaces. I have to cut the end short but what would be the best glue to adhere it to the frame??

Also is wood or a metal rod best for support within the masts? and whats the best method to keep it from ratteling around inside the mast (like at the bottom)??

Update on paints. Found a can of Testors spray dullcoat. (yahoo) and a bottle of testors coper paint. Wheee now i can have the right color for the hull! (though I do have gold & brass in acrylic the copper paint is enamel. I paint it on thin. Though I was wondering If i should have just bought the spray on enamel instead....

Thats all for now.

Big Ole Bob.

If you can think it. Then someone has else has also thought of it. Then someone else has tried it. Then someone else tried and completed it. Then someone else tried and proved it CANT BE DONE!
  • Member since
    April 2004
Posted by Chuck Fan on Saturday, December 31, 2005 3:05 AM
 MagicSteve wrote:

HMS Victory by comparison is preserved because of some very different conditions that existed at the time.  Trafalgar and Nelson were immensely significant events.  The royal navy had lots of ships, and following Trafalgar, somewhat more than they needed.  Victory was an old ship, 40+ years old at the time, and had gone through a major refit two years before trafalgar.  Economics prevented much renovation following the battle, War prevented the ship from being broken up, and Trafalgar kept her preserved.  Being an older boat, Victory was not a candidate for much active duty after trafalgar, though the prestige of nelson prevented her being neglected.




Sorry to say, but only 1 point made in that passage - Victory was 40 years old at time traflagar - is correct.  Every other point made in it is incorrect.

Trafalgar and Nelson were immensely significant events..... Trafalgar kept her preserved

1. Trafalgar was immensely significant.  But Victory herself was not given her national symbol status until well into 1830.   In fact, serious thought was given to scrapping the Victory during 1820s.   First Lord of Admiralty Thomas Hardy, who had been Victory's skipper at Trafalgar, had infact signed the order to scrap her.  But his wife manage to change his mind and he countermended his own order.

The royal navy had lots of ships, and following Trafalgar, somewhat more than they needed. 

2. The Royal Navy was desperately short of serviceable ships both before and after Trafalgar, and the shortage extended all the way to the end of the Napoleonic war.   As a result, there were war emergency programs to build new warships out of unseasoned timber, knowing they will rot in just a few year;  doubling and bracing program plank over the rotting hull of old warships in far worse shape to extend their service lives by a few years; and the abysmal 40 thieves crash program to 40 ship of the line in commerical yards, resulting in some of the worse built battleships to ever be afflicted upon the RN. 
and had gone through a major refit two years before trafalgar

3.  The word "refit" is inappropriate since a sailing warship refits everytime when she is brought into commission.  Victory has undergone a "great repair" 2 years before Trafalgar.   A so called "great repair" involves completely dismentalling the a warship ("taken to piece" as it is known), replacing all fasteners, renewing all suspect timber, and reassembling the ship, often to a completely new design.   When Victory was sent for the "great repair", the Admiralty specifically called for her highly esteemed original design not to be seriously altered.   But nevertheless the ship that emerged is effectly all new , freshly assembled, possessing only a small content of original timber.   Indeed, it is estimated the Victory of today has less than 5% of her pre-1800 timbers.

Economics prevented much renovation following the battle

4. Untrue.  Victory was given another major modernization before the end of the Napoleonic war.   This time she was not taken to pieces, but she was brought up to full modern standards along the lines of new 120 gunners Caledonia and Nelson,  emboding all the  rapid advances made after Trafalgar such as the full built up bow.   This modernization infact altered Victory's appearence far more drastically than her "great repair" of 1800-1803.  

Being an older boat, Victory was not a candidate for much active duty after trafalgar

5. Again untrue.   Victory remained in active service during much of the remainder of the war in the British baltic fleet.   Although as bow to the fleet wide chronic manpower shortage, Victory was down rated from 1st rate to 2nd rate, loosing 6 guns, so her official manning requirement can be lowered from 850 to 750.     The fact that even RN's mightest 1st rates were chronicallt shorthanded had become a ministerial level embarassement.   As the war was ending, she was uprated again to 1st rate and sent into full modernization program to incorporate all of the new advances made in the 9 years since Trafalgar, indicating that her continued service for a long time to come was seriously contemplated.

Her design was highly esteemed because she was an unusually fast sailor even 40 years after she was built.   In the days when hydrodynamics was more art than science, no one really understood why her design wass good, and her good qualities can only be extracted by direct copying.    So after Trafalgar the Victory was copied twice by 2 new 98 gun 2nd rates.  Later those two ships were uprated to 104 gun 1st rate to match the Victory exactly.    Even after Napoleonic war the British were loath to loose a large ship with unusally good sailing characteristics.    It was intended to modernize the Victory again in 1826, this time to a 84 gun 2nd rate, to prolong her active service life and emphasize her sailing qualities.

Although Victory did stay in reserve or harbour service after Traflagar, up to 1830 it was intended that she be called back to active service during any war.   This is shown by the fact that her entire complement of guns stayed with her and was not returned to audanance depot until 1830.





  • Member since
    December 2005
Posted by MagicSteve on Saturday, December 31, 2005 6:06 PM

Ouch that was harsh.

The bottom line is that as much as the admiralty wanted to use Victory, it just wasn't possible to send her on patrol because of manpower shortages.

Royal navy needed lots of ships in service, preferably sloops, frigates and 74s.  Man for man these ships are far more efficient than the 1st rates, and with manpower shortages and crew gone, Victory stays in harbour.  The math was damning, Victory or two 74s, victory or four frigates, Victory or 8 sloops, victory or bringing a whole squadron up to readyness.

What was not true about victory's age in 1805 was an issue by 1830 in the absence of war.  Fortunantly Victory was preserved.

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Greenville,Michigan
Posted by millard on Sunday, January 1, 2006 11:33 AM

Gee! and I thought this post was about what glue's and paints Bob should use on his Constitution.Silly me.

Rod

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Greenville,Michigan
Posted by millard on Sunday, January 1, 2006 10:43 PM

Bob

CA glue is more commonly known as Super Glue.You can use it on plastic.I normally use the thick or Maxi-Cure for attaching plastic parts,also called gap-filling.The problem is it has no sheer strength so you can't use it on parts that are going to have force on them.I do use it to attach metal eyebolts to hulls and decks works nice on that.The thin super glue(CA) also called Insta -Cure I use for knots and different rigging area were I need instant fastening..You can get nozzle's that fit the bottle's that let out just a drop at a time.

Now for good strength on plastic I use Liquid Plastic Cement normally comes in a glass bottle with a small brush attach to the lid.You put the two piece's of plastic together put some of the Liquid Cement where they connect and it weld's the piece's together.It does this by melting the plastc.You do have to make sure the two piece's of  plastic have the paint scraped off where your going to connect them.Now tube glue does basicly the same thing but has alot slower drying time and is a lot messier than The Liquid cement.If you spill a little Liquid cement on your model by mistake if you blow on it ,it will almost disappear.Where as the tube glue leave a big glob.Not easy to hide.

You where talking about eyebolts. If you are putting them on a deck.Do it before you put the deck on the ships hull.find were your going to put them drill through the deck.Put the shaft of the eyebolt through the hole than fold it on the under side of the deck.Than take either Super Glue or Epoxy and attach on the under side of the deck. This holds pretty secure so you can attach rigging to it.If your putting eyebolts in hulls,mast. or etc. just drill a hole put a little super glue on the shaft in stick them in the hole.Works great.

Attaching your plastic Shrouds and Ratlines I would use the Liquid Plastic Cement.That would hold the best.If you can't get in use a little Super Glue since ther's no pressure on plastic Ratlines.

Inside of mast I would put brass rod it stay's straighter,and gives more strength.

Rod

  • Member since
    April 2004
Posted by Chuck Fan on Monday, January 2, 2006 2:18 AM
 MagicSteve wrote:

Ouch that was harsh.




Sorry, after a few rounds of grog to celebrate the new year, my manners deserted me.

But yes, Victory's age was an issue by 1830.  But more important were the rapid progress of naval design from 1805-1830, and the large naval construction program Britain begun after the Napoleonic war to replace her fleet of worn out ships, many of which had served since war of 1776.  

Britain has by tradition maintained a force of 7 1st rates at any given time, in active service or reserve, in war or peace.    The start of the Napoleonic war saw Britain dramatically increasing the size of her new 1st rates from from around 2000 tons to around 2700 tons, and their fire powers from 100 guns, standard on 1st rates since 1683, to 120 guns.   Just after the war the traditional mixed battery of 32/24/18/12 pounders and carronades on the new large 120 gunners were standardized to a uniform battery of all 32 pdrs.   By 1830 Britain had built a full force of 7 new 120 gunner with uniform 32 pdr batteries, with another 3 under construction.   Victory and other ships of her generation just stood no chance against these new ships that are nominmally still in her class.    Indeed her firepower now is barely equal to the new 80 gun third rates.   So she no longer had a clear place in the new RN.  


  • Member since
    April 2004
Posted by Chuck Fan on Monday, January 2, 2006 2:37 AM
 millard wrote:

Gee! and I thought this post was about what glue's and paints Bob should use on his Constitution.Silly me.

Rod



Sorry for the digression.

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Pennsylvania (big state)
Posted by Big Ole Bob on Monday, January 2, 2006 8:17 AM

Yes I will Post Photos of My Constitution build. From The bottles of paint (for a color refference) to the uncut spruces.

Here's a link for where I'll be keeping my new images. Bravenet. So far just my color selection. The model and working supplies. Like I said before. Full doccumention on this one.

http://pub37.bravenet.com/photocenter/album.php?usernum=3157957965&album=36233

I It sounds like crazy but I've decided to build the kit with its existing deadeyes. In my research I've heard that CA becomes brittle and isnt really meant for metal and I dread working with 2 part epoxy for such a small part.

As for deck color I've decided to  use a dark wood tone. Not weathered grey-white or a black-stain but simply a dark woodtone. It's probably be testors acrylic 'leather' or 'wood' with a wash of 'raw umber'.

It was Chuck Fan's pictures of his victory build with the grey decks that convinced me otherwise. I dont mind the look its just sorta... dreary looking.

Im about ready for building this (after i finish the victory rigging). I'm actively seeking a book on rigging though. With a 25$ gift certificate all I have to do is get it ordered. There leaves only one question left.

The washing of the model of 'mold release'. I've heard so many times that acrylic paint doesnt stick to a model too well because of the use of mold release being heavy. So I have to wash it with soapy water. Now with a fragile spruce and tiny parts I dont want to loose anything by giving them a scrub. Sure the big pieces but what about the small. Warm soap and water? is there like an anti-mold release spray that you can just spray onto the spruce, rinse it off and let it dry? I'ld be so much more receptive to a spray than a scrub.

Also just a silly question. For those who reinforced the mast with metal rods. Off the top of  your noggin do you remember the diameter of the rod? Since I have yet to even remove them from the spruce I have no idea of what size to get let alone how to fit it in.

Check the photo link when I get some construction pics up. And heres hoping for the victory rigging.

B.O.B.

Current kit: 22" HMS VICTORY (rigging)
Next Kit: 1/95 Revell USS Constitution (collecting information making plans)
Future projects: Dover Santa Maria (cardstock to wood trial run)

If you can think it. Then someone has else has also thought of it. Then someone else has tried it. Then someone else tried and completed it. Then someone else tried and proved it CANT BE DONE!
  • Member since
    December 2005
Posted by MagicSteve on Monday, January 2, 2006 9:47 AM

Keep in mind that the ship is not maintained as it was 200 years ago.  I doubt that the decks are stone pollished every day like they were.  You could get a plank of the deck wood and leave it to the weater, polishing it with a brick and salt water every other day.  If you do this please publish the pictures.

Sorry I kind of took this thread off topic.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:30 AM

There are quite a few good books on rigging out there - but I'm not sure whether they can be had for $25.00.  Two that would be highly relevant to this particular project are Eighteenth-Century Rigs and Rigging, by Karl Heinz Marquardt (I hope I haven't misspelled his name) and The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War, by James Lees.  (It's reasonable to assume that, in general, American sailing ship rigging followed British practice during this period.)  Several contemporary sources also are available in reprint form.  D'Arcy Lever's The Young Officer's Sheet Anchor and David Steel's Elements of Rigging and Seamanship are excellent sources, though obviously not aimed directly at the modeler.

You're lucky in one important respect:  the rigging diagrams in the Revell 1/96 Constitution kit are simplified a bit, but in terms of representing the leads of the lines they're generally pretty good.  If you ever do tackle the Heller Victory, your first step should be to throw the rigging diagrams in the trash.  The people responsible for them had no idea how rigging actually works.

I'll take the liberty of recommending three other books (all paperbacks, to be had for reasonable prices).  George Campbell's Neophyte Shipmodeler's Jackstay is an old, low-priced classic introduction to the hobby.  It's primarily geared toward solid-hull wood kits, but contains a great deal of solid, basic information about such things as rigging and the evolution of the ship.  Anybody who memorized everything in that little book would be well on the road toward understanding the technology of the sailing ship.  Ben Lankford's How To Build First-Rate Ship Models From Kits is a larger, more recent work with about the same target audience - though the author makes references to plastic kits too.  He knows what he's talking about, and the book is full of sound, practical advice.   And Wolfram zu Mondfelt's Historic Ship Models is a remarkably comprehensive overview of the whole hobby, with hundreds of good drawings and sound suggestions.  Many modelers make it their first book acquisition - and they're smart to do so.  I do have a couple of small reservations about the Mondfelt book.  One - it's extremely European in its approach; many of the tools and materials he refers to are hard to find in the U.S., and there are some vocabulary problems.  (The "walnut" Mondfelt refers to is European walnut, which is quite a bit different from the walnut most American lumber dealers sell.)  Two - simply because of the breadth of its coverage, it can't go into great depth about any one topic.  But it's an excellent - and reasonably priced - introduction to scale ship modeling.

The decision to keep or replace the kit's deadeye/lanyard assemblies obviously has to rest with the individual modeler, but I'm a little confused by the connection between deadeyes and adhesives.  Some aftermarket blocks and deadeyes (notably Bluejacket's, my personal favorites) are cast in britannia metal; others are wood.  The lower deadeyes on the lower masts would indeed have to be fastened in place somehow, and if you use an adhesive for the purpose CA ("superglue") would be appropriate.  (Epoxy would create a mess.)  But there are plenty of ways to do it that wouldn't rely on adhesive to take any significant stress.

There have been stories about the alleged weakness of CA adhesive ever since it was introduced.  I have yet to see any real, honest-to-goodness scientific evidence on the subject.  But I do have some practical experience to report.

I built a model of H.M.S. Bounty when the first CA glues (I remember the brand name:  Aron Alpha) were appearing in the hobby shop where I worked.  By the time I finished it, several of the current brand names (Zap, Hot Stuff, etc.) were on the market.  I was fascinated with them, and used them on that model for more applications than I probably would today.  (I used it for metal-to-metal, plastic-to-plastic, metal-to-plastic, wood-to-wood, wood-to-metal, and just about every other kind of joint.  I also used it extensively in the rigging.)  The model, having been kept in a plexiglas case out of direct sunlight ever since I finished it, literally looks as good as new; none of the CA joints in it has shown even the slightest tendency to come loose, discolor, or otherwise cause any problem.  I finished that model in 1979.  I've got several other models on which I used CA, between the late 70s and the present.  None of the CA joints in question has shown any tendency to deteriorate.

If a chemist or physicist tells me there's some chemical or physical reason to distrust CA adhesives, I won't argue.  And I'll certainly listen to any modeler who's actually had trouble with it.  But in about 25 years of using the stuff I personally have never had any problems whatever with it (beyond getting it stuck to various portions of my anatomy). 

There are plenty of things to be considered when deciding whether or not to replace the kit's blocks and deadeyes, but the availability of adhesives doesn't need to be one of them. 

Regarding mold release - that one isn't worth losing sleep over.  I'd been building plastic models for at least twenty years (let's not talk about what they must have looked like) before I ever heard of mold release.  Washing the parts in detergent is a good idea, but by no means is it an absolute necessity.  If you're having frequent problems getting acrylic paints to stick to styrene, something else is probably wrong.

On another website we had an interesting discussion of hobby paints, and a chemist contributed some information that I found interesting.  It seems that acrylic and solvent-based paints behave differently when they dry.  Solvent-based paints (e.g., enamels) dry from the inside out; acrylics dry from the outside in.  As a result, the modeler gets the impression that acrylic is dry before it really is.  For quite some time after it's applied, acrylic paint is dry to the touch - but hasn't actually "grabbed" the surface.  During that period (which may last hours, days, or even a week or two, depending on the brand of paint, the nature and size of the painted surface, the thickness of the paint layer, and atmospheric conditions) it feels like it's dry but can be rubbed off relatively easily.  Have faith.  Modern acrylic hobby paints are excellent; they just take a while to "grab."  Removing any vestiges of mold release underneath them certainly won't hurt, but I have yet to be convinced that it's really essential.

Good luck.  It's a great hobby.

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

  • Member since
    December 2005
Posted by MagicSteve on Wednesday, January 4, 2006 6:17 PM

A quick rigging note. Pitch the Heller instructions but keep the Revell rigging instructions as a general reference.  If you keep in mind how the ship is rigged bottom to top, front to back, and balanced port and starboard should make things easier.

I am taking some liberties with my constitution in that I pre-rig the tops and royals off the boat.  The thing I find most challanging is keeping a good balanced tension on the lines so that they are taunt but do not pull things out of wack.  There sure are a lot of lines on this boat

One thing I do find is that the line in the kit is too light for many of the heavy lines.

My understanding about the CA glue is that it contains iso cyanates which are somewhat toxic.  These glues work real well for some things but I would recommend using them with caution.

Finally look at the posted pictures that ChuckFan has of his Victory.  What he did for his hammock netting looks most excellent. 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Wednesday, January 4, 2006 7:34 PM

MagicSteve reminds us of an important point.  CA adhesives (aka Superglue) are wonderful things, but they need to be treated with respect.  Using CA in a small, poorly-ventilated room for a considerable period can lead to significant health problems.  And the fact that it dries so fast, and sticks to so many things, can lead to other interesting situations.  I once managed (I don't remember exactly how) to stick a pair of eyelids together with it.  And one time I left a good-sized bottle of Zap-a-Gap lying on its side, and then managed to drop something heavy on it.  In 49 years of model building I've created my share of impressive messes, but that was just about the most spectacular. 

(Offhand, the only equally memorable one I can recall happened when I was working at a maritime museum and managed to dump about half a pint of mercury out of a nineteenth-century barometer.  One of the technicians and I had to spend about an hour on our hands and knees chasing the stuff all over the floor - to the accompaniment of many perceptive comments from the rest of the staff.)

MagicSteve - in rigging various parts of the model separate from it you aren't taking any liberties whatever.  Lots of modelers do it that way.  My personal custom is to attach as much of the rigging to each yard as I can while it's fastened to a dowel in a vise on the workbench.  The less actual rigging takes place on the model, the better.

I have no idea what sort of rigging line Revell is packing in its kits these days, but I'm sure MagicSteve is right about the diameter of it.  A real sailing ship's rigging consists of many, many different sizes of rope.  The stuff supplied in plastic kits generally isn't really good, and never in a sufficient variety of sizes.  The books I mentioned in an earlier post provide lots of information on the sizes of line used in the original ships.  In several other threads we've discussed the various rigging materials available; Big Ole Bob is a long way from having to worry about that.  But two golden rules of rigging are, perhaps, worth noting here.  1.  When in doubt as to color, err on the dark side.  2.  When in doubt as to diameter, err on the small side.  But as MagicSteve points out, the shrouds and stays - especially those on the lower masts - won't look right unless they're pretty hefty pieces of rope.

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

  • Member since
    April 2004
Posted by Chuck Fan on Wednesday, January 4, 2006 7:57 PM
One question:   Are you guys doing the Constellation with a white band on the hull, like she is now, or with a yellow band like she had at least at the beginning of war of 1812?



  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:48 PM

Actually the modeler wanting to represent the Constitution as she looked during the War of 1812 has a choice regarding the notorious stripe. 

Captain Tyrone Martin, the ship's commanding officer during the big bicentennial restoration project of the mid-seventies, did a considerable amount of research in primary sources to establish just how her configuration had altered over the years.  (In addition to his navy experience, he has academic credentials in history.  I have a great deal of respect for the work he's done on that ship's history - though he wasn't able to get the funding to have her restored the way he would have liked.)  He's established that the stripe was in fact white while Isaac Hull was her commanding officer (i.e., from the beginning of the war through the fight with H.M.S. Guerriere), and got changed to yellow thereafter.  (One often-expressed theory is that her later captains, Bainbridge and Stewart, wanted to make her look more like a British frigate.  I'm not sure whether that's documented - but the color change is.)

The Revell kit, as mentioned earlier, is based on the plans George Campbell drew for the Smithsonian, which used them to build a model on 1/48 scale.  It represents Mr. Campbell's best guess as to how she looked in 1814.  The Smithonian's model has a yellow stripe on the hull. 

If I remember correctly, the biggest difference between the ship's 1812 and 1814 configurations concerned the figurehead.  (I'd have to look this one up, but I think the original figure of Hercules was still in place till the Guerriere's gunners shot it off.  The Revell kit, like the Smithsonian model - and the Hull model - has a representation of the simple billethead that was installed when the ship was repaired after the battle.) [Oops- goofed.  Please see correction further down the thread.  Sorry about that.]  So logic seems to suggest that the  yellow stripe would be appropriate.  On the other hand, the famous "Isaac Hull model," which apparently was presented to Hull during or after the war and is now in the Peabody-Essex Museum, of Salem, Massachusetts, has a billethead like the Revell kit - and a white stripe.  (That one, admittedly, is a little dubious.  The guy who built that model wasn't exactly well-equipped with tools, materials or paint.  It's pretty obvious that he only had three colors:  black, white, and green.  I'd have no trouble believing that he painted the stripe white because he didn't have any yellow paint.)

Bottom line:  there's enough wiggle room here to justify the use of either "stripe color."  Personally I like the look of the yellow stripe, but it's really up to the modeler. 

Various people have built models representing the Constitution at different points in her career.  One color scheme I've never seen on a model is the one that, according to Captain Martin, she wore sometime in the latter part of the nineteenth century.  The hull was silver-grey and the stripe was dark red.  Ugh.

 

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

  • Member since
    December 2005
Posted by MagicSteve on Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:55 PM

I am working on the Constitution not the Constellation and I have done the band in White.  I've gone by the paint instrucitons and the condition of the present boat as a guide. so the bullwarks are a green colour.  I'll try to post some photos of what I have done so far in the next couple days. 

I've built a cool little jig for doing the shrouds and ratlins, tested it on the fore mast and it worked out great.  when i set it up on the main mast I'll be able to demonstrate what I have done.

One technical question, the stays to the top masts are doubled, should they also be snaked?  The instructions for this and a kit of Bellona seem to suggest not, but the presence of doubled stays begs for it.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Wednesday, January 4, 2006 10:51 PM

I think the combination of white stripe and green bulwarks is sound.  That seems to be the color scheme of the "Isaac Hull model," among other sources.

Another point regarding the color scheme:  Captain Martin found at least one document that convinced him that one of the ship's cutters was painted green.

We had an interesting discussion just a few days ago about the "Hull model."  Schoonerbum was kind enough to post a couple of good photos of it.  They're worth careful study by any Constitution modeler.  I've moved that thread to p.1; it should appear right below this one on the topic list.

That model's rigging is fascinating.  Oddly enough, it seems that the forestay and fore preventer stay are snaked - but not the mainstay and main preventer stay.  (Another related detail:  the main preventer stay is noticeably smaller in diameter than the mainstay.  And the eyes and mice forming the stay collars are done with remarkable accuracy.  And the wide variety of different sizes of thread throughout the model is remarkable.  The guy who rigged this model knew what he was doing.)  

The explanation may be that she was fitted at that time with a main staysail.  James Lees's Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War says that it was unusual for a ship to set a staysail on the forestay in any but the largest ships, and that the main staysail "was not often rigged."  But if the ship had one, it would (after 1810 or thereabouts, according to Mr. Lees) have been run up the mainstay itself (rather than the purpose-rigged "main staysail stay" that was used earlier).  A stay with a sail set on it couldn't be snaked; the snaking would interfere with the hanks.  For the same reason, snaking of the topmast stays was virtually unheard of.  The topmast staysail was a common and pretty important one. 

The real Constitution is, of course, a priceless and fascinating artifact.  But the scale modeler needs to take her with a huge grain of salt.  She's been modified many, many times during the past 208 years.  Recent restorations have brought her back far closer to her 1812 configuration than she was in the first time I went on board her (in 1965, I think), but there are still some big differences.  Her bulwarks are higher now, for example.  (They're planked up to the level of the tops of the hammock nettings in the Revell kit.)  And the transom is completely different from the one she had in 1812.  And the gunport lids, with their semi-circular cutouts in the centers, probably are wrong for the 1812 period.  (I asked Captain Martin about that one once.  He explained that he had no inclination to replace the gunport lids with 1812-vintage ones, which probably - like the Revell kit's - were square, solid, and made in one piece, hinged at the top.  Reason:  the ones with the cutouts can be closed without running in the guns.  In the winter, with the ship full of tourists, that's important.) 

The Revell kit, based as it is on research commissioned by the Smithsonian, probably represents the ship as she looked in 1814 more accurately than she does herself.  Mr. Campbell drew those plans quite a few years ago, and more recent research has uncovered some interesting new details.  But I have the impression that his plans, and the Revell kit, have held up pretty well.

Caveat:  I haven't done much reading about the Constitution in quite a few years.  It's getting late, and I wanna go to bed.  Tomorrow, though, I want to get down some books about her and refresh my senile memory.  I'm starting to get nervous about some of the stuff I typed earlier this evening - particularly with regard to the ship's figureheads.

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

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Madison, Mississippi
Posted by Donnie on Thursday, January 5, 2006 3:53 PM
Hey Bob,

I visited your page and it is good that you are going to post your progress. However, I noticed that from my visiting your page that allot of advertisements come up on the screen blocking my view and each time I want to view another image, more pop-ups come up. I rarely ever have pop-ups until I saw this site.

Personally I hope that you would never be offended by my viewpoints. I must recommend at least you trying the http://www.photobucket.com  (doesn't cost a dime)

I know for a fact, you get what you get. No advertisements and you can view your images without allot of other things getting in the way. To me it is allot easier. I am sure that their are others on this forum might have other suggestions or they might not even care.

But, actually I DO care. I think that the site I mentioned to you will be easier to handle and for folks like me, it is not such a wierd hike thru the information so that I can see your work on your project becuase I cam defineitly interested in your ship model !!!

Donnie

In Progress: OcCre's Santisima Trindad Finished Builds: Linbergs "Jolly Roger" aka La Flore Mantua's Cannone Da Costa Americano linberg's "Cptn Kidd" aka Wappen Von Hamburg Model Shipways 1767 Sultana Midwest Boothbay Lobsterboat (R/C)

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Thursday, January 5, 2006 6:02 PM

Well, I did a little digging today for information about the points we were discussing yesterday.  I don't have any definitive answers, but I now know more about the subject than I did.

The two best and most recent books about the Constitution are, to my knowledge, Capt. Tyrone Martin's A Most Fortunate Ship:  A Narrative History of Old Ironsides (revised edition, 1997) and Thomas Gillmer's Old Ironsides:  The Rise, Decline, and Resurrection of the U.S.S. Constitution (1993).  Captain Martin was the ship's commanding officer for several years in the 1970s; Mr. Gilmer is a former Professor of Naval Architecture at the Naval Academy, and supervised the Constitution's most recent restoration, in the late eighties and early nineties.

(A new volume in the Conway Maritime Press/Naval Institute Press Anatomy of the Ship series dealing with the Constitution has just been published, but I don't have a copy yet.  It may contain some material that will update the above two books.)

I did have the figurehead story garbled; sorry about that.  The original sculpture of Hercules was destroyed when the Constitution had a collision with her sister-ship, the President, in the Mediterranean in 1804.  The ship was repaired at Malta, where a  simple, temporary carving of the traditional billethead shape was installed.  This was replaced a few years later by a more elaborate billethead carved in the U.S.  That figurehead - which, presumably, is what the Revell 1/96 kit represents - is the one she carried throughout the War of 1812.  (I recall reading somewhere about an earlier figurehead representing Neptune, but I have the impression that research has discredited that one.)  She's had billetheads of various descriptions ever since, with the exception of the period 1833-1874.  During those years she carried a figure of Andrew Jackson.  (Actually two figures of him.  The first got beheaded by an ill-disposed anti-Jacksonian.  There are lots of conflicting stories about what happened to Jackson's head.  My favorite is that it got passed around among various Whig political groups, who "held Bacchanalian orgies over it."  The second Jackson figurehead is the one represented on the older, 1/192 Revell kit.)

The question of color schemes is complicated.  The best guide as to the ship's War of 1812 appearance seems to me to be the watercolor by the distinguished modern marine artist William Gilkerson, which appears in color in the Gillmer book.  Mr. Wilkerson consulted all the sources he could find, including the Hull model.  The color scheme he shows is as follows:

Hull - black with a white stripe through the gunports.  Bow rails, billethead, and carvings - white.  Quarter gallery window frames and decorations - white.  Lower masts, bowsprit, and jibboom - white.  Yards - black. Studdingsail booms - natural.  Boat hulls - white.  (I think Captain Martin's "green cutte" is obscured in the picture by the spanker.) Bulwark interior planking - medium green. 

One interesting feature of this painting:  the gunports on the maindeck don't have lids.  (The one exception is the bridle port - the foremost one on each side.  It's covered by a pair of lids, upper and lower, painted white outside and green inside.)  Captain Martin has said in various places that she didn't have hinged gunport lids until relatively late in her career.  I have to say I found that a little hard to swallow when I first read it, but I'm coming around to agree.  Several contemporary (or near-contemporary) engravings published in the two books seem to show her without portlids, and the Hull model, so far as I can tell from the photos in Mr. Gillmer's book, agrees with the Gilkerson painting.

Several other Gilkerson pictures are reproduced in the same book.  He seems to be of the opinion that the notorious "stripe" changed color at least twice during the War of 1812.  He shows it as being white during all three of the ship's famous frigate actions, but yellow in 1814.

All very interesting stuff - allowing for some taste and interpretation on the part of the modeler.  One of the most relevant comments on the subject, though, is one made by Captain Martin (p. 67):  "The truth is we really don't know exactly how Constitution looked when she first saw service."  The same applies for virtually every other time in her history prior to the arrival of photography.  We don't know for sure what she looked like, and I doubt that we ever will. 

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

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Pennsylvania (big state)
Paint & Glue Fumes
Posted by Big Ole Bob on Sunday, January 15, 2006 11:21 PM

Paint fumes & glue fumes

I have yet to even remove one single part from this big bad boys spruce yet (the 1/96 constitution) and I thought it would be best to do research on the toxicity of paint/glue fumes before I get into the model at all. Mainly involving the following products. Testors 'blue tube' non toxic glue. and testors 'acrylic model masters' paint. I know these are supposed to be 'safe' meaning to the touch but what about fumes??

What long term effects does enamels have on ones body. (I used to use enamels all the time as a kid)

What about the fumes from the acrylic paints? or this supposedly non toxic glue?

During winter I naturally cant crack open a window and know I will be relegated to painting in my garage. I have a nice table I can set up and can get some nice covers to keep dust off while working on paint intensive projects. Paint's will have to be done in thick layers & washes. Either way, paint, dullcoat, and wash.. a long time consumeing process. Glue on the other hand... Well... I would like to get this assembled without freezeing to death.

I have yet to even start assembeling this 1/96 model as I sworn to start it after I finish rigging the victory and recovering from a cold I have done little to it recently.

Also these 'respirators' or 'mask' ive quick searched in the forms seems to reffer to air brushing. Do they also help with brush painting? (which I'll mainly be doing)

Safe and knowledgeable beforehand is better than the reverse.

bob

If you can think it. Then someone has else has also thought of it. Then someone else has tried it. Then someone else tried and completed it. Then someone else tried and proved it CANT BE DONE!
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.