Can I start a new thread about building HMS Surprise?

In "Ship Model Builders Assistant" by Charles G. Davis, pg 36, there is a most enlightening treatise on Quarter Gallerys. To paraphrase: the "horizontal lines" should follow the sheers, the vertical distance between them should increase going aft. The "vertical" lines should radiate from a point well above, and in line with the profile line of the transom. If any of these lines is off by even a little, it will quickly catch the eye. It is most pleasing when everything runs true, and fair.  This is the only reference I have, concerning the construction of the galleys. Quarter gallerys, and intricate carvings, are the primary reason I have stayed away from modeling ships of this era.............I have removed the gallerys and transom from the lindberg kit, I have no choice now but to rebuild them as best I can, to represent "Surprise", as she was in the film, when that is done, the bow is next...."Styrene is on our side(s)".......pictures at eleven.

Anyway, I'm a little disappointed and have put the project on hold for now. There's so much variability and disagreement out there. And after all, if I did put in all that work and get it all built, then Revell would come out with a perfectly scaled Surprise kit! Wouldn't that be a sur... well, never mind.

   HMS Surprise, as Jack Aubrey's command, was, as I recall, not an existing vessel. What you see, in your mind's eye, as you read, is for you, the "surprise"! I never read the tales, so I only have the movie to go on. There are some elements of the rigging, that I'm sure didn't exist in the era of the stories. I'll probably use them anyway, because "that" is the Surprise I know. I won't go into the number of times I've kitbashed something, only to find it produced the "next day". On the other hand, there have been several kitbashes, which have stood alone for several years! The pleasure is gained from the building, and the learning during the building process. If someone produces an exact scale replica, so what! I will have already received the benefit of the work. As I said building quarter gallerys kept me away from this era ship........that situation may cease to exist, shortly.

Pete

 

 

 

 

 

Hi,

You might start here:

http://www.answers.com/topic/hms-polychrest

I really don't know how it all worked. HTH.

Weasel

weasel505 wrote:

Hi, I believe you are referring to the HMS Polychrest; Boadicea was another ship. Polychrest was fictional but based on an existing design with sliding keels. Not too successful.

Could somebody explain how the sliding keels were supposed to work? I get that they slid up and down to project into the water and minimze leeway, but where on the ship were they located? How were they operated? Does anyone know?

Regards,

Beautiful pics indeed. I have come to the conclusion that one can only build an approximation of the Surprise using the Lindberg kit. The real Surprise was 126 feet not including the sprit. In 1/130 scale, that's about 11 5/8 inches. If you cut a section with two gunports out of the waist, the hull ends up too short by about just under 1 inch (I'm going by memory here, my figures are at home. I'm busy working, ha, ha, ha!) Also, the quarterdeck becomes disproportionately long, over half the length of the deck. Most sources indicate that the quarterdeck extended up to and encompassed the main mast, so to cut the q-deck back means to move the mast, chains, etc. back as well. That's a lot of work to put into a so-so quality kit.

And then there's the beakhead, which should be round with no athwartships bulkhead. There likely should be a step up to the foc'sle from the waist too. Also interesting is that most sources and drawings put the wheel immediately abaft the mizzen mast. In The Letter of Marque, O'Brian twice mentions that the mizzen mast is about 10 feet abaft the wheel! I have some pics of a wooden Surprise from a wood ship site (can't remember which) that shows, from the stern: taffrail, mizzen, wheel, step down (about 2/3 way from the taffrail), capstan, main, step down to waist, no step up to the foc'sle. Totally different from any other source. Looks nice too.

A couple other observations: in The Hundred Days O'B makes reference to "boats on booms" and to "red-painted gunports". I wish I had paid better attention to these details as I read the series.

Anyway, I'm a little disappointed and have put the project on hold for now. There's so much variability and disagreement out there. And after all, if I did put in all that work and get it all built, then Revell would come out with a perfectly scaled Surprise kit! Wouldn't that be a sur... well, never mind.

Weasel 

 

 

 

 

Beautiful pictures.  The moviemakers and their advisors (who included some of the best British naval hsitorians in the business) did a remarkable job of turning the old "H.M.S. Rose" from a none-too-convincing frigate of 1775 to a thoroughly believable one of 1805.  One could quibble with some of the details, but the movie - in that respect as in so many others - was so far superior to virtually anything else in the genre that we'd be well advised to keep our mouths shut.  The only other sailing-ship-warfare movie I've seen that can stand comparison with this one is "Damn the Defiant" (with Alec Guiness and Dirk Bogarde), and the ships in that one certainly aren't as convincing as this.

Quarter galleries and transoms are the stuff of nightmares - beautiful and subtle when done right, eyesores when done just a little bit wrong.  To my eye the quarter galleries on this particular replica don't look quite right; it looks like the task of modifying and "modernizing" the old Rose forced somebody into some understandable compromises.  But the transom looks beautiful.  I've never seen an arrangement of carved ornamentation quite like that on a contemporary drawing, but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it.  (We should also remember that the ship in question is supposed to have been captured from the French, so some non-British decorative elements are entirely appropriate.)

The geometry of transoms varied somewhat from ship to ship, but the configuration of the windows in the picture is certainly believable.  Sometimes the windows were parallelograms, and that seems to be the case here.  Just as often (especially when there was more than one row of windows, as in a ship of the line) the sides of the windows are radii of a huge circle, with its imaginary center located several feet above the taffrail.  And in either case the tops and bottoms of the windows are circle arcs.  (I suspect the carpenters didn't always actually curve the tops and bottoms of the frames, but the line formed by them across the transom is definitely a curve.  It's more-or-less parallel to the deck camber.  In a multi-decked ship the radii of those arcs get slightly smaller as you go up.)  So each individual window is shaped like a trapezoid, with the angles formed by the side changing.  H.M.S. Victory has 27 windows in her transom.  No two of them are identical (though the starboard ones are mirror images of the port ones).

To make matters worse, the typical transom isn't flat.  It curves outward in the middle, and has a pronounced slope fore-and-aft.  (The curvature and slope vary from ship to ship.)  And just to make the task of the modeler as difficult as possible, contemporary plans (e.g., Admiralty draughts), if they included details of the transom, almost invariably show it as though it were projected onto a vertical plane.  So the modeler has to figure out the actual top-to-bottom and side-to-side measurements of the windows - and figure out the curvature of the various rails and moldings.  (They're curved in both the horizontal and vertical planes.) 

Quarter galleries are even worse.  The curves defy verbal description, and varied a great deal from ship to ship.  A properly-shaped quarter gallery becomes a focal point of the ship; one that's even a little bit distorted sticks out like a sore thumb.  (The folks who restored the U.S.S. Constitution back in the 1970s tried hard to rebuild her quarter galleries correctly.  They almost managed it - but not quite.  They also distorted the headrail assemblies a little.)

The naval architects who designed features like these must have been sadists - and the carpenters who executed those designs must have been geniuses.

 

I found some interesting photos of "HMS Rose/HMS Surprise" at http://fortogden.com/surprise-deck1-r.jpg   http://fortogden.com/surprise-deck2-r.jpg   http://fortogden.com/surprise-gc-r.jpg   http://fortogden.com/surprise-tumble-r.jpg   http://fortogden.com/surprise-r.jpg

 

  This is the movie version. To correctly build the quarter galleys is going to be a serious test of skill and perserverence. In fact, even the transom windows will not be easy, the lights in the center window are rectangular in the other six, they are parallelagrams, with increasing angles as they go outboard.

Pete

Based on Boudriot (1744 Renomee and 1765 Belle Poule) and AOS ( Pandora and Alert) plans, nominal full scale grating would use ~2 inch wide planks, forming 2" X 2" openings.

The Jolly Roger model scales (1/133 to 1/150 depending on which feature you measure) out to 3.5 - 3.75 inch planks with 5.5 - 6 inch square openings... fairly dangerous for the crew having to work over them.

These should be easy to do in photo-etch, you just need to decide the scale (I would vote for 1/144 as a compromise and it's a common scale for other models). Full scale 'step' between grating battens would be ~1 inch.

While you are at it, I think PE offers some good opportunities for deadeye/lanyard assemblies; probably the most difficult part of plastic sailing ship modeling, and completely missing from the JR.

 

 

schoonerbumm wrote:

.  the grating detail on the JR decks is way out of scale

Can you tell me what size the grating should be? I am thinking I can photoetch some new ones.

P.S.: I'm amazed at the interest in sail ships on this board. I don't see that at other ship boards. Nice.

 

There is some sail interest here:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SeawaysShipmodelingList/ 

Hi,

I believe you are referring to the HMS Polychrest; Boadicea was another ship. Polychrest was fictional but based on an existing design with sliding keels. Not too successful.

Go here, this site covers all of Aubrey's ships:

http://members.aol.com/batrnq/

But be warned, the text gives away the plot lines of all the books, so if you want to finish the series unspoiled, don't read past HMS Surprise. HTH.

Weasel 

Wow. So I guess converting the Lindberg JR into a reasonably accurate Surprise isn't exactly a one-weekend project. Actually, I knew full well it wouldn't be, but didn't realize all the changes necessary, especially sectioning the hull and reshaping the bow. That's a LOT of work. It also sounds like getting a second kit would be desirable for the extra ship's boats, cannons and carriages, spare spars, etc. It's cheap enough. I wonder if the kit's 9-pounders could be cut down to represent carronades?

I'm still waiting for the book with Surprise diagrams, and the barky will probably get sent to the back burner for a while. Frankly I'm a bit intimidated by the prospect of all that plastic surgery and THEN I still have to rig it! Well, we'll see.

Thanks to all for your input. It's exactly what I was looking for.

Weasel

 

 

 

 

Speaking of the  Aubrey/Maturin books, I have read only 5 of them ( I couldn't find any more translations into Dutch of the rest of them) and I remember on ship Aubrey was given command of, the name was rather strange and I don't remember it exactly but I looked on the internet for the explanation of the that name and it was some ancient celtic queen from what is now called England.
However, the ship was described as beeing very strange, where (quote) one can hardly tell wether she coming or going (end quote) I was wondering if there was a historical ship on which this is based or if it is strictly fiction.
aha, I think the name was something in the line of "Boadicea" or something sounding similar....

jwintjes wrote:

scottrc wrote: I have built two of the Lindberg kits.  One OOB and one as a Bristish converted 32 to represent a fictitional frigate from an Alexander Kent novel. Hey, interesting idea - Phalarope or Tempest? I always wondered whether it might be worth the while to build a Sparrow with her two 32pdrs and oars. Jorit

HMS Undine, from Command a King's Ship.  The Undine was described as a few feet shorter than Phalarope and built of French design.  This book was one of my favorites of the series.

Scott

Actually, there is a kit on the market for HMS Surprise...  check it out at:

http://www.modelsailingships.com/ships/hms.html

Start saving your pennies... put all of those kits you have stashed in the rafters in your garage on ebay.... sell your kids for medical research,  whatever, this puppy retails for almost $3400.

But how many of your models have firing cannons?

http://www.modelsailingships.com/update/index.html

 

 

For those of you, like me, that will have to settle for the Lindberg boat, the basic mods include:

1) sectioning the hull... if you cut out a section with the fifth and sixth gunports from the bow, the hull can be rejoined leaving 13 gunports (the model will scale out at about 1/150th with 9.8" on the gundeck). The cross section in this area is virtually constant. I reinforced the joint with Evergreen strips inside and putty outside. The main wale on the starboard side matches up almost perfectly, the wale on the port side takes a little putty and contouring.

2.) living with 13 ports or fill in the aft gun port, too close to the quarter gallery anyway, to get 12 ports. Removing the two ports also provides a more representative length/breadth ratio, the Lindberg ship is too skinny.

3.) closing in the bow... get rid of the beakhead bulkhead and use some surgery and Evergreen styrene to plank up the bow to a pointy shape. Make a temporary foc'sl deck to act as a guide / support.  Don't worry about continuing the raised planking lines... they are way out of scale and need to be removed anyway. Putty and fair in the new bow.  At this scale, planking would not be that visible. 

4.) fill the holes for the chain plates, sand the fenders and the goofy looking ladder off of the hull and replace with styrene strip...  add a 'waist rail', thin (~same size as channel rails) raised wale running from bow to quarter galleries, bisecting the gun ports amidships and running parallel to the channel rails. New fender and gangway step locations per your references or preferences...  I laid out mine per a 'typical' British small frigate with steps in front of the 6th port from the stern (5th if you fill in the aft port), two fenders fwd. of the 7th gun port and a single fender fwd. of the 10th gunport.

5.) fabricate new decks using the kit versions for templates..  (mast locations change with the modified hull, the grating detail on the JR decks is way out of scale and the British eliminated the French capstans on the foc'sl deck in their rebuilds and placed captsans on the Qdeck through to the gun deck). Evergreen scribed railroad siding sheets make a convenient decking.

6.) rework the quarter galleries and stern galleries for square windows, reshape the stern transom shape. Sand window details flush and rebuild with evergreen strip.

7.) relocate mast locations per Steel's tables (or plans if available, I haven't seen the Surprise plans referenced in this thread). Masts and yards could be resized based on Steel's rules (reprint of the 1794 edition of "Steel's Elements of Mastmaking, Sailmaking and Rigging" - available for $25 - 50 on WWW.ADDALL.COM on their used book page.. if you are serious about modeling this period, this book is essential). Note Quarterdeck length will change with the new main mast location and new locations for shroud channels will be required.

8.) build bulwarks on the quarterdeck using evergreen strip

9.) detail per your research and/or fancy.  Russel Crowe's Surprise had long 9 pounders on the gundeck, the historical Surprise was listed with 24 X 32 pdr. carronades on the gun deck. The kit supplied guns are reasonable for 9 pdrs. The Lindberg hull is sans hawse holes, so they need to be drilled. Like most plastic models it is virtually devoid of gun deck furniture (such as riding bitts). Also the modeler has to decide whether to use skid beams or an enclosed waist spar deck... either way, the ships boats move from the gundeck to the upper deck. and as mentioned on another JR thread, details for things such as anchors are different for British and French... it can go as far as your budget and interest lead you. 

As for other questions in the thread

Pin rails were introduced about 15 to 20 years after La Flore was built. For the Surprise, you need to add them for the mizzen and main masts... inside the raised bulwarks. For the foremast (no bulwarks), I think shroud cleats would be appropriate.  

The bottom of the vessel would have been coppered... whether coppered or not, sand off the planking, it's so out of scale it's cheesy. At this scale ~1/150th, I wouldn't worry about the plating texture, just paint the lower hull with copper, and maybe 'age' it as described in other threads in this forum.

 

 

 

 

 

     

 

 

 

 

 

scottrc wrote:

I have built two of the Lindberg kits.  One OOB and one as a Bristish converted 32 to represent a fictitional frigate from an Alexander Kent novel.

Hey, interesting idea - Phalarope or Tempest? I always wondered whether it might be worth the while to build a Sparrow with her two 32pdrs and oars.

Jorit

I have built two of the Lindberg kits.  One OOB and one as a Bristish converted 32 to represent a fictitional frigate from an Alexander Kent novel.

As what Mr Luther has pointed out, the differences of the British frigate and a French frigate are quite noticable.  The British would mix long guns with carronades and put the latter on the upper decks to be used when closing in on an engagement.  Also, it seems that details of the captured ship such as bulwarks and transome would be changed, or enlargened to meet Royal Navy requirements for trim and style.  These modifications would seem obvious in order to carry the heavier guns on the weather decks and to further accomodate the administrative functions for the ship.

One modification that I wish I had done was to cut the stern off and build a new transome, tumblehome, and galley.  I did enlarge the bulwarks, but the finished model, when compared to period plans and drawings, still looks French and just isn't right.

If I was to try to make this kit the Surprise, I would plan to be doing a lot of scatchbuilding, and use just the hull and maybe part of the deck as a guide.  However, I do seem to enjoy kit bashing a plastic kit with wood and other materials much more than the traditional start from scratch or just build OOB.

Scott

Hi all, and thanks for the replies!

I hope my original post did not give an incorrect impression that I was startig a "build thread" of the Surprise. Far from it, I am trying to decide whether to commit to staring a conversion of the Lindberg "Jolly Roger" to the Surprise. I haven't done a sailing ship for decades, but that's not for lack of interest. It's just that my modeling time is limited and I want to determine that if I commit to this project it will be worth it.
 

I fully understand the sentiment that if I go all-out on the rigging etc. the kit will end up lacking, just because it's a so-so kit and can't be improved. Nonetheless, I have ordered the Cunningham book as a reference; the drawings you describe sound exactly like what I am looking for. I thank you for the reference (FYI for all, it is out-of-print, but I got one cheap at Amazon).

Part of my problem is deciding what level of "accuracy" I want to acheive. After all, which "Surprise" are we talking about: 1) The real 1790s Surprise (the French Unite); 2) HMS Rose, the Surprise movie stand-in; 3) the LeFlore, the supposed prototype for the Lindberg kit; or 4) Surprise as presented in written description by O'Brian?

Anyway, I await my reference book, and will keep posting. Thanks again for all the input.

Weasel

P.S.: I'm amazed at the interest in sail ships on this board. I don't see that at other ship boards. Nice.

 

 

I corresponded early last year with another generous gentleman from California named Bill Luther, who had helped started an HMS Surprise SIG (Special Interest Group) with the San Diego Ship Modelers' Guild. He sent me a detailed e-mail with some good information, which I have attached below (I don't think he would mind). He also sent me a couple really excellent line drawings of the Surprise, including the one he references below that was scaled to fit the Jolly Roger kit hull.

"Greetings fellow Surpriser's,

Master Sergeant Don Ferguson from US Marine Corps, who also works as part of the crew of Rose/Surprise replica in San Diego naval museum also is doing that same conversion and has gone a lot of way in his project. You can see his work here: http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery/misc/sail/surprise-130-df/df-index.html

Feel free to contact him, he's an extraordinary, utmost kind gentleman. He's ready to help anyone who looks for help. I also call to Ctulhu (sorry for pun ) if he could contact with Don. "Top" was last looking for him in the steelnavy message board to learn the secret of making realistic paper sails

all my best, best regards to everybody.

The Lindberg "Jolly Roger" is a reissue of a sixties-vintage kit that was intended to represent an eighteenth-century French frigate named La Flore. We've discussed it in several good threads in this Forum.  If you do a search on you'll find all sorts of info about the history of the real ship (which is a matter of some controversy) and tips on improving the kit.  But - the more, the merrier.  I personally think it's great to see how several modelers go about tackling the same subject.

Several companies sell aftermarket blocks, deadeyes, and other fittings that will come in handy on a project like this.  My personal favorites are the Britannia metal fittings from Bluejacket ( www.bluejacketinc.com ).  They aren't cheap, and do require cleanup and painting, but they're beautiful castings and will go a long way toward making a classy model.

The kit shows its age and has some problems, but it really isn't a bad one.  As you'll see from the other threads, it certainly can form the basis for a fine, serious scale model.

Good luck.  It's a great hobby.

Please do!  Even though the Jolly Rodger has been done many times, each builder has a different take on the ship.  I haven't seen the kit converted to the HMS Surprise, so I think it would be a wonderful project for everyone to see.

This forum is not necessarily for showing off a particular model, but for the exchange of skills and views on the craft of modelling itself.  Personally, I welcome everyone's take on the art, no matter what they build.  Plus, the more long term projects that are posted here the better.  I'm doing the Soleil Royal (when I actually have free time).  It's been done here before and is not a very welcome kit by some because of it's historical inaccuracies.  But, everyone here welcomed me warmly.

So go ahead, take as many pics as possible and post as often as you can.  I would love to get some ideas on how to improve what I do...

I have no idea what the Lindberg "Jolly Roger" is supposed to represent as I am not familar with the kit, but if you hope to do a reasonably accurate rendition of Surprise then I encourage you to read through the Aubrey/Maturin books comprehensively. O' Brian's research is held to be very very good, and you'll get a lot of details of her rig, deck set up etc just by reading the novels, which in of themselves are a total treat.

Surprise was an actual ship. Her lines were taken off by the Admiralty when she was taken from the French. Brian Lavery has an excellent essay titled 'Jack Aubrey's Ships' in the book Patrick O'Brian: Critical Essays and a Bibliography, edited by AE Cunningham, ISBN#0-393-03626-X, WW NortonCo., 1994. He explores Surprise in helpful detail in 7 1/2 pages, and there's a doublefold lines drawing spread of her hull profile, sections, and a cutaway.

Lavery also authored the excellent The Arming and Fitting of the English Ship of War, Conway Maritime, 1987, which you'll find helpful as well. There are other books on typical period rigging practices, but if you go into it that deep then forget kit bashing the Jolly Roger, you won't be satisfied with the result.

I have been amazed for years that no one has come out with a kit of Surprise in plastic, resin, or wood. They'd have made a tidy penny, and no royalties would be owed to WW Norton or O'Brian's estate because she was a historical ship with published lines.

Good luck with your project-

I think it will be great to have another thread about this. I was also thinking about doing this same conversion some day and would love to see others go through it first! I recently watched the DVD and paid close attention to some of the ship details. I noticed that there was also some system of netting on the decks behind the rails. Can anyone describe these? I wondered if this was where extra sails or maybe hammocks were stored. I read somewhere that sometimes this stuff was placed on deck as a form of "sandbagging" (sorry, I'm still a grunt) before an engagement. It seems like there are a lot of interesting details that will make the model unique. I found a website about the ship used in the film. It has many great photos and a virtual tour of the ship that looks like it would be a great help. There was even a photo of the hull of the Acheron on this site:

http://www.tallshiprose.org/index.html

I hope this is some help. Sorry if this stuff was covered in another thread. I'm new at this. Good luck on your conversion. I'm looking forward to your build!

Devin

You won't get an argument from me. I would love to see these questions answered. We have had some discussions about blocks. Model Expo and Bluejacket offer replacements.

I too am an O'Brian convert. I have only read the first two though!