?METAL? HMS Victory

Sure.  One such scenario comes to mind immediately.  If a fairly heavy sea was running, it would threaten to send water in through the lower deck ports - especially those on the lee side.  There were a number of instances in eighteenth-century sea battles (the Battle of Cape Henry, in 1781, comes to mind) in which the ability of one side or the other to open its lower deck ports played a role in the outcome.

jtilley wrote:

Agreed on all points - except that there were plenty of reasons for a gunport to be open other than that the gun was being fired.  I never found that Revell configuration - with a handful of apparently-arbitrarily-selected ports open on the lower and middle decks - convincing, but it's not inconceivable.  Those particular guns could have been run out for drill, for instance, or the ports could have been open for ventilation.

Apologies for bumping a fairly old post, but this brings to mind a question I had:

Is it realistic to have the gun ports on the lower deck (or decks) shut and those on the upper ones
open? I assume so, but just wanted to make sure. This is what I've done on my Airfix HMS Victory, and (if it's not inaccurate) I'll probably use the same approach in future on other multiple-decked sailing warship kits.

We had an interesting Forum discussion not long ago about the changing price structure of plastic kits: 

http://www.finescale.com/FSM/CS/forums/622398/ShowPost.aspx

My contention is that kit prices have risen considerably faster than inflation, largely due to the changing nature of the hobby and the purchasers the manufacturers target.  The good news is that - though we sometimes don't like to admit it - the quality of the average kit, in terms of detail, accuracy, and sophistication, is a great deal higher than it was thirty years ago.  The bad news is that the high prices have combined with a number of other factors to drive kids almost completely out of the hobby.

Back in the Goode Old Dayes, Airfix was indeed one of the most progressive of hobby kit manufacturers.  Those books Chris referred to were part of a big publishing program that actively encouraged modelers to go beyond gluing the pieces together, and to learn about the history of the subjects they were modeling.  The old Airfix Magazine (which my local hobby shop in Columbus, Ohio stocked, albeit sometimes rather sporadically) carried monthly articles on how to do conversions (I wonder how many serious aircraft modelers got their start with Alan Hall's articles, which frequently advised the use of balsa wood coated with dope thickened with talcum powder), alternative color schemes, and the historical background of the latest Airfix kit subjects.  It seems like the company was cranking out five or six new kits every month.  OK, most of them didn't come up to the standards of 2006.  (Though some of them came pretty close.  I'm thinking, for instance, of the 1/24 Hawker Hurricane and Stuka, and the Wasa.) 

For a few years Airfix also published the Airfix Magazine Annual, which contained longer, more in-depth articles.  One particularly impressive feature of the magazine was its objectivity.  The monthly reviews gave full credit to high-quality products from other manufacturers - and showed no mercy to Airfix kits that didn't come up to snuff.

To its credit, Tamiya seems to be doing its best to carry on in that tradition.  The Tamiya Model Magazine (though a little hard to find here in the boondocks of North Carolina) carries some fine material.  But I miss the friendly, modest  quality of the little Airfix Magazine.

I remember at least two series of those nice Airfix books on specific model subjects - one on sailing ships and one on 1/24 aircraft.  (Chris mentioned one about a tank; I can't recall seeing that one.  There may also have been one on the 1/12 Bentley automobile; I can't remember.)  The ship subjects I can remember were the Victory, Cutty Sark, and Mayflower, and the aircraft the Spitfire, BF-109, P-51, Hurricane, and (I think) Stuka.  There may have been one or two more.  They were fine publications - though I must say I thought the aircraft books were more sophisticated than the ship ones.

millard wrote:

When Airfix came out with the HMS Victory.They also came out with a book on how to build it and super detail it.I don't believe any other model companies did this.I've got the book now wished I had it for both my Airfix build and the Revell build. Rod

I think that the Airfix HMS Victory book came out some years after the kit itself. The kit was first released in 1965, and the book was published in IIRC, 1970. Airfix (through Patrick Stephens Publishing, who published Airfix Magazine at the time) also produced 'how to' books on their 1/96 Mayflower, 1/24 Spitfire Ia, and 1/32 Crusader tank, possibly others.

Other manufacturers produce 'how to' books from time to time. Tamiya did one on their 1/48 Swordfish and their 1/35 Tiger I. It would have been nice if Heller could have done one for the 1/100 Victory, but then again, it might have been written by the same guys who wrote the Airfix version of the instructions.

Cheers,

Chris.

Hi Tech. Not too bad,

 

I had a customer who asked me to build the 1936 Merc. Benz 540 K Roadster by Pocher, on 2000+ parts.  The Pocher company has been sold.  They are at present in the process of being restructured. No Pocher kits are currently available.  

http://www.scaleautoworks.com/mercedes_photos.htm

 

Remember, during the '80's-'90's, were sold "hi-tech" models, by manufacturers, like Gunze Sangyo (cars,  tanks,...), including cast metal parts and PE brass parts (see this "Lotus Elan" model)http://www.lotuselan.net/publish/gunze_elan_s3_hi_tech_model.shtml

Heller did it too with aircraft kits.

  Those models were very expensive, and few of them sold well. 

Michel

 

Jtilley

You got to remember what we're making back then for a salary.When I got out of the Navy in 1969 I was working construction for $2.50 and hr.So to buy a kit it was like three hours of work for the $8.00 kit.So today when I spend $35.00 or so on a kit on Ebay its the same.

When Airfix came out with the HMS Victory.They also came out with a book on how to build it and super detail it.I don't believe any other model companies did this.I've got the book now wished I had it for both my Airfix build and the Revell build.

Rod

jtilley wrote:

Agreed on all points - except that there were plenty of reasons for a gunport to be open other than that the gun was being fired.  I never found that Revell configuration - with a handful of apparently-arbitrarily-selected ports open on the lower and middle decks - convincing, but it's not inconceivable.  Those particular guns could have been run out for drill, for instance, or the ports could have been open for ventilation.  The Airfix approach does offer the option of gluing all the portlids shut, thereby dispensing with the hokey-looking  "dummy" gun barrels.  Later Airfix offerings, such as the Wasa and St. Louis, had considerably deeper and more sharply-molded recesses to represent the gunports.  That Airfix Wasa is high on my list of favorite plastic sailing ship kits.  The "carved" ornamentation on it can stand comparison with anything Heller ever did.  yes - the good old days of reasonable kit prices!  If I remember right, I built my first Revell Victory (courtesy of mAh,y parents) when I was in the sixth grade.  That would have been in 1962 or 1963.  (The kit was initially released, according to Dr. Graham's fine book on the history of Revell, in 1959.)  At that time, and for quite some time after, all the Revell kits in that series - the Constitution, Bounty, Santa Maria, Flying Cloud, Eagle, etc. - cost $3.00 each.  I don't know the date of the Airfix kit's initial release, but I saw it for the first time in the U.S. in the late sixties.  Over here Airfix kits were marginally more expensive than their Revell counterparts; that one, in its big "Airfix Classic" box, was, I think, somewhere in the neighborhood of $8.00.  (By then the Revell $3.00 kits were up to $4.00, I think.)   I've read before of what wonderful bargains Airfix kits were in the U.K. back in those days.  I wonder how many parents of sixth graders would even consider buying kits like that for their kids nowadays - when comparable kits sell for upwards of $20.00.

Agreed on all points - except that there were plenty of reasons for a gunport to be open other than that the gun was being fired.  I never found that Revell configuration - with a handful of apparently-arbitrarily-selected ports open on the lower and middle decks - convincing, but it's not inconceivable.  Those particular guns could have been run out for drill, for instance, or the ports could have been open for ventilation. 

The Airfix approach does offer the option of gluing all the portlids shut, thereby dispensing with the hokey-looking  "dummy" gun barrels.  Later Airfix offerings, such as the Wasa and St. Louis, had considerably deeper and more sharply-molded recesses to represent the gunports.  That Airfix Wasa is high on my list of favorite plastic sailing ship kits.  The "carved" ornamentation on it can stand comparison with anything Heller ever did.

Ah, yes - the good old days of reasonable kit prices!  If I remember right, I built my first Revell Victory (courtesy of my parents) when I was in the sixth grade.  That would have been in 1962 or 1963.  (The kit was initially released, according to Dr. Graham's fine book on the history of Revell, in 1959.)  At that time, and for quite some time after, all the Revell kits in that series - the Constitution, Bounty, Santa Maria, Flying Cloud, Eagle, etc. - cost $3.00 each.  I don't know the date of the Airfix kit's initial release, but I saw it for the first time in the U.S. in the late sixties.  Over here Airfix kits were marginally more expensive than their Revell counterparts; that one, in its big "Airfix Classic" box, was, I think, somewhere in the neighborhood of $8.00.  (By then the Revell $3.00 kits were up to $4.00, I think.)   I've read before of what wonderful bargains Airfix kits were in the U.K. back in those days.  I wonder how many parents of sixth graders would even consider buying kits like that for their kids nowadays - when comparable kits sell for upwards of $20.00.

jtilley wrote:

I also have trouble reconciling myself to Airfix's approach to the guns on the middle and lower decks, where the gunports are represented as countersunk squares and the "guns" are just stumps.  Revell didn't have the nerve to provide separate pieces for all 102 (or 104, depending on which source you believe) guns, and molded most of the portlids shut.  But the guns that are included in the kit are full-length, complete with carriages.

The problem with Revell's approach is that you can't have an only partial broadside. Either all the gunports are open, or they're all closed. No half-and-half. As far as the Airfix approach to the lower and middle deck guns, fair point, but remember that the model was originally aimed at kids, and, when it first came out in the mid 1960s, cost, in the UK at least, less than $US2.00. At that price, you've got to make some compromises. Even so, it had more parts, by a large margin, than any Airfix kit before or, with the exception of the 1/24 Harrier and Sea Harrier, since.

IIRC, the Revell kit was significantly more expensive, but that may have been down to UK import duties.

Cheers,

Chris.

Zamak, mazak...whatever.  I don't know the definition of "white metal" either, the only things that come to mind are low-melt and good casting qualities.  I gather there are differing alloys for various purposes.  I could never understand the name - it's certainly not 'white'.

I reckon IMAI's metal Victory is designed more as a decorative piece rather than a strict scale model.  The smooth lower hull is copper painted and the upper portions dark blue(!)  As i said, it appeals to me because it's different.

I have seen the last kit you mention above, the Caldercraft one.  An expert model ship-builder I know has been working on it for a couple of years that I know of.  From time to time he swears off it and tries to give it away, but he always comes back.  If someone like that finds it so demanding then I think I'd stick with IMAI thanks.

I imagine the hull of that kit is indeed cast in zamac.  I don't know that "white metal" actually has any specific technical definition; I tend to use it whenever I'm talking about a soft, silver-grey casting metal.  That's probably sloppy use of the language on my part.

I'd forgotten about the brass deck pieces.  I'm not quite sure why the company chose that material - but to each his (or her) own.  It is indeed different.

We've had some interesting discussions about the various Victory kits here in the Forum during the past few months - largely due to the efforts of our friend Michel.vrtg, who surely can now claim to be the reigning authority on the subject.  Here's an example:  http://www.finescale.com/FSM/CS/forums/610184/ShowPost.aspx

Identifiying the scales of the various kits turned into something of a project.  Apparently the people responsible for the boxes and instruction sheets had only the vaguest notion of the concept of scale.  It turns out that the Airfix kit (the larger of the two Airfix kits, that is) is on about 1/171 scale, and the Revell one is about 1/220.  (If the Revell one were indeed 1/146 and the Airfix one 1/180, the Revell kit would be the larger of the two.  That obviously isn't the case.)

I have lots of pleasant memories of both those old kits.  I agree with Chris Hall that Airfix did a better job on some of the details - notably the upper deck stanchions and the figurehead.  But I continue to think there's something seriously wrong with the shape of the Airfix kit's bow - an area that Revell got right.  I also have trouble reconciling myself to Airfix's approach to the guns on the middle and lower decks, where the gunports are represented as countersunk squares and the "guns" are just stumps.  Revell didn't have the nerve to provide separate pieces for all 102 (or 104, depending on which source you believe) guns, and molded most of the portlids shut.  But the guns that are included in the kit are full-length, complete with carriages.

If I were to rate the Victory kits with which I'm acquainted (not all that are on the market, by any means), the list - from high score to low - probably would be as follows:

1.  Heller 1/100.  It's got some problems - most notably the configuration of the forecastle bulwarks - but generally it's a fine basis for a scale model.  And in my opinion Heller probably was right to omit the elaborate entry ports.

2.  Revell 1/220, in an almost dead tie with:

3.  Airfix 1/171. 

4.  Skytrex 1/700.  This, incidentally, is the only one that does have raised forecastle bulwarks.

One other kit unquestionably belongs very high on the list:  the CalderCraft/Jotika wood kit, on 1/72 scale.  I haven't actually seen that one - and given its price of over $1,000 I rather doubt that I ever will - but the photos and web descriptions make it clear that it's a first-rate kit.

chris hall wrote:

millard wrote: HMS Victory model in metal come up so often on Ebay.The last one about a month ago went for over $180.00.I agree with John The Revell plastic and the Heller 1/100 scale are better kits.I've always been keen on Imai kits but this is not one of there better efforts.Don't be fooled that its been shrink wrapped for over twenty years.Almost all hobby centers have a shrink wrap machine in the back. Rod If the Revell 1/146 kit is better, then so is the Airfix 1/180 kit, which has better detail accuracy than the Revell kit. Cheers, Chris Chris the Airfix kit does have good detail.The one I built several years ago had very brittle plastic.I was forever breaking off piece's.I had a lot of trouble with the stern fit ended up doing a lot of filling.For me the Revell kit went together nicer so I have fonder memorys of it. Rod

millard wrote:

HMS Victory model in metal come up so often on Ebay.The last one about a month ago went for over $180.00.I agree with John The Revell plastic and the Heller 1/100 scale are better kits.I've always been keen on Imai kits but this is not one of there better efforts.Don't be fooled that its been shrink wrapped for over twenty years.Almost all hobby centers have a shrink wrap machine in the back. Rod

If the Revell 1/146 kit is better, then so is the Airfix 1/180 kit, which has better detail accuracy than the Revell kit.

Cheers,

Chris

Well, I don't know what it says about me but I went out of my way to get one of those metal kits.  Yeah, I know it's not a great scale model but it's "different".

The hull isn't white metal incidentally, it's a mazak or similar diecast.  As jtilley suggests the masts and yards are wood.  The decks, interestingly enough, are etched brass as is all the fretwork around the bowsprit.

I love it.....

They ain't no way I would spend that much on a 150th. scale ship model, although I have gotten silly over a few.

Right now I just got 5 orders for the Monogram VVA statue kits and I'm scrambling to find 3 more.  Hobby Lobby normally caries them but I'm running into brick walls.  Anbody got any they want to sell ?

Jake

HMS Victory model in metal come up so often on Ebay.The last one about a month ago went for over $180.00.I agree with John The Revell plastic and the Heller 1/100 scale are better kits.I've always been keen on Imai kits but this is not one of there better efforts.Don't be fooled that its been shrink wrapped for over twenty years.Almost all hobby centers have a shrink wrap machine in the back.

Rod

I remember taking a look at this kit back in the late seventies.  I think it was in a hobby shop in Pensauken, New Jersey.  My thought at the time was, "This is just about the most ridiculous ship model kit I've ever seen."  The hull halves were cast in white metal; most of the other parts were plastic.  (The spars may have been wood; my memory is foggy on that point.)  Overall, the kit wasn't as well detailed as the considerably smaller Revell plastic one.  Those metal hull halves were particularly crude, with nothing approaching the nice, if slightly overemphasized, "anchor stock" planking on the Revell version.

I can't imagine why the people at Imai, whose products generally were first-rate, thought it would be a good idea to make a sailing ship model with a cast-metal hull.  Apparently it was a dud in terms of sales.  Maybe it's a partial explanation for why Imai went out of business a few years later.

I'm not opposed to white metal hulls under all circumstances. One of my favorite Victory  kits, as I've mentioned before in this Forum, is the little 1/700 cast metal one from Skytrex.  But that big Imai one is just a curiosity.

Wow Look at the bid history, that guy must have really wanted it BAD.

 

My LHS back home had one on the shelf for years.  It retailed around $200 and this was back in the 70s.  I remember looking at it from time to time and thought, man, what a lot of soldering and superglue.
The box was 30" x 20" and it weighted a few pounds.
The details were quite good for an all cast, white metal, model.

Scott