Removing "fuzz" from rigging thread.

Just leaving the thread I would like to tell you that the former GORCH FOCK (later sowjet and than ucrainien TOWARISCHTSCH ist back home. Since 2005 the GORCH FOCK is back in germany and got her old name. She is now restored as museum and towed in a position just a few miles from the point where she was sunk by the crew in 1945.

She is different from the GORCH FOCK  - better GORCH FOCK II  - of the german navy, built in 1957 and still the german training ship.

But it is true, they all are sisters and looking similar from a distance. The USCG EAGLE is often in germany e.g. for the annual kiel-week, the biggest sailing event in the world, where she's towed near the GORCH FOCK II whenever possible.

You could use the different Revell's models of the Gorch Fock to modify them into the EAGLE.

Would you think it's useful to open a new thread for the ancient roman warships ?

jtilley wrote:

This thread has moved a long way from de-fuzzing rigging line.  But it sure has gone in some interesting directions.

As the originator of this thread, let me be the first to say that I am delighted in ALL the directions this thread has gone.

It's great when one simple question can spark several satellite conversations, all model related. That is one of the things I like best about these forums, and this particular forum. It's like being at a model gathering any time of the day just talking about modeling.

Anyhow, I take no offense to anyone high jacking my threads, just so long as the topic remains "models"!

 

 

By coincidence I bought that Academy "Roman Warship" kit myself a few months ago.  My wife and I went to a hobby shop looking for a project that my eight-year-old grandson and I could do when he came to visit for a week in the summer.  As soon as I got the shrink-wrap off the box of the Roman warship I realized I'd made a big mistake:  no way could anybody build that kit in a week.  (We did a Tamiya triceratops diorama instead - and a superb kit it is.)

I know scarcely anything about ancient warships, but I'm quite impressed with the kit.  I think it's a reissue of an Imai product - and Imai, as we've noted many times in this Forum, may well have been the best manufacturer of plastic sailing ship kits ever. 

One feature of the kit that immediately got my attention is the little black sprue of deadeyes and blocks.  Some incredibly ingenious person (the type that apparently worked for Imai in the goode olde dayes) figured out how to make injection-molded blocks and deadeyes to scale - with holes through them and grooves around them.  Close inspection reveals that they came from an extremely sophisticated "slide mold," with at least four pieces.  They have an eighteenth- or nineteenth-century look to them; I question whether such fittings would be found on board a Roman vessel.  But if Academy made those parts available separately I'd buy them by the gross.

Elsewhere, the kit radiates ingenuity in design and attention to detail.  The "wood grain" detail is some of the most convincing I've seen - on a par with the best Imai kits (which is saying a good deal).  Even the injection-molded "sails," from which I instinctively recoil, are beautifully sculpted to look like there's a gentle breeze blowing in them, and their edges are chamfered so their thickness isn't as obvious as it might be.  And how about those "gold"-plated lions on the stand?

I do have some reservations about the kit.  First, as zulucharlie noted, the stated scale of 1/250 just can't be right.  I think 1/72 may be a little big; I'm not sure the necessary number of 1/72 oarsmen would fit.  But there's no way that thing is on 1/250.

Second, I'm pretty sure the design of the kit originated quite a few years ago - before the most recent generation of research into ancient galley technology.  I'm sure jwintjes can comment on this subject far more intelligently than I can, but I instinctively have some doubts about any galley reconstruction that predates the great Olympias project.

Finally, it looks to me like the designers made one big mistake:  they didn't understand the function of the outriggers.  (I hope that's the right term.  I'm talking about the long "boxes" that protrude from each side of the ship, providing the fulcrums for the oars.)  The single row of oars (which, to my eye, look a little oversized) is designed to project through elongated holes in the bottoms of the outriggers.  There's also a row of holes in the outboard face of each outrigger; as I understand it, those holes are supposed to receive another row of oars.  In other words, the kit represents a bireme, but is missing a row of oars.

At any rate, my grandson and his parents in Texas are delighted with his triceratops diorama, and I've got a Roman warship in my stash awaiting my attention.

This thread has moved a long way from de-fuzzing rigging line.  But it sure has gone in some interesting directions.

Hello John,

not only Zvezda issued an old ship. Some two years ago I found a model of a roman warship, issued by academy. The company made a mistake by telling the scale 1:250 .  In fact the scale is about 1:72.

When I recognized this, I bought one and had a lot uf pleasure building it. It is easy to be built but could be improved in many ways - and building hours.

It is still on the workbench. Now I'm rigging it because I wanted to show the ship sailing. I did not use the massive plastic sails provided but used them to form paper sails. Now the rigging is to be done with all the lines that are needed.

There is still doubt how the romans did it in detail. But this model is a nice opportunity to speculate in a more or less scientific way.

Well okay then, that's more like it!

I have requested plans from the CG historian's office, so when they arrive I'll review them to see if a possible resin kit might be worth the effort, since the likelihood of a plastic kit company doing it is slim at best.

I'll keep everyone posted, but most likely on the other thread titled "1/96 USCG Training Ship Eagle".

Goshawk wrote:

Shame on you rcboater! No mention of a new, accurate kit of the subject of your avatar? How beautiful would a 1/96 scale injection molded Eagle be? Granted, not a kit to bring a beginner into the model ship building hobby, but certainly it meets all the other criteria. It is very well known (at least in the USA), it is a beautiful ship, and my guess is it would sell very well. I know I would buy one in a heartbeat!

That's because an EAGLE goes without saying!  Doesn't everyone realise that this thread had morphed into  "After a 1/96 scale USCGC Eagle, what other new sailing ship kit would you like see?"  <g>

 

Well, I for one am very unhappy with the business practices of the major model companies.  They avoid new and better sailing ship kits due to the so called faltering interest.  I believe that it would work the other way for them.  Produce new kits of some of the most famous ships in history in all categories.  They would not only refuel the building frenzy of us diehards but would also bring back those who have left due to lack of new worthwhile kits.  And that's not counting the newer generations of modelers coming up.

I love the HMS Surprise from the movie so I took the Lindberg Jolly Roger and built my own.  I believe that she looks just like the ship in the movie and am very pleased and proud of her.  I have the large and the small Constitution.  I read about the famous battle between her and the Guerriere so I took the kit of the small USS United States and converted it into the Guerriere.  Her and the Constitution look absolutely great next to each other.  I would pay almost any price for a kit of the Guerriere in the same size as the large Constitution.  The same goes if someone would come out with a large HMS Surprise and a retool of some large scale clipper ships which I think were the most beautiful ships to ever sail the oceans.

Dale

Goshawk's last comment strikes a familiar tone.  I vividly remember, when I was working my way through grad school in a hobby shop, listening to the plaintive whines of the airplane modelers who wanted a decent B-36 kit.  When the Monogram 1/72 one was announced, my boss ordered a dozen.  When they came in, almost all the customers had the same reaction:  "Wow!  Great! Fifteen dollars?  Sorry, no place to put it - and my wife would kill me.  What's coming in next week?"

Nothing in this world could persuade me to try to make a living in the hobby business.

Shame on you rcboater! No mention of a new, accurate kit of the subject of your avatar?

How beautiful would a 1/96 scale injection molded Eagle be? Granted, not a kit to bring a beginner into the model ship building hobby, but certainly it meets all the other criteria. It is very well known (at least in the USA), it is a beautiful ship, and my guess is it would sell very well. I know I would buy one in a heartbeat!

All of the other suggestions by you, sumpter250 and jtilley are great, any one of those subjects would make for a terrific kit. I guess we can only hope that someone out there, maybe Trumpeter, will have the guts to venture into these uncharted waters. If they do, as a group I would hope that we would support them by actually purchasing their product. All too often, I here modelers whine about no company taking on "X" subject, and then when one company does, it doesn't sell worth a damn. It is a two-way street you know, we as hobbyists do have an obligation to support companies that bring out kits of what we ask. And no, I don't work for any kit company!

 

 

I always thought that there should be a edecnt model of the two most significant ship types of the Napoleonic era-- the British 38 gun frigate and the 74 gun ship of the line.

I've always wished that Revell had made a Guerriere to go with their 1/96 scale Constitution.....

I think that the obvious subject these days would be the HMS Surprise.  (Though I suspect the licensing fees would kill any chance to make this a viable proposition....)

Wow.  Interesting question.

I agree with Jwintjes that the old Heller Nina, Pinta, and Santa Maria make good starter kits.  The problem is that, at least in the U.S., they're hard to find - not the sort of thing the beginner is likely to see in the local hobby or craft shop.

Actually an up-to-date yacht America probably would make a nice subject.  Lots of people - including non-modelers - have heard of her, she has minimal rigging, and few more handsome ships have ever been built.

We need a good styrene Viking ship - a scale model of either the Oseberg or Gokstad Ship.  The old Revell Gokstad Ship from 1976 was excellent; I'd be delighted if Revell reissued it.  I believe one of the European companies has announced a Viking ship of some sort for the near future; I'll be interested to see it. 

Some of the later America's Cup contenders - the J Boats of the 1930s, like the Rainbow or the Endeavour - would also be good subjects.  One mast apiece.  A couple of wood kit manufacturers have tried resin-hull J Boat kits, though, and I have the impression that they haven't sold well.

Lots of tourists in the neighborhood of the Great Lakes have seen the reconstructed War of 1812 brig Niagra.  There's already a good plank-on-bulkhead kit from Model Shipways, but a plastic one would be nice.  On the other hand, she actually has quite a  lot of rigging - not the best beginner's subject.

More than a million people are expected to visit the Jamestown Settlement historic site during 2007.  How about a set of Jamestown ships - the Discovery, Godspeed, and Susan Constant?  Building them in that order would be an excellent, progressive course in ship modeling.

Many, many years ago Pyro made a plastic kit of a Chesapeake Bay skipjack - the last working sailing craft in the U.S.  Skipjacks make beautiful, interesting models.  The Model Shipways Willie L. Bennett is a fine kit, but it takes a lot of work to turn it into a real showpiece.  A skipjack would make a nice subject for an up-to-date plastic kit.  It could be fitted out with oyster dredging gear and people - and would make a fine exercise for weathering techniques.  (Any active, oystering skipjack is among the dirtiest vessels ever seen.)

The archives of the old U.S. Revenue Cutter Service are full of plans of handsome ships.  Maybe they aren't as well-known to the public as some, but anybody who sees a finished model of the Joe Lane or the Morris is almost guaranteed to think it's pretty.  Another subject that the public seems to like is the Model Shipways Sultana.  Wouldn't the Sultana (or the Halifax, or one of the other colonial schooners) make a handsome styrene kit?

What I would like to see (and I doubt that I ever will) is a big variety of accurate, well-designed sailing ship kits in styrene, offering the potential purchaser a choice of historical periods, subjects, sizes, and degrees of difficulty.  The experienced modeler needs some new kits too.  How about a 1/96 American clipper ship?  Or a decent fishing schooner?  Or the Mary Rose?  (Ok, we don't know enough about the missing parts of her to reconstruct her with much confidence, but what would be wrong with an intelligent piece of guesswork - like the Revell Golden Hind?)  How about some American sailing warship other than the Constitution?  (The frigates from the Revolution would make fine subjects.)  Or some British sailing warship other than the Victory?  (Would folks who've built the Revell 1/96 Constitution be prepared to shell out the additional cash for a 1/96 Guerriere?  I have no idea.) 

I suspect anybody who's actually involved in the marketing of plastic kits has concluded by now that I'm hopelessly naive - and I probably am.  On the other hand, the state of the plastic sailing ship kit business seems to suggest that the people in charge of it haven't done such a great job of judging the market themselves.  Maybe the concept of the plastic sailing ship model just isn't economically viable.  But I hope the manufacturers don't give up on the idea completely.  As I understand it, Heller was actually surprised at how many people bought its Soleil Royal (a kit that I can't recommend personally, but that seems to have struck a responsive chord among the buying public).  It seems there are people out there who want to buy such kits. 

The bottom line, in my mind, is that the beginner ought to be encouraged to start with a well-designed kit representing an attractive, historically significant, relatively small kit on a relatively large scale.  Not a huge, expensive kit that takes months or years to build, and forces the purchaser to choose between building it out of the box and getting an unimpressive result or spending lots of extra time and money to "accurize" it.  Give the beginner a nice, well-detailed America, Discovery, or Sultana - a kit that he/she can turn into a nicely detailed, accurate model in a few weeks of evenings, without investing hundreds of dollars in it.  That, to my notion, is the way to learn ship modeling, have fun with it - and expand the hobby.

I would think some sort of schooner or brigantine in 1/8" scale might fit the bill...

There haven't been many three masted schooners modeled, or maybe even a Hudson River Sloop in 1/96.  The last sloop I remember was the Marine Models "Victorine". Pete Seeger's "Clearwater" would be a great prototype for a sloop model.

All very good points John.

Although we have departed from the original direction of this thread, let me pose this question while we are on the subject.

If a kit manufacturer were to produce an all new tool sailing ship model, what would your choice of subject be. Keeping in mind that he would want to sell it to the average skill level builder with the hopes of generating significant interest in the category. And he would also want it to be a somewhat manageable size and scale. The subject would also have to be a fairly recognizable ship that the average modeler would know.

I would think some sort of schooner or brigantine in 1/8" scale might fit the bill...

 

I'm afraid I have to concur with Goshawk's gloomy assessment of the future for the plastic sailing ship kit. 

I see two reasons for faint optimism.  One, as Goshawk suggested, is the resin market.  A couple of resin kit manufacturers have dipped their toes into the sailing ship field.  For a while Model Shipways was producing its pretty little pilot schooner Phantom with a resin hull.  I was one of the few people who bought the kit in that format.  The resin hull had some accuracy problems, but I'm happy with the finished model and I think the company was on the right track.  I guess the kit didn't sell well, though; MS recently re-released it with the old solid wood hull.

One of the cottage industry firms recently issued a Morris-class revenue cutter with a resin hull.  My senile brain has forgotten the name of the company; maybe another Forum member can help.

The other sign of faint hope is the Russian company Zvezda.  It recently issued a styrene Hanseatic cog in 1/75 scale.  That struck me as an extremely intelligent move.  The kit should appeal to more than one segment of the market (the wargamers should like it), the subject is both attractive and important, and, with only one mast, a bowsprit, and two yards, the kit should be easy to complete to a high standard in a couple of weeks of evenings.  I suspect Zvezda intended it to fit in with the company's range of soft-plastic medieval figure sets - which do indeed have the potential to make it into an impressive display piece.  It will be interesting to see what Zvezda does next.

The big manufacturers do seem to be feeling a little adventurous these days.  I'm thinking of Hasegawa's Mikasa, for example, and Trumpeter seems to be seeking subjects for big, expensive kits that either fill in gaps in the current ranges or replace out-of-date kits from other manufacturers.  (I confess I practically tossed my coffee when I saw an ad for the new Trumpeter 1/700 Nimitz - at a price of about $80.) 

I suspect our dreams of a Tamiya Flying Cloud or a Hasegawa British frigate won't be realized in this lifetime.  But I do see signs of some interesting developments in the not-too-distant future.

Okay then, seeing as I am a fan of the informal I guess I'll just go with John.

Anyhow, I appreciate your candid description of your experience at the Mariner's Museum. Having also experienced the feeling of let down associated with a job in a field that seemed cool from the outside, I can surely relate. I grew up a toy industry brat, my dad working for some long gone companies including Remco, Aurora and Mego. After graduating high school, I served an apprenticeship at Mego as a model maker, hoping to realize my dream of someday working for a model kit manufacture. I've now been in the toy industry for 30 years, having yet to work for a model kit manufacturer (and with that industry shrinking by the minute, my hopes are diminishing with it). Working for a toy company is the exact OPPOSITE of what was represented in the movie "Big". Not fun, no reward for talent or effort, run by incompetent idiots, relatively low pay, etc. Sound familiar?

Lately I've been wondering what working for a museum would be like. Thanks to your response above, I have a pretty good idea. Basically going from the frying pan into the fire. I guess I'll stay where I am for now!

As for the plastic kit companies doing anything new in the sailing ship category, even with interest here on this forum as well as others, I don't see it happening anytime in the foreseeable future. I don't think it is an issue of interest as much as it is cost. I can't even imagine what the tooling cost for a brand new sailing ship model would be in today's dollars, but I know way back when Revell, Aurora, and the rest were doing new kits it was in the $100-200K range. And that would be in 1970s dollars. They would have to sell a warehouse full of kits (in the order of 50-100K per year) to justify the expenditure. I wouldn't do it with my money, even if I had the money to spend.

However, the other option available to modelers in other modeling categories (aircraft, armor, and automotive) is resin. And even though many subjects have been done in resin of modern ships, I am curious why no one has done any classic sailing ship resin kits, at least not that I am aware. It might be the only way we will ever see a new, accurate and relatively easy to assemble (compared to wood) sailing ship model done.

Here's hoping!

Tory

Glad to be of help.  Any form of address, up to and including "hey, you," works fine.  Newcomers are the lifeblood of the hobby.  One of the most interesting aspects of this Forum, to me at least, is the sheer number of people who seem to be interested in plastic sailing ship kits.  I don't think the manufacturers know how many of us there are.  If the people at Revell, Heller, et al - and maybe even the big Japanese companies - would pay some attention to this Forum, maybe they'd conclude that they're missing out on a potentially lucrative share of the market.

Working in a maritime museum has its good and bad sides.  I was at the MM for three years, and they were indeed interesting ones.  The great thing about that job was that when I got to work at 9:00 I had no idea what I'd be doing before I went home at 5:00.  The down sides included the pay (which was miserable) and the necessity of serving under a board of trustees that, as far as I was concerned, was professionally incompetent and ethically contemptible.  In 1983, after a series of financial blunders on the part of the board practically wrecked the place (and got all the staff salaries frozen), I concluded I couldn't stand to work in the place any more.  That was when I applied for a job at East Carolina University. 

Since then the administration has gotten worse.  I last visited the MM about thirteen years ago.  On the way back to Greenville, my wife asked me, "do you realize that you were in a good mood when we started this trip, but ever since we walked into the Mariners' Museum you've been acting like a crab?"  She was right.  I haven't set foot in the place since - and have no intention of doing so unless and until there's a major change of management.  My blood pressure is more important to me than anything I could see in that museum.

The Crabtree models were the bane of my existence for those three years.  I've ranted on that subject in this Forum before; there's no point in repeating everything I said earlier.  In brief, though, August Crabtree was a superb miniature carver and craftsman.  He was also a human being.  Human beings get better at their skills as they get more experience - and Crabtree was no exception.  The best of his models - i.e., the ones he made late in his life - are among the finest ship models I've ever seen, in every respect.  The early ones aren't up to the same standards - and certainly don't represent today's state of the art with regard to research. 

When Crabtree built those models, many of the sources of information about maritime history that are now taken for granted hadn't been published.  Crabtree's collection was a pioneering effort, and some of those models just don't come up to modern standards of accuracy.  The most glaring example is the "armed brig, circa 1810."  It was intended to be a reconstruction of the Revolutionary War brig Lexington.  Crabtree's "research" consisted of buying a copy of a 1927 edition of Mechanix Illustrated magazine.  The Lexington plans in that magazine are regarded nowadays as the classic example of how not to reconstruct an eighteenth-century ship.  I was responsible for getting the "Lexington" label removed from the model - to the accompaniment of considerable protest from the considerable number of "Crabtree groupies," who worshipped those models like holy relics.

Another aspect of the Crabtree Gallery that's worth noting is the lighting.  I understand the gallery has been renovated recently; I don't know what it looks like now.  In my day it was a darkened room, with the models mounted in individual glass cases illuminated from above.  The models appeared to be floating in gold-colored boxes.  I've seen groups of people walk into that gallery and instinctively start communicating in whispers.  (I've also caught pairs of high school students making out in the dark corners.)  It was one of the most effective pieces of exhibition design I've ever seen.

On the other hand, I once had one of the Crabtree models out of its case in the curatorial work area, sitting on a block of foam rubber under flourescent light.  Several museum staff members, walking by on their way to lunch, said "where'd you get the model?"  When I told them it was a Crabtree model, they found it hard to believe.

We shouldn't be hard on Crabtree's research; that would be like criticizing the Wright Brothers for failing to invent the jet engine.  But I think we should evaluate the models like any others - realistically, and in the context of the time in which they were built.  I agree completely that every ship model enthusiast ought to see the Crabtree models  Study the carvings on them with awe and even reverence.  If you're lucky enough to be able to display your models the way those are, for heaven's sake do it.  But don't look at those models as examples of how to build a ship model in 2006.

Once again, thank you for your help on this jtilley (or do you prefer Prof. Tilley, or just John?). And let me take this opportunity to thank you for all the help you offer us neophytes on this forum, I have yet to see any request for help go unanswered by you or any of the other learned builders. It is such a pleasure to come here and read the exchanges of information, although it can become habit forming!

That is a very amusing story of your quest for brass hinges for a 100 year old skylight, I can only imagine the expression on the faces of those you inquired with.

To have worked at the Mariners museum must have been fascinating. I was there for the first time last year and was totally mesmerized by it all. For me the highlight of the visit was the Crabtree Collection, anyone interested in model ship building should make a point of seeing that.

 Again, thank you.

 

Tory

 

I can't comment intelligently on any specifics of the Revell America kit; I haven't seen one for about thirty years.  My guess, though, is that you're right:  the designers probably simplified the rigging, though the rigging of the original was simple enough that the problem probably isn't as severe as in many other kits.

What you need is a good set of plans.  Several wood kit companies have made America kits over the years.  Model Shipways used to have one with plans by the estimable George Campbell, but it's been out of production for some time.  (MS currently is reviving many of its old solid-hull kits; maybe it will get around to that one.)  Bluejacket (www.bluejacketinc.com) has a plank-on-frame kit with good plans.  I think they'd sell you a set of the plans, which would have all the information you'd need.

I had one personal experience with the America when I was working at the Mariners' Museum.  The last temporary exhibition I was involved with, in 1983, was about the history of the America's Cup.  (We picked a great year to do that exhibition - the year the U.S. lost the cup for the first time.)  We had two relics of the America to exhibit:  a half-model of her that had been presented to Queen Victoria by the designer, George Steers, and the main skylight.  The problem with the latter was that most of the brass hinges on the glazed panels were missing.  I had the job of driving around Tidewater Virginia with one of the few remaining hinges, trying to find a ship chandler who could supply some duplicates.  The first question I usually got asked by the guys behind the counters was, "how old is this thing?"  The reaction when I answered can well be imagined.  Nobody had anything close.  I finally wound up at a machine shop in Newport News, whose supervisor took pity on me and agreed to make a custom set of hinges for a few hundred dollars.

Thanks again to all who responded to my request for help.

I have rigged the America per the Revell diagrams and all that is left to do now is add the anchors and flags. My guess is that the diagram showing the flag placement is accurate (the ensign at the top of the mainsail towards the stern and the NYYC pennant at the top of the mainmast).

However, while gazing upon my nearly completed model I just can't help but feel like there is still rigging missing. I've read posts by Prof. Tilley that almost all model ships have varying degrees of simplified rigging, and I'm guessing that the Revell America is no exception. I'm just wondering if there are any comprehensive plans for the America available that would show all the rigging that I could use to enhance what is described in the kit instructions.

Again, any help would be greatly appreciated.

Use nylon thread instead of cotton thread.  It is easily managed, no fuzzies, and does not stretch or break like cotton thread.

Dale

Thanks for the information John.

It seems that Revell did do their homework on this kit, and I can tell you first hand it is a pleasure to build. The instructions are first rate, the detail is beautiful and the accuracy seems to be right on from what little information I can gather off the internet. This is the first sailing ship model I have biult in a good 30 years (Revell's Cutty Sark being the last) and it is a great kit to re-familiarize myself with sailing ship modeling. Not a lot of rigging, at least compared to a square rigged ship!

A funny side note on my little adventure with the America. I read that the Eagle and tiller from the actual America currently resides in the NY Yacht Club on 44th Street in Manhatten. Since I work in Manhatten, I decided to take a little strole over to see if I could get at least a glimpse of it. It turns out that these two artifacts are hung right in the lobby of the club in plain view. Though I couldn't gain permission to view the "Model Room" which is reserved for club members, just seeing those America pieces really connected me to my model the way visiting the Constitution or Cutty Sark would do for someone building those models.

I'll try to post some photos of it when it's complete, if I can figure out how to do that on this forum!

Thanks again.

Tory

The first America's Cup race took place in 1851.  By that time chain anchor cable was pretty common in merchant ships - though warships were a little more reluctant to adopt it.  My guess is that Revell is right in providing anchor chain.

There are various good ways to blacken it.  Decent hobby shops sell chemical blackeners; if you've got a hobby shop in your vicinity that caters to serious model railroaders, it should be able to help.  Gun blueing will accomplish the same thing.  It can be found at stores that sell rifles - including WalMart.

If you use any sort of blackening chemical, I recommend giving the finished product a shot of flat-finish lacquer, such as Testor's Dullcoat.  Otherwise the stuff sometimes tends to flake off.

You can, of course, also just paint the chain flat black.  If you do that, try to handle it as little as possible afterward; the links of the chain will tend to rub the paint off when they scrape against each other.

That old Revell America is a pretty nice old kit - and a rare one.  Good luck.

Thanks to all of you for the help and suggestions.

I tried the beeswax tonight and it worked great. It not only eliminated the fuzz, but also helped straighten the thread. And as a bonus, I found that the knots held tighter while I placed a tiny drop of glue on them. Good stuff that beeswax!

While I have your attention, I was wondering if anyone would know whether the America actually had anchor chain (as supplied in the kit) or rope. The kit supplied chain is bright copper in color, I'm assuming it would need to be blackened if used.

Again, any help would be appreciated.

Tory

I agree with bees wax and would also add. bow string wax. You can find it in any archery shop and some gun shops.

Super glue will discolor your running rigging. I second using the white glue. You can try using a locking set of twezers to put just a little weight to the line until the white glue sets. Don't hang the twezers from the spar, just rest it on an angle putting just enough tension to hold the line in place without warping your spar.


Mike

I use coat thread instead of the kit supplied stuff. It does not get fuzzy and always stays tight. Available at fabric and sewing stores.

 

Here's a suggestion that works well for me. Stretch your line first, before running it thru the beeswax. Next run the line thru your fingers to smooth it out. Finally I use deluted white glue rather than CA on rigging, more forgiving and doesn't dry glossy.

Beeswax, that's it! Thanks Scott.

Is there any problem using super glue with the thread after running it through the wax?

Beeswax. It not only peels away the fuzzies, but makes the thread more managable and resililant to moisture.  You can get it at any craft store in small cakes.  Just run the thread through the cake.

Scott