Revell 1/150 USS United States

jtilley wrote:

We had a good discussion of the old Revell 1/196 Constitution kit in the Forum a couple of months ago. I've moved it to the first page; it should appear just below this one. If rayers's United States kit is indeed a reissue of that one, the comments in that thread - regarding the big, solid hatch on the spar deck, for instance - presumably are applicable. I'm not sure this is the kit rayers has, though. I just checked the Revell Germany website. There's a "1/150" U.S.S. United States on it all right - and it's described as having a one-piece hull. There's no photograph of the kit - just a reproduction of the box art. And the dimensions (assuming my conversion from the metric system is reasonably accurate) don't check out for 1/150. They're way too small. I wonder if this kit is the old Constitution that Monogram issued back in the late seventies. That's the only one I can recall that had a one-piece hull. It was promoted as being the ultimate in simplicity, at a time when the plastic ship model industry was just about dead. I seem to recall that the yards were molded integrally with the masts, as well. Monogram did a Cutty Sark in a similarly-sized box at the same time, with similar simplifications. Rayers - does yours have a one-piece hull? Regarding the United States herself - my impression is that she had the "round house" (i.e., raised quarterdeck) from the beginning, because she was intended to serve as the flagship of the embryonic U.S. Navy and to carry a supernumerary commodore in addition to the ship's captain. I may be mistaken, but I believe that's what Howard I. Chapelle, in his History of the American Sailing Navy, says. In his plans for the class Chapelle added the raised quarterdeck in dotted lines, with a note that the feature was "reconstructed" (i.e., it didn't appear on the original drawing he was tracing). Chapelle's book is pretty old now (1949), and I normally like to check his statements before asserting that they're absolutely correct. But I'm not aware of any other researcher's having taken much interest in the United States. That's a shame, really. She was an important ship, and had an interesting career. If Chapelle and I are right, a model of the United States without the raised quarterdeck wouldn't be accurate. There seem to be a couple of options. One -build the raised quarterdeck. (Evergreen scribed styrene sheet would be a good material for the deck planking. The trickiest part would be figuring out what to do about the transom and its associated carvings.) Two - scrape the name off the transom and call the model either Constitution or President. If the painting on the Revell Germany website is to be believed, the figurehead in the kit is a simple generic billet head. The Constitution and President had figureheads of that style during the War of 1812. Regarding the "shrouds and ratlines" - "nasty" is a good word for what's in the kit. My good friend Jake and I seem to have a cordial disagreement about the best way to solve the problem; read what both of us have to say about it and take your pick (or ignore both of us). In my opinion Heller-type jigs are a waste of time and effort - and almost everybody I've heard from who's bought a "loom-a-line" has thrown it away. In that earlier post about the old Revell Constitution kit I described two ways to make ratlines out of thread - both of which methods will look far, far better than any system that involves gluing the threads across the shrouds. On this particular kit I'd probably use the "shove-the-ratline-through-the-shroud-with-a-needle" method. On 1/150 (or 1/196) scale rigging ratlines is tricky, no matter how you do it. They should, in theory, be about 1/16" apart. If you space them wider than that - say, anything less than 1/8" - most people probably won't notice. But, as another Forum participant commented once, the best solution on such a small scale may be simply to leave the ratlines off. If the shrouds are rigged nicely the model won't look bad. Ludicrously out-of-scale ratlines will do more harm than good. In that earlier thread you'll also find some comments about rigging line. The bottom line is - the more variety the better. A ship model rigged with four or five different diameters of line will look far more realistic than one rigged with two. Two golden rules about rigging: If in doubt about color, err on the dark side. If in doubt about size, err on the small side. Hope this helps a little. Good luck.

Good day Professor ! I hope you won't get bored from revitalizing that good old thread

I finally gathered enough confidence to take German Revell's "1/150" USS United States. To start with, this kit is neither the United States nor 1/150. But also, it is not a virtual reissue of the nice old 1/196 Constitution. Apparently, they united the two halves of the hull to mold a new single piece hull; issued a new set of guns molded on two narrow strips of plastic which represent parts of the gun deck; united the spars with masts, thus created one piece masts, a new "fiddle head" bow, without Andrew Jackson figurehead, and a new transom. Interesting but hilarious marketing ploy as you so aptly call  In my trip to London this February, I bought a reprint of a super-duper old book: "The Frigate Constitution and Other Historic Ships" by F. Alexander Magoun (originally printed in 1927). I assume both the book and its author are very famous to ship modelling community in the States. When I compared Revell's kit with the plans of Constitution from the book (these are noted to be the official plans for her 1927 restoration), I found that they overlap to the last detail. Thus, quite ironically, what German Revell sells as the United States is actually the Constitution after its first restoration as a museum ship.

We had a good discussion of the old Revell 1/196 Constitution kit in the Forum a couple of months ago. I've moved it to the first page; it should appear just below this one. If rayers's United States kit is indeed a reissue of that one, the comments in that thread - regarding the big, solid hatch on the spar deck, for instance - presumably are applicable.

I'm not sure this is the kit rayers has, though. I just checked the Revell Germany website. There's a "1/150" U.S.S. United States on it all right - and it's described as having a one-piece hull. There's no photograph of the kit - just a reproduction of the box art. And the dimensions (assuming my conversion from the metric system is reasonably accurate) don't check out for 1/150. They're way too small.

I wonder if this kit is the old Constitution that Monogram issued back in the late seventies. That's the only one I can recall that had a one-piece hull. It was promoted as being the ultimate in simplicity, at a time when the plastic ship model industry was just about dead. I seem to recall that the yards were molded integrally with the masts, as well. Monogram did a Cutty Sark in a similarly-sized box at the same time, with similar simplifications.

Rayers - does yours have a one-piece hull?

Regarding the United States herself - my impression is that she had the "round house" (i.e., raised quarterdeck) from the beginning, because she was intended to serve as the flagship of the embryonic U.S. Navy and to carry a supernumerary commodore in addition to the ship's captain. I may be mistaken, but I believe that's what Howard I. Chapelle, in his History of the American Sailing Navy, says. In his plans for the class Chapelle added the raised quarterdeck in dotted lines, with a note that the feature was "reconstructed" (i.e., it didn't appear on the original drawing he was tracing). Chapelle's book is pretty old now (1949), and I normally like to check his statements before asserting that they're absolutely correct. But I'm not aware of any other researcher's having taken much interest in the United States. That's a shame, really. She was an important ship, and had an interesting career.

If Chapelle and I are right, a model of the United States without the raised quarterdeck wouldn't be accurate. There seem to be a couple of options. One -build the raised quarterdeck. (Evergreen scribed styrene sheet would be a good material for the deck planking. The trickiest part would be figuring out what to do about the transom and its associated carvings.) Two - scrape the name off the transom and call the model either Constitution or President. If the painting on the Revell Germany website is to be believed, the figurehead in the kit is a simple generic billet head. The Constitution and President had figureheads of that style during the War of 1812.

Regarding the "shrouds and ratlines" - "nasty" is a good word for what's in the kit. My good friend Jake and I seem to have a cordial disagreement about the best way to solve the problem; read what both of us have to say about it and take your pick (or ignore both of us). In my opinion Heller-type jigs are a waste of time and effort - and almost everybody I've heard from who's bought a "loom-a-line" has thrown it away. In that earlier post about the old Revell Constitution kit I described two ways to make ratlines out of thread - both of which methods will look far, far better than any system that involves gluing the threads across the shrouds. On this particular kit I'd probably use the "shove-the-ratline-through-the-shroud-with-a-needle" method.

On 1/150 (or 1/196) scale rigging ratlines is tricky, no matter how you do it. They should, in theory, be about 1/16" apart. If you space them wider than that - say, anything less than 1/8" - most people probably won't notice. But, as another Forum participant commented once, the best solution on such a small scale may be simply to leave the ratlines off. If the shrouds are rigged nicely the model won't look bad. Ludicrously out-of-scale ratlines will do more harm than good.

In that earlier thread you'll also find some comments about rigging line. The bottom line is - the more variety the better. A ship model rigged with four or five different diameters of line will look far more realistic than one rigged with two. Two golden rules about rigging: If in doubt about color, err on the dark side. If in doubt about size, err on the small side.

Hope this helps a little. Good luck.

Email me your address to


jbgroby@cox.net

Thanks Jake --

I would appreciate it if you would send me the info from the Wilkins book. I have wanted a copy of this book for some time but could never find it at a decent price. I checked all the usual suspects (Alibris, Bookfinder, AbeBooks, etc.) and only found one for $55 at Amazon and $39 on another site... is the book good enough to make it worth buying at those kinds of prices?

I guess now that I think about it, I have the ratline jig from the Heller kit I have, so perhaps I'll try that. I'll try the steam power black too. Does anybody know whether the raised poop was there when the United States took the Macedonian?

Also here is a link on the United States from an earlier BB discussion.


http://www.finescale.com/fsm/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8910

Hi,
According to the history books, USS United States, a 1576-ton sailing frigate, was built at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as one of the first warships of the new United States Navy. Commissioned in July 1797, she cruised vigorously during the 1798-1800 Quasi-War with France, taking several prizes. United States was again active in the 1812-13, this time against the British, and captured the Royal Navy frigate Macedonian on 25 October 1812.

Following the War of 1812, United States was employed in the western Atlantic, the Mediterranean, the eastern Pacific and off Africa. She was laid up at the Norfolk Navy Yard in 1849 and was captured by the Confederates when they seized that facility in April 1861. Placed in Southern service as CSS United States, she was used as a receiving ship but was sunk when the Confederates abandoned Norfolk in May 1862. Though subsequently salvaged by the U.S. Navy, she was not worth repairing and was broken up following the Civil War.

One of her Capt. I can't remember which one (Calling Prof. TiIley) decided to bring his wife allong on the deployment, so he had the shipyard add a raised poop area and fit it out with living apt/area so his wife would be cozy. The extra weight over the stern post not only warpped the hull (hogged the keel) but created additional drag and slowed down the frigate when try to sail. I don't remember when they removed that crap.


Here is what I can offer on the questions you asked;

1.) To duplicate it, add a flat section with sone deck detail to stern area from about the 4 gun from the stern.

2.) Use a loom-a-line or Heller ratline jig.

3.) Contact Model-Expo they have an excellent supply of rigging. In the 1/150th scale something the size of heavy thread and fine upolstry(sp) line should work.

4.) Use Floquil Railroad Steam Power Black, it's a water base, but covers GREAT.

5.) That depends on the detail YOU want to have? Is worth it? The thinness of the wood will be the problem. You can follow the methods used in Les Wilkins Building Plastic Ship Models. If you don't have a copy I can copy the section for you.

Jake