SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Question: Revell 1/96 Constitution

6165 views
36 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Tuesday, January 22, 2008 9:34 AM

Well, replacing the plastic "deadeye and lanyard" assemblies on the Revell kit isn't, in itself, particularly time-consuming.  I did it on the one I built way back in the seventies, as a matter of fact.  I don't remember just how the parts representing the deadeyes and the channels are arranged, but the job amounts to slicing off the deadeyes and replacing them with wood or metal ones.  A series of holes needs to be drilled where the old deadeyes were; the new ones can be held in place with wire or even thread.  You might also want to think about replacing the chain plates, but they don't look bad if they're cleaned up carefully.

The tricky part of the process is rigging the genuine, thread deadeye lanyards.  As I've mentioned several times in other Forum posts, I personally find that just about the most trying part of ship model rigging.  In theory it's pretty simple, but getting the upper deadeyes lined up in a straight line and more-or-less uniform tension on the shrouds, without making the mast lean too much in some direction, is a challenge.  I've seen various jigs and fixtures that people have devised in attempts to make it easier, but in my experience there's just no substitute for getting some practice.  I frankly don't suggest a big ship, with lots of shrouds, as a first effort for rigging your own shrouds.

I remember, back when I was working in a hobby shop, examining a ad for what must have been that same Mantua kit.  The brochure contained glorious color photos of the cast brass bow and stern ornaments.  (The company also sold them separately - in a velvet-lined wood box.)  It struck me that they looked remarkably like their counterparts in the Revell plastic kit.  And the scale of the Mamoli version was 1/98. The Revell kit is on 1/96.  Brass castings shrink by two percent as they cool.  Hmmmm.

I had another curious experience with one of those European manufacturers.  I went into a hobby shop that specialized in ship models (such establishments really did exist, once upon a time).  The proprietor produced, with a considerable flourish, an item that had recently arrived:  a pair of "bronzed metal" castings from (I think) Mamoli that supposedly represented the carved trailboards of the Cutty Sark.  I don't remember the price of them, but it was considerable.  Several other customers were admiring these things.  I said I thought they were out of proportion and rather crude; that the Imai and Airfix plastic kits, and even the decal versions in the old Revell one, actually were better scale representations of the real thing.  Everybody looked at me as though I'd either gone out of my mind or blasphemed.

The interesting thing about that conversation was the venue:  Maritime Models of Greenwich.  Everybody present had walked by the real Cutty Sark on the way to the shop.

Those continental European wood kits have a strange mystique about them that has little to do with scale modeling.  If you do a Forum search on the word "HECEPOB" (that's Hideously Expensive Contintental European Plank On Bulkhead) you'll find several interesting discussions of the subject.  Bottom line:  if you're seriously interested in scale ship modeling, getting rid of that Mantua kit was an extremely smart thing to do.

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

jpk
  • Member since
    August 2006
Posted by jpk on Tuesday, January 22, 2008 10:19 AM

I think I may hold off on that for now then and just use the plastic parts. I don't know if I'm "seriously" interested in ship modeling, plastic or otherwise, but I do love the Constitution. I guess it's not just the ship and the way it looks but the history and all the speculation as to how she looked that interests me, not just the Constitution but all of the initial 44 gun frigates.

Another type of sailing ship I'm interested in would be one of the US Navy's 74 gun ship's of the line. If you think there's not much on the United States, there's almost nothing on those ships, at least as far as I know. There may be some obscure books out there and if there are I'm not aware of them.

You're right, it was brass in the Mantua kit now that you've jogged my memory. I felt kind of gyped when I got the Mantua kit and saw that the hardware was lifted off the Revell kit. I did sell it for more than I paid for it, a good thing. Still kick my self for not getting the BJ kit for less than half what it retails for. Maybe down the road....... 

 

 

 jtilley wrote:

Well, replacing the plastic "deadeye and lanyard" assemblies on the Revell kit isn't, in itself, particularly time-consuming.  I did it on the one I built way back in the seventies, as a matter of fact.  I don't remember just how the parts representing the deadeyes and the channels are arranged, but the job amounts to slicing off the deadeyes and replacing them with wood or metal ones.  A series of holes needs to be drilled where the old deadeyes were; the new ones can be held in place with wire or even thread.  You might also want to think about replacing the chain plates, but they don't look bad if they're cleaned up carefully.

The tricky part of the process is rigging the genuine, thread deadeye lanyards.  As I've mentioned several times in other Forum posts, I personally find that just about the most trying part of ship model rigging.  In theory it's pretty simple, but getting the upper deadeyes lined up in a straight line and more-or-less uniform tension on the shrouds, without making the mast lean too much in some direction, is a challenge.  I've seen various jigs and fixtures that people have devised in attempts to make it easier, but in my experience there's just no substitute for getting some practice.  I frankly don't suggest a big ship, with lots of shrouds, as a first effort for rigging your own shrouds.

I remember, back when I was working in a hobby shop, examining a ad for what must have been that same Mantua kit.  The brochure contained glorious color photos of the cast brass bow and stern ornaments.  (The company also sold them separately - in a velvet-lined wood box.)  It struck me that they looked remarkably like their counterparts in the Revell plastic kit.  And the scale of the Mamoli version was 1/98. The Revell kit is on 1/96.  Brass castings shrink by two percent as they cool.  Hmmmm.

I had another curious experience with one of those European manufacturers.  I went into a hobby shop that specialized in ship models (such establishments really did exist, once upon a time).  The proprietor produced, with a considerable flourish, an item that had recently arrived:  a pair of "bronzed metal" castings from (I think) Mamoli that supposedly represented the carved trailboards of the Cutty Sark.  I don't remember the price of them, but it was considerable.  Several other customers were admiring these things.  I said I thought they were out of proportion and rather crude; that the Imai and Airfix plastic kit, and even the decal versions in the old Revell one, actually were better scale representations of the real thing.  Everybody looked at me as though I'd either gone out of my mind or blasphemed.

The interesting thing about that conversation was the venue:  Maritime Models of Greenwich.  Everybody present had walked by the real Cutty Sark on the way to the shop.

Those continental European wood kits have a strange mystique about them that has little to do with scale modeling.  If you do a Forum search on the word "HECEPOB" (that's Hideously Expensive Contintental European Plank On Bulkhead) you'll find several interesting discussions of the subject.  Bottom line:  if you're seriously interested in scale ship modeling, getting rid of that Mantua kit was an extremely smart thing to do.

  • Member since
    May 2006
  • From: Chapin, South Carolina
Posted by Shipwreck on Tuesday, January 22, 2008 1:21 PM
 jpk wrote:
I was looking at photos of the Hull model of the Constitution and noticed the small jolly/cutter boats at the stern of the ship are not there. Nor are there any indications that they should be there. The Revell kit has them and I'm curious as to whether or not the ship actually carried them as the kit shows. Anyone have any info on this? Thanks.


At this point there are now 32 posts responding to this question. Is there a consensus that we just do not know if there ever was a boat at the stern of the Constitution; and if there was, we do not know when? But, Revell's rendering could be valid?

On the Bench:

Revell 1/96 USS Constitution - rigging

Revell 1/48 B-1B Lancer Prep and research

Trumpeter 1/350 USS Hornet CV-8 Prep and research

 

 

 

  • Member since
    June 2005
  • From: Biloxi, Mississippi
Posted by Russ39 on Tuesday, January 22, 2008 1:29 PM

According to the 1803 Corne' painting of the Constitution leaving Boston harbor that year, she had stern davits but no quarter davits are shown. William Bass shows them in his book based on his research of that painting. So, in 1803 she probably had stern davits and thus carried a boat there.

Russ

 

  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: 37deg 40.13' N 95deg 29.10'W
Posted by scottrc on Friday, January 25, 2008 1:01 PM

I would keep and use the kits blocks.  They are not as bad as you think.  The chainplates are another story for they are pretty weak and under scale. On the current model I am working on, I am replacing the plastic shrouds and deadeyes because these do not take the stress of rigging up the ratlines very well.  I too use Bluejacket fittings.  Very good in scale and quality and Bluejackets service is great.

Another suggestion, when putting the lower masts and bowsprit together, place a metal rod in the center before gluing the halves togther.  You will not regret it when you snage your sleeve or finger on the bowsprit for now it won't snap or shatter. It seems the plastic for these parts on many of the kits  can become quite brittle.

jpk
  • Member since
    August 2006
Posted by jpk on Friday, January 25, 2008 8:12 PM

Thanks, the metal rod suggestion sounds like a very good idea. However, I have already assembled my masts. I don't like the way Revel designed the chainplates. Is there available replacement ones aftermarket or can the be scratched? If they can be scratched what would you suggest I use? I've decided to use the kit's blocks. I'm also thinking about replacing the ratlines. They seem like they might be reasonably easy to make. Thanks.

 

 scottrc wrote:

I would keep and use the kits blocks.  They are not as bad as you think.  The chainplates are another story for they are pretty weak and under scale. On the current model I am working on, I am replacing the plastic shrouds and deadeyes because these do not take the stress of rigging up the ratlines very well.  I too use Bluejacket fittings.  Very good in scale and quality and Bluejackets service is great.

Another suggestion, when putting the lower masts and bowsprit together, place a metal rod in the center before gluing the halves togther.  You will not regret it when you snage your sleeve or finger on the bowsprit for now it won't snap or shatter. It seems the plastic for these parts on many of the kits  can become quite brittle.

  • Member since
    June 2005
  • From: Biloxi, Mississippi
Posted by Russ39 on Friday, January 25, 2008 9:11 PM

Jon:

Scratch building chainplates is easy with some basic soldering equipment and some brass wire of the appropriate gauge. I have a simple butane torch and I use some prefluxed soldering paste. I hard solder the links and the strop from the brass wire after they have been shaped around a wood form (the strop is sized around the deadeye) to the appropriate size. The strop is soldered first, then the links are added and soldered shut, one by one. Then the brass wire is chemically blackened and the deadeyes are added to the strop at the top of the chainplate.

The entire soldering set up costs about $40-50 and it can be used to make any metal fitting for a scale model. It takes a bit of practice but the end result is very strong and very realistic.

Russ 

 

 

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.