|
|
 Rank: Pro Groups: Joined: 24/08/2009 Posts: 48,051 Points: -13,308
|
|
|
|
Rank: Pro Groups: Joined: 24/08/2009 Posts: 48,051 Points: -13,308
|
Thanks for those Tomick, they will be of help.
|
|
|
Rank: Pro    Groups: Registered
Joined: 02/04/2010 Posts: 491 Points: 1,460 Location: Poole
|
On a launch-related note; there appear to be a lot of discrepancies between the launch colour scheme, as applied to the official build (proscribed by AL) and the real thing at Portsmouth - the banding (yellow on top, black band, white hull) is reversed on the official build (and, strangely enough on the Jokita kit build). The decking planks on the official build are shown as being painted white, whereas on the launch at Portsmouth they appear black (The Jokita build shows them in natural wood). The duckboards are Planked on both the Portsmouth replica and the Jokita model, not made of iron grating, as suggested by the official build and there is also a different spacing between the thwarts (white on the mag build, natural wood on the Jokita build and black on the replica).  I accept that the AL kit has some curious anomalies (which can be easily fixed, if one is so inclined) - but what puzzles me is why, if the Jokita kit is supposed to be the holy grail of Victory kits and rubber stamped by the official Victory historians, does it differ from the replica at Portsmouth?  Someone, somewhere, wants a spanking. Schnellboots on back burner
Tools.
|
|
|
 Rank: Superelite    Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/05/2010 Posts: 2,608 Points: 7,519 Location: Lincolnshire
|
[quote= Someone, somewhere, wants a spanking.quote]  Oh you've opened a real can of worms here!!!   The queue is forming......
|
|
|
 Rank: Vice-Master  Groups: Registered
Joined: 13/10/2011 Posts: 851 Points: 2,628 Location: Leeds, Yorkshire
|
I have been going over some of the earlier posting re: colour schemes and the launch. I think there are two important points to bear in mind. The first is that at the end of the day each of us can go our own way providing what we do is what we personally like and the other point is that back in Georgian times there was no set instructions for painting ships boats and this depended upon the Captain's preferences and what the bosun had in his paint stores or could be obtained from the dockyard.
I have decided for my launch to follow the external banding as per the Portsmouth pictures, the bottom boards, thwarts and stern sheets in a relatively dark varnish and the rest of the interior in yellow ochre. The two grids I think I will paint black using the Admiralty black metal paint. But having said that each to their own.
Another interesting fact about colour schemes is the choice of Victory's yellow bands which were one of Nelson's ideas. Other Captains followed his design but where they had the funds they chose all sorts of shades of yellow from a pale primrose upwards. Nelson never had a lot of money himself, he was always in 'discussions' with his prize agent, so he simply used the dockyard issue yellow ochre.
It was not until December 1815 that the Navy board formalised the practice but laid down an instruction that the yellow bands should be replaced by a uniform white to avoid Captains 'showing off'.
So at least we won't be discussing the appearance of Victory colour-wise at Trafalgar(?)
Mike T
|
|
|
 Rank: Master Groups: Registered
Joined: 15/04/2010 Posts: 1,266 Points: 3,841 Location: The Quantock Hills,Somerset
|
Mike,you may know the answer to this one. I read somewhere that it was only Captains that were sailing with Nelson or had sailed with him that were allowed to use the yellow stripe.Do you know if this is fact or fiction? Rob Nolli Illigitimi Carborundum!!!Current Builds: HMS Victory, SV Thermopylae
|
|
|
Rank: Vice-Master Groups: Registered
Joined: 13/10/2011 Posts: 851 Points: 2,628 Location: Leeds, Yorkshire
|
Hi Rob
My understanding is that paint schemes during the 18th century tended to be at the whim of the individual Captains. Around 1790, the chequered effect with the coloured banding started to be adopted and came to be known as the 'Nelson Chequer' as he was one of those who adopted it and as he became more famous. I would guess that the idea that only Nelson's Captains could use it is fiction. As I said in the last post it was not until 4th December 1815 (reference for that is Alan McGowan's Victory book) that the Navy Board formalised the appearence of ships of the line, insisting on white to replace the various shades of yellow in use. In the case of Victory this was implemented as part of the great refit of 1815-16.
Mike T
|
|
|
Rank: Pro Groups: Joined: 24/08/2009 Posts: 48,051 Points: -13,308
|
Personally I think the Panart Victory Launch is probably about as close as you'll get to reality in kit form, and it being 1/16 scale it has lots of useful detail to 'borrow'. Hoover attached the following image(s):
|
|
|
Rank: Pro Groups: Registered
Joined: 02/04/2010 Posts: 491 Points: 1,460 Location: Poole
|
Cheers Mike and Hoover. That Panart launch looks very buy-able.. So very, very Buy-able Heck, who needs food anyway... Schnellboots on back burner
Tools.
|
|
|
Rank: Superelite Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/05/2010 Posts: 2,608 Points: 7,519 Location: Lincolnshire
|
Capt Stedders wrote:Cheers Mike and Hoover.
That Panart launch looks very buy-able..
So very, very Buy-able
Heck, who needs food anyway...
Can be yours for the princely sum of £107.95 + p&p.  http://www.model-dockyar...catalog/Panart_Kits.html
|
|
|
Rank: Pro Groups: Joined: 24/08/2009 Posts: 48,051 Points: -13,308
|
Capt Stedders wrote:Cheers Mike and Hoover.
That Panart launch looks very buy-able..
So very, very Buy-able
Heck, who needs food anyway...
Keith Juliers 'The new Period ship Handbook' has a blow by blow double-sided six page build of it, the kit seems to have an astounding level of detail/content! Beans on toast sounds good
|
|
|
Rank: Pro Groups: Joined: 24/08/2009 Posts: 48,051 Points: -13,308
|
Some of you may of seen a link to a lady names Doris, she has built to most incedible model of the Victory, BUT its all in card. see here - http://www.papermodelers...1798-1-96-shipyard.html
On the last page she talks of finishing the Cutter and Launch, to my surprise there is this (pic below) What do you think? could this be a way of doing our launch?   this is straight to the small boats page - http://www.papermodelers...98-1-96-shipyard-18.html
|
|
|
Rank: Pro Groups: Registered
Joined: 02/04/2010 Posts: 491 Points: 1,460 Location: Poole
|
That's just dandy. Another colour scheme and variation on the build of the launch...  *puts head into hands and starts weeping* Schnellboots on back burner
Tools.
|
|
|
Rank: Master Groups: Registered
Joined: 15/04/2010 Posts: 1,266 Points: 3,841 Location: The Quantock Hills,Somerset
|
She is doing the Victory in 1798 colours Rich,but I must say I do like the way the launch looks when fully rigged. Rob Nolli Illigitimi Carborundum!!!Current Builds: HMS Victory, SV Thermopylae
|
|
|
Rank: Pro Groups: Joined: 24/08/2009 Posts: 48,051 Points: -13,308
|
That's my question, could we use this for our Launch, some of the pictures I've seen here show a different mast/rigging set up. Found this pic taken from her original plans. 
|
|
|
Rank: Super-Elite   Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/04/2010 Posts: 3,955 Points: 11,809 Location: uk
|
zep I have this model at home,but must confess,not like hers,(hanging head in shame) and still have the plans,my shipyard version was the traffalgar one,same scale. they are incredibly hard to do,and have to be so precise.where I went wrong was making it out of cereal boxs,and the instructions are in polish.there is a pic on here somewhere of it nearly finished, before the rigging was done. Current builds: SotS, USS Consitution, San Felipe, D51 loco, HMS Surprise, RB7, Arab Dhow, Jotika HMS Victory Completed builds: HMS Pickel, Thermopylae, Mississipi river boat, Mary Rose, Cutty Sark, San Francisco II, HMS Victory x5, Titanic Lifeboat, Panart HMS Victory Launch, Hachette Titanic, Virginia Schooner, Endeavour Longboat. http://www.model-space.com/gb/
|
|
|
Rank: Vice-Master Groups: Registered
Joined: 13/10/2011 Posts: 851 Points: 2,628 Location: Leeds, Yorkshire
|
I am still of the opinion that we are unlikely to find a definitive answer to what is the right configuaration for any of the ship's boats. They weren't necessarily regarded as an integral part of a ship but more like dockyard stores. When a ship had a refit the boats would be returned to the dockyard and other boats supplied at the end of the refit. There is a short section in McGowan about the boats but in terms of detail it is inconclusive. That's why I think we can all go different ways to some extent. My only comment on the above posts is that the drawings suggest two lanteen sails. This was a rig favoured more in the Mediterranean and is less likely to be adopted on Royal Navy boats, but the gaff rig of Doris's excellent model could well have been used.
I would still favour the two mast square rigged version as being the simplest to set up when the launch needs to be sailed rather than rowed.
I sometimes wish that H.G. Wells had got it right and time travel was not just fiction!
Mike T
|
|
|
Rank: Pro Groups: Joined: 24/08/2009 Posts: 48,051 Points: -13,308
|
This is what she did for the smaller boat, maybe this type of rigging/mast configuration? 
|
|
|
Rank: Vice-Master Groups: Registered
Joined: 13/10/2011 Posts: 851 Points: 2,628 Location: Leeds, Yorkshire
|
I reckon that would be about right.
It looks as if it would be easier to rig as and when the launch was needed to sail.
The other gaff rig had standing rigging which would take more time to set up. If the launch was going to be used on detached duties away from the mother ship, it might have been worth the extra effort. In some of the books I have read, the mother ship anchors in the mouth of a river and sends the launch up the river for a week or to attack the enemy some distance away. Victory as a flagship and part of a fleet is more likely to use its launch for rowing supplies or men to collect stores or to take part in cutting out expeditons or shore landings.
Mike T
|
|
|
 Rank: Amateur level 2 Groups: Registered
Joined: 19/04/2010 Posts: 48 Points: 133
|
[quote=Capt Stedders]On a launch-related note; there appear to be a lot of discrepancies between the launch colour scheme, as applied to the official build (proscribed by AL) and the real thing at Portsmouth - the banding (yellow on top, black band, white hull) is reversed on the official build (and, strangely enough on the Jokita kit build). The decking planks on the official build are shown as being painted white, whereas on the launch at Portsmouth they appear black (The Jokita build shows them in natural wood). The duckboards are Planked on both the Portsmouth replica and the Jokita model, not made of iron grating, as suggested by the official build and there is also a different spacing between the thwarts (white on the mag build, natural wood on the Jokita build and black on the replica). I accept that the AL kit has some curious anomalies (which can be easily fixed, if one is so inclined) - but what puzzles me is why, if the Jokita kit is supposed to be the holy grail of Victory kits and rubber stamped by the official Victory historians, does it differ from the replica at Portsmouth? Someone, somewhere, wants a spanking. [/Have also noted slight discrepancies on the launch build. In issue six the finished launch shows the two 'L' shaped supports as flush with the top of the launch,also the two middle beams are butted into the rear thwart,giving the impression of them being parallel to the transom,however,in Tomicks build the 'L' shaped supports appear to lie about a mm below the top and the two middle beams appear to rest on the rear thwart giving the appearance of - say - a 45 degree angle. Modellers license I know, and it does not make the build any the less aesthetically pleasing but in the interests of accuracy which is correct - The model depicted in issue six - or tomicks interpretation? ]
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
US
