I failed at the Model Space Vasa. Parts just did not fit so I left it. I still want to create a Vasa. There are a number of kits out there. How to discriminate? Comprehensibility of instructions? Quality of wood? Fittings? Support? Some of these kits are offered at $1,600 usd and that is a huge investment for me. Any/all comments will help. PS. I am working my way thru Cederlund's and Hocker's book one on Vasa.
Corel makes a smaller Wasa model at 1:100 scale, and Billings Boats makes one. Artesania Latina has a 1:65 scale model large enough to create lots more detail on than the Corel model because of its size. Regardless of when kit you buy, there well ALWAYS be things to correct, and materials and fittings to be replaced with better materials. Drawings and instructions vary. We do not yet have a database of member reviews of specific model kits. However, the build logs on Wasa builds will give you a lot of insight on how the quality of the kits are. There are a few posts that just show you what a kit has in the box. Most builders swap out materials, replace fittings, and modify their models to increase accuracy. When parts don't fit, you make them fit or replacement them with scratch built parts. Unfortunately, this is the reality for all kits, although some are better in certain aspects than others. Those of us with some building experience but not prepared to do a full scratch build take kits and modify some parts to most parts to get the ship we want. Example: the Artesania Latina kit has lots of nice details with regard to accurate hull decorations, and great instruction, but the fact that the model they display is mostly painted on all hull surfaces makes you suspect that the wood is cheap basswood that has to be painted since it's grain looks like crap when stained only. You would replace all planking with hardwoods of your selection to make the model appear better overall. This is the route I would go if I built Wasa. Paul Kattner (DocKattner) on this forum is totally reworking DeAgostini's Wasa into a true masterpiece, with the full frame the only thing used from the kit, and the finest pear hardwood replacing all visible parts of the model. I am doing a similar bashing to DeAgostini's HMS Sovereign of the Seas. Both models will not look even close to the kit as built out of the box. Few kit models have more than the basic level of quality no matter where you buy. The process of researching, getting advice and tips from the fun membership here, and modestly enhancing or totally gutting and reworking a model kit results in some truly great models. It's more work than many newcomers bargain for, but that's why there are so few wooden sailing ship model builders out there compared to the millions who make plastic models of other things. It sets us apart a bit, and the skill set is a tad different than the plastic modelers, such as rigging. Most newcomers fear changing or modifying a kit. It's not that bad if you research a modification, and bounce the idea off others. Pretty soon the model is not the kit manufacturer's design, it's yours.
Sorry for the lengthy ramble. I get easily excited about this hobby...
No reason to apologize. I took away a few pointers, first is be prepared to modify parts which means fine sanding and shaping work. Second is to lay in a stock of pear wood. I believe its the small things which add up to museum quality work, the first patience and a willingness to start again. Since we are relocating to South Carolina soon and its just me and my handicapped son(there is a cat-Catman by name) I plan to devote one room to work.Corel makes a smaller Wasa model at 1:100 scale, and Billings Boats makes one. Artesania Latina has a 1:65 scale model large enough to create lots more detail on than the Corel model because of its size. Regardless of when kit you buy, there well ALWAYS be things to correct, and materials and fittings to be replaced with better materials. Drawings and instructions vary. We do not yet have a database of member reviews of specific model kits. However, the build logs on Wasa builds will give you a lot of insight on how the quality of the kits are. There are a few posts that just show you what a kit has in the box. Most builders swap out materials, replace fittings, and modify their models to increase accuracy. When parts don't fit, you make them fit or replacement them with scratch built parts. Unfortunately, this is the reality for all kits, although some are better in certain aspects than others. Those of us with some building experience but not prepared to do a full scratch build take kits and modify some parts to most parts to get the ship we want. Example: the Artesania Latina kit has lots of nice details with regard to accurate hull decorations, and great instruction, but the fact that the model they display is mostly painted on all hull surfaces makes you suspect that the wood is cheap basswood that has to be painted since it's grain looks like crap when stained only. You would replace all planking with hardwoods of your selection to make the model appear better overall. This is the route I would go if I built Wasa. Paul Kattner (DocKattner) on this forum is totally reworking DeAgostini's Wasa into a true masterpiece, with the full frame the only thing used from the kit, and the finest pear hardwood replacing all visible parts of the model. I am doing a similar bashing to DeAgostini's HMS Sovereign of the Seas. Both models will not look even close to the kit as built out of the box. Few kit models have more than the basic level of quality no matter where you buy. The process of researching, getting advice and tips from the fun membership here, and modestly enhancing or totally gutting and reworking a model kit results in some truly great models. It's more work than many newcomers bargain for, but that's why there are so few wooden sailing ship model builders out there compared to the millions who make plastic models of other things. It sets us apart a bit, and the skill set is a tad different than the plastic modelers, such as rigging. Most newcomers fear changing or modifying a kit. It's not that bad if you research a modification, and bounce the idea off others. Pretty soon the model is not the kit manufacturer's design, it's yours.
Sorry for the lengthy ramble. I get easily excited about this hobby...
Wondering if I should try to refloat the DeAgostini I have, investing in better woods and tools. I bought this on the installment plan. Maybe its worth a go.
I Believe there is a bit of a misconception when people describe something as Museum quality, Ive seen many a You Tube modeller describe their work as Museum quality, where they have built manufacturers kits exactly as the manufacturer makes it, yes the workmanship may be excellent, but there is no thought put into the accuracy, or details. I believe a museum would be more likely to choose something that is accurate over workmanship, although both would be preferred.
Like Kurt, I'm building the DeAgostini's Sovereign of the seas, I've replaced a lot of the parts, in fact after constructing the hull out of the horrible bamboo, I've substituted about 90% of the materials, half the fun is solving an issue, and you get a sense of achievement when you succeed, and the model is truly yours not a copy. The main thing is to have fun, one thing i have learnt people with this hobby tend to be very helpful and like to help a fellow modeller, never be afraid to ask for help.
Maybe I misused the term 'museum quality' where a professionally constructed kit would appear to the untrained eye as a real knockout. I did watch Ohla Batcharova's tour of the vessel. Her video has the master modeler's eye.
Shes made some amazing models, wish I was as good ;-)
Just my humble opinion. Unless you are a super experienced modeler, I would avoid getting a Corel model. I purchased the Corel Prins Willem, which is a similar ship. The materials are first rate, no problem there. However, the instructions are absolutely horrible. I am going to save building the Corel Prins Willem until I build a few more ships. Corel is for very experienced modelers.
Frank's is 100 % right about Corel. Their written instructions only state the order to make the steps in, and do not instruct how those steps are to be performed. That is left to the builder to figure out. The plans were good, with few mistakes, and the wood was good quality, but the quantity was BARELY sufficient to finish the model. No waste of material from mistakes is possible. You have to shape several solid chunks of wood to make parts for the galleries in many cases, which is not forgiving for a new builder. My first model was Corel, but I came to the table with years of hand crafting skill from other hobbies, which is not usual for new model builders. Corel models are small, so making tiny details is particularly challenging at 1:100 scale. If you want a larger ship in a model compact sized model, Corel is great. The nice thing is Corel offers ships not available by any other manufacturer, many of them early vessels from the 17th century.
AMEN! Perfect reply. We all should save any leftover wood or items from previous ships. By the way, I dropped a small part in my workshop. I searched forever for it and could not find it. Is it possible it may have gone to another space in time? Any suggestions where these things go?
Frank, I have had similar experiences with my Corel Unicorn. First full build and the only way to proceed was reading several how to do it books, show the work to a master builder who convinced me to change the size of walnut for the second planking and purchase after market items such as new decking, and he showed me how to taper on the model itself.
It’s ok now, I know that this is part of most builds. Wish I had started with something else say from Caldercraft. Fortunately this great forum is a wealth of detail in regard to skills.
On missing parts in the workshop, I was gluing the port propeller on my Lusitania and it just disappeared when I reached out for something. After searching every inch of the floor for ages and believing I would have to build a new prop, I went to wash my hands to at least eat lunch to recover… and in the mirror…there she was… stuck on my woollen jumper shining like a brooch.
It’s ok now, I know that this is part of most builds. Wish I had started with something else say from Caldercraft. Fortunately this great forum is a wealth of detail in regard to skills.
On missing parts in the workshop, I was gluing the port propeller on my Lusitania and it just disappeared when I reached out for something. After searching every inch of the floor for ages and believing I would have to build a new prop, I went to wash my hands to at least eat lunch to recover… and in the mirror…there she was… stuck on my woollen jumper shining like a brooch.
If we have a post for every one of those miraculous part saves, we could write a book. Sometimes parts show up years later, long after you scratch build a replacement.
My only experience is Vasa model is the Billing Boats.
The wood is junk.
The instructions are worthless
My kit was missing a full sheet of parts. I contacted Model Shipways on 8/31/2021. And haven't heard anything since.
If there is something missing in your kit, your on your own.
The wood is junk.
The instructions are worthless
My kit was missing a full sheet of parts. I contacted Model Shipways on 8/31/2021. And haven't heard anything since.
If there is something missing in your kit, your on your own.
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2018
- Messages
- 885
- Points
- 403
How very true. If you took a poll of the Admiral’s you would most likely get some interesting adjectives associated to the builders
I abandoned Corel's Victory before the hull had been finished,
A slight correction the Corel Wasa is 1/75th not 1/100th scale.
That said, it is by far the least accurate example of any Vasa kit available. Had I known better at the time I would NOT have purchased that example.
I spent several on and off years bashing the hell out-of-it - Still, the hull is totally inaccurate. If you care to take a look I have a few images of what I ended up with linked in my signature.
Regards,
That said, it is by far the least accurate example of any Vasa kit available. Had I known better at the time I would NOT have purchased that example.
I spent several on and off years bashing the hell out-of-it - Still, the hull is totally inaccurate. If you care to take a look I have a few images of what I ended up with linked in my signature.
Regards,
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2021
- Messages
- 93
- Points
- 143
I cannot comment on the build process of any of the wooden kits of Vasa (except to reflect the experiences of modellers who have written to me with cries for help on their Corel and Billing kits), but can comment on accuracy. Most of the older wooden kits (Corel, Billing, Mantua) were designed before the ship had been completely restored, and so feature a lot of conjecture about the upper works, beakhead and sterncastle, as well as the rigging. None of them get the hull form exactly right, although Billing is probably the closest. No criticism implied here, the kits simply predate the availability of good data.
The d'Agostini kit (which is actually made by Artesania Latina) was developed in cooperation with our research staff (I supplied many of the basic drawings, including data from three-dimensionsl scans of the hull). I would say it is reasonably accurate in terms of hull form, dimensions, and overall configuration. There are some concessions to scale and the process AL uses to make parts, as well as to make it possible to sell the kit in the installment format where nothing is larger than an A4 shipping card, but these were mostly rational choices with little visible impact on the finished result. There is also some mass-production quality to the cast metal sculptures, since it was not practical to make 786 unique, individual castings, but this is not very noticeable if one varies the painting as in the original. There are some small detail inaccuracies, in cases where AL used stock parts rather than tool new moulds (the rigging mostly uses standard blocks rather than the wide range of specialized types, for example), and there are some odd misses, such as painting the gun carriages red when we know they were black. The rigging is simplified quite a bit in the interest of making it less of a nightware for beginners. But all in all, it is easily the most accurate kit available in wood, and is a reasonable base for an enhanced model.
By the way, in the maritime museum world, we do not use the term "museum quality" to describe models, since we collect all sorts of models, from primitive folk art up to the most detailed scale replicas. Museums do set standards for models they commission, but these can vary, depending on the intended use. From my own experience, I know that when the Smithsonian commissioned a large series of models for a gallery of American maritime history (way back in the 1960s), all to the same scale, they included a set of standards that were given to the builders, so that the models would reflect a similar level of detail, and the museum provided the plans (many by Howard Chapelle). These standards later became widespread, as the resulting models were a good balance of detail and scale. They included such criteria as the use of durable materials, and how closely the result should match the plans, as well as how fine the detail should be (I think I remember that any feature that would be larger than 1/8" on the model had to be present). Mystic Seaport Museum did something similar, when they embarked on a series of models at the same scale to show the development of American fishing vessels, and the museum's in-house model builders had a set of standards that they applied to models made for exhibits. The model shop at the Swedish National Maritime Museum currently has a loose set of standards as well, but like all others, they vary depending on how the model will be used.
Fred Hocker
Director of Research, Vasa Museum
The d'Agostini kit (which is actually made by Artesania Latina) was developed in cooperation with our research staff (I supplied many of the basic drawings, including data from three-dimensionsl scans of the hull). I would say it is reasonably accurate in terms of hull form, dimensions, and overall configuration. There are some concessions to scale and the process AL uses to make parts, as well as to make it possible to sell the kit in the installment format where nothing is larger than an A4 shipping card, but these were mostly rational choices with little visible impact on the finished result. There is also some mass-production quality to the cast metal sculptures, since it was not practical to make 786 unique, individual castings, but this is not very noticeable if one varies the painting as in the original. There are some small detail inaccuracies, in cases where AL used stock parts rather than tool new moulds (the rigging mostly uses standard blocks rather than the wide range of specialized types, for example), and there are some odd misses, such as painting the gun carriages red when we know they were black. The rigging is simplified quite a bit in the interest of making it less of a nightware for beginners. But all in all, it is easily the most accurate kit available in wood, and is a reasonable base for an enhanced model.
By the way, in the maritime museum world, we do not use the term "museum quality" to describe models, since we collect all sorts of models, from primitive folk art up to the most detailed scale replicas. Museums do set standards for models they commission, but these can vary, depending on the intended use. From my own experience, I know that when the Smithsonian commissioned a large series of models for a gallery of American maritime history (way back in the 1960s), all to the same scale, they included a set of standards that were given to the builders, so that the models would reflect a similar level of detail, and the museum provided the plans (many by Howard Chapelle). These standards later became widespread, as the resulting models were a good balance of detail and scale. They included such criteria as the use of durable materials, and how closely the result should match the plans, as well as how fine the detail should be (I think I remember that any feature that would be larger than 1/8" on the model had to be present). Mystic Seaport Museum did something similar, when they embarked on a series of models at the same scale to show the development of American fishing vessels, and the museum's in-house model builders had a set of standards that they applied to models made for exhibits. The model shop at the Swedish National Maritime Museum currently has a loose set of standards as well, but like all others, they vary depending on how the model will be used.
Fred Hocker
Director of Research, Vasa Museum
Many Thanks to Fred for this highly interesting information about the Vasa kit and also especially the insight into the term "museum quality", a term which is so often used and misused, like an old chewing gum under your shoe.....
Many Thanks for your time writing these information together