Unboxing Hms Enterprize 1774 1:48 - Modelship Dockyard

zoly99sask

zoly99sask

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Forum Moderator
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
8,057
Points
738

Location
Saskatoon,Canada
The Enterprize was a 28-gun sixth-rate frigate of the Royal Navy. This class of frigate was extensively used in the American region, particularly in the Caribbean, to counter local privateers. For example, the Enterprize successfully captured a 22-gun American privateer in the area in 1782. Of course, these frigates also carried out missions in European waters, engaging in battles against French and Spanish ships. The image below shows a scene of the H.M.S. Fox, a frigate of the Enterprize class, engaging a French frigate in 1778.

This class of frigate, known for its excellent maneuverability, cost-effectiveness, and versatile nature, saw the construction of a total of 27 ships. Additionally, many similar but not same lines frigates were also built during this era. It can be said that the Enterprize represents the epitome of frigates during this time period.

This unboxing is the pearwood version shows boxwood 3d carved CNC decorations.

more images are following soon

IMG_8910.JPG
 
One of the failings of the majority of kits are the cannon. I cannot tell from the photo but is the cannon pattern an Armstrong Frederick which would be appropriate for 1774? If not, can the kit be purchased without the cannon so the correct cannon can be made or purchased separately. According to Caruana the 9 pounders on all the 28s, (except for Active 1763) had 7 foot Armstrong Fredericks that were about 8 feet long overall. Active carried 7.5 foot 9's that were 100 inches long overall.
Allan
1737547236754.png
 
Last edited:
Cascabels and knobs as well look like a bit different at first sight...
 
Last edited:
albertmary said:
Cascabels and knobs a well look like a bit different at first sight...
Click to expand...
That is what I thought, but hard to tell in the photo. I do not see any cypher either which would have been the George III cypher. With all the 3D printed parts being used in kits these days, the kit makers could offer appropriate pattern guns and save a lot of money at the same time. There is something to be said for brass guns but if they are blackened to replicate iron cannon, why bother? If the cannon were bronze, which would be appropriate for earlier cannon brass might be a better choice, but the majority of build logs are for ships with iron cannon.
Allan
An interesting and helpful website for cannon is: https://www.arc.id.au/Cannon.html
 
AllanKP69 said:
One of the failings of the majority of kits are the cannon. I cannot tell from the photo but is the cannon pattern an Armstrong Frederick which would be appropriate for 1774? If not, can the kit be purchased without the cannon so the correct cannon can be made or purchased separately. According to Caruana the 9 pounders on all the 28s, (except for Active 1763) had 7 foot Armstrong Fredericks that were about 8 feet long overall. Active carried 7.5 foot 9's that were 100 inches long overall.
Allan
View attachment 496599
Click to expand...

I was quiet watching the thread but... I need to speak up. First, I am not part of the Modelship Drydock yard or affiliated with the kit manufacturer. However, it seems that some of us don't realize the purpose of the kits. Why do we keep looking for mistakes such as gun patterns, tapering the head knee the thickness of the frames, etc.? The majority of us don't even know most of the nautical terminology and are happy with the purchased kit as is. The most challenging task would be to assemble the kit and not worry too much about the correct gun pattern provided. The kit basher should take care of the proper guns and other parts authentically incorrect or suspiciously supplied in the kit. Does the kit say anywhere it is an exact copy of the original ship? I think we are spoiled by today's technology and demand more and more.

Why do we suggest to manufacturer how they should sell their kits? @AllanKP69 You can try to order a custom kit where you will ask what to include/exclude from the kit. I don't think it will be possible, but you can try. How many of us know the correct patent guns? How many of us know the difference between Armstrong Fredericks and Blomefield patterns? How many reinforcement rings the cascabel should have and their thickness? How many of us want to know what Cascabel is? We keep forgetting that the kit manufacturer is a business to begin with. Why do we keep complaining and demanding? To me, it is simple: I either will buy or will not, IMHO.

BTW... will the kit provide hardware for the axletrees' support, or what would be the correct angle for the transom? Where is the transom in the cannon? How about the correct diameter for the trunnion? And what the heck is trunnion? ;) LOL
 
Jimsky said:
I was quiet watching the thread but... I need to speak up. First, I am not part of the Modelship Drydock yard or affiliated with the kit manufacturer. However, it seems that some of us don't realize the purpose of the kits. Why do we keep looking for mistakes such as gun patterns, tapering the head knee, etc.? The majority of us don't even know most of the nautical terminology and are happy with the purchased kit as is. The most challenging task would be to assemble the kit and not worry too much about the correct gun pattern provided. The kit basher should take care of the proper guns and other parts authentically incorrect or suspiciously supplied in the kit. Does the kit say anywhere it is an exact copy of the original ship? I think we are spoiled by today's technology and demand more and more.

Why do we suggest to manufacturer how they should sell their kits? @AllanKP69 You can try to order a custom kit where you will ask what to include/exclude from the kit. I don't think it will be possible, but you can try. How many of us know the correct patent guns? How many of us know the difference between Armstrong Fredericks and Blomefield patterns? How many reinforcement rings the cascabel should have and their thickness? How many of us want to know what Cascabel is? We keep forgetting that the kit manufacturer is a business to begin with. Why do we keep complaining and demanding? To me, it is simple: I either will buy or will not, IMHO.

BTW... will the kit provide hardware for the axletrees' support, or what would be the correct angle for the transom? Where is the transom in the cannon? How about the correct diameter for the trunnion? And what the heck is trunnion? ;) LOL
Click to expand...
Agree. Let’s just have fun building models, and these are great models.
Way too much nitpicking on details.
It’s enough to put manufacturers off.
Scratch build if you want total perfection. The majority of hobbyists just want to build a kit.,Great for therapy and mental wellbeing.
Go scratch build then, purists!
That’s my opinion and when you look back over 50 odd years of modelling, we have come on leaps and bounds.
Well done kit manufacturers. I salute you.
 
As an old farmer once said "Remember not to shoot the Golden Goose for dinner before it lays the Golden Eggs"

From what has been shown, it would be rather hard to tell if small parts are correct type or length until they are unpacked and inspected.

I agree with others, I don't know the differences and those who look at my ship on the shelf will not know or care either.
 
I disagree here. There are so many free sources nowadays and it is much easier then years ago to do things "right" not more expensive but right. Allan is correct stating why not doing 3D printed correct barrels but more expensive wrong brass barrels. Yes maybe lot of people don't know the correct wording but some do and it would be nice to get a kit without some "typical" withdraws :-) Just my 2cent ... in bad english ... haha..

Dirk
 
I have been eagerly waiting for the unboxing, Kit Review, and release of Dockyard's 1:48 HMS Enterprise. Soon after Dockyards released their 1:96 Enterprise, they announced that the 1:48 version was in the works. If the detail and quality of the 1:96 version is any indication, the 1:48 version should be a superb kit, with even more detail. There is an excellent POF 1:48 Enterprise by CAF, which I have been building intermittently since 2020. The kit did not come with full interior structures and decks (could have been bashed by a better shipwright than me), but nevertheless there are several superb several builds in SOS. I may or may not ever finish my CAF Enterprize-It has lots of mistakes, work-arounds, etc., etc., but It has really been my training platform...
So now I want to start a new, more complete and complex 1:48 Enterprize where hopefully I can make less mistakes, have a lot of fun, and take a while to build it. Kinda like a really good second marriage ??
Anyway, thank you Zolly for starting the unboxing. I hope that you can review the quality and completeness of the materials and production (laser and CNC precision, casting quality, etc.) Most important, at least for me, are the drawings and instruction manuals. Please tell us when the kit will be available for sale and price.
Regarding the historical accuracy of kit elements such as cannon, I agree with Jimsky. The kits are superb as they come, but maybe not a 100% historically accurate representation of the original. Only a real expert or a judge at a contest will know ! There are SOS members with extraordinary knowledge and expertise and if their goal is perfection-go at it-bash the kit, cast your own cannon, etc.,etc. One can even find errors and inconsistencies in many museum ship models. The engineering and design of modern Chinese kits is extraordinary. Just building them is a pleasure and a learning experience; finishing one is an accomplishment.
 
Jimsky said:
@AllanKP69 You can try to order a custom kit where you will ask what to include/exclude from the kit. I don't think it will be possible, but you can try.
Click to expand...
Thank Jim I really appreciate your post. I enjoy the banter back and forth and FULLY respect other's likes and needs. Thanks for posting other ideas and thoughts, this is a great thing. When some members are commenting on details I am sure it is only a desire to show alternatives to help anyone build a superior model in the end.
Allan
 
Allan, I completely agree with you.
I was building British style cannon carriages for my Le Coureur build. However, after reading your posts and Jimsky's, I now know better, and I am almost finished building French style carriages for the (French) cannon included in the kit. Anyway, I learn stuff everyday. I'll post pictures on my Le Coureur build when I finish.
Thank you,
Alex R
 
AllanKP69 said:
That is what I thought, but hard to tell in the photo. I do not see any cypher either which would have been the George III cypher. With all the 3D printed parts being used in kits these days, the kit makers could offer appropriate pattern guns and save a lot of money at the same time. There is something to be said for brass guns but if they are blackened to replicate iron cannon, why bother? If the cannon were bronze, which would be appropriate for earlier cannon brass might be a better choice, but the majority of build logs are for ships with iron cannon.
Allan
An interesting and helpful website for cannon is: https://www.arc.id.au/Cannon.html
Click to expand...

Alex R said:
I have been eagerly waiting for the unboxing, Kit Review, and release of Dockyard's 1:48 HMS Enterprise. Soon after Dockyards released their 1:96 Enterprise, they announced that the 1:48 version was in the works. If the detail and quality of the 1:96 version is any indication, the 1:48 version should be a superb kit, with even more detail. There is an excellent POF 1:48 Enterprise by CAF, which I have been building intermittently since 2020. The kit did not come with full interior structures and decks (could have been bashed by a better shipwright than me), but nevertheless there are several superb several builds in SOS. I may or may not ever finish my CAF Enterprize-It has lots of mistakes, work-arounds, etc., etc., but It has really been my training platform...
So now I want to start a new, more complete and complex 1:48 Enterprize where hopefully I can make less mistakes, have a lot of fun, and take a while to build it. Kinda like a really good second marriage ??
Anyway, thank you Zolly for starting the unboxing. I hope that you can review the quality and completeness of the materials and production (laser and CNC precision, casting quality, etc.) Most important, at least for me, are the drawings and instruction manuals. Please tell us when the kit will be available for sale and price.
Regarding the historical accuracy of kit elements such as cannon, I agree with Jimsky. The kits are superb as they come, but maybe not a 100% historically accurate representation of the original. Only a real expert or a judge at a contest will know ! There are SOS members with extraordinary knowledge and expertise and if their goal is perfection-go at it-bash the kit, cast your own cannon, etc.,etc. One can even find errors and inconsistencies in many museum ship models. The engineering and design of modern Chinese kits is extraordinary. Just building them is a pleasure and a learning experience; finishing one is an accomplishment.
Click to expand...
Alex, that of yours is a a good point and I'm totally agree with you. Gun barrels are a tiny, minor issue in such a huge project. So many things could go wrong well before one gets the stage "guns and gun carriages". Once a slice of fortune should have allowed me to score a decent achivement that far, then I'll be warried by gun barrels.
 
Dubz Modelling World said:
I disagree here. There are so many free sources nowadays and it is much easier then years ago to do things "right" not more expensive but right. Allan is correct stating why not doing 3D printed correct barrels but more expensive wrong brass barrels. Yes maybe lot of people don't know the correct wording but some do and it would be nice to get a kit without some "typical" withdraws :-) Just my 2cent ... in bad english ... haha..

Dirk
Click to expand...
Your English, Dirk is perfectly fine, BTW, English isn't my native language either.

Who said it would be bad if everything in the kit is the way you/me/others want? One wants brass cannons, another wants 3D printed, one wants Pearwood another Boxwood, and the third Cherry, and the fourth wants something affordable. One wants Frames, another bulkheads... One wants cotton threads another polyester... do you follow what I am trying to say? How easily the kit manufacturer can accommodate such demands, specifically in a small (a few man-operated) shop?

To me, A "model kit" is a set of pre-fabricated pieces, that hobbyists can assemble to create a scaled-down model of an object like a car, airplane, or ship, requiring the builder to follow instructions and often involving additional steps. The kit is designed and targets a wide audience of modelers with different skills and abilities in mind. The kit will never be designed for bashers only!

With kit manufacturing, there will be always compromises you have to account for. Even the most accurate kit (should one exist) will find the dissatisfied people. They will find what to complain about. The high price tag would be one of those complaints. Sorry, I don't know your age, but I don't remember POF kits at a young age of mine. All we have is the blank wood to shape the hull and other parts, brass wire, and cloth for the sail.
Today's kits are a complete game-changer, it is amazing what today's technology can offer, are you kidding me? Still, we are not satisfied: why not have a 3D print of cannons instead of brass? But then, for some reason, we don't critique the square holes in the tracks, found in some kits. We don't critique the blocks supplied year after year in the kits. Why is just the correct representation of cannons a culprit for a well-designed and nicely made kit?

Here is my advice to anyone (for free) ;) Buy a nice printer, design and print 3D barrels, or maybe a complete gun, and sell them as supplemental packs for various kits! How about that??!!!! BTW, I will not ask for commissions ROTFROTFROTF
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top