Unboxing Hms Enterprize 1774 1:48 - Modelship Dockyard

Hi Victor,
I'm 3/4 finished with the 1:48 Enterprize by CAF. I've been working on it intermittently since 2020. It has been my "practice" model; I have learned a lot from it, and my modeling skills and understanding have increased. I love the ship, and I want to make a really good quality model of it. When I saw your 1:96 version, and then your plan to design a 1:48 version, I decided that I would build your 1:48 version as soon as it was available. For all the reasons you mention above, I am eager to get started as soon as I receive the kit. My favorite part of modeling is working on the structure, and the way your kit is designed is perfect for me.
Thanks
 
For materials some players have mentioned, I think different players can have different preferences, there's never a right or wrong. But as a kit, we sometimes can't offer all the types of materials for builders to choose. That is a shame, indeed, but we haven't got much to choose. Doing that would lead to either a long lead time for you guys to get the kit (as a player, I really don't like waiting), or a big pressure for our stock management. So what we went for, like some other players have mentioned, is to follow what museum models are like, be like the same, or at least getting pretty close to it. This is a British RN ship, so we followed what NMM models are like, which got a very high representation of this type from my perspective. Most of the models they have are made in pearwood and boxwood (especially from the mid 18th century on), which is what we went for on the 1/96 Enterprize.

On the 1/48 kit, the boxwood version was abandoned for mainly two reasons. Firstly the cost would be much higher, different timber can make a big difference on the price of the kit. I can't reveal too much but prices for cherry wood, pear wood, and boxwood are three completely different levels, not to mention materials like lime wood or sapele.

Secondly, the production would be hard, thick boxwood sheets are hard to cut through, which will take a long time for us to produce. We will be adding better machines in the coming year, which might potentially solve this, but I really can't guarantee when, for now the Pearwood version is what we can offer. It's a very beautiful material that brings good results and is not hard to work with.
 
Last edited:
For the use of 3D fitting parts like cannons, we would like to have these, they are good for us and some builders in many ways. But not all players are willing to accept these. Some of you may have seen the PoB kits that we designed, we have mode bold changes innovating the old PoB designs, adding many 3D printed parts as internal structures. Although we think there are many benefits for builders to have structures like that, many simply disagrees. But anyways, we will be market testing 3D cannons in the very near future, and we might include them in some of the kits as a optional feature.

A image of 3D cannon that I printed a while ago, we have now done many rounds of production testing on these.
1737997129728.jpeg

Talking about additional feature, we are considering to add half planks as a additional feature like what I had on my 1/96 Enterprize. I think that was pretty cool.
1/96 Enterprize:

New finished model - PoF 1/96 H.M.S. Enterprize 1774 - Modelship Dockyard

https://shipsofscale.com/sosforums/threads/pof-1-96-h-m-s-enterprize-1774-by-modelship-dockyard.12153 The 1/96 PoF HMS Enterprize 1774, built by me (Victor) using Modelship Dockyard kit. Boxwood, roughly 480mm in length, with planking and decks on starboard side. I won't say it's a perfect...
shipsofscale.com
 
A plus is that there were 27 ships in the class, so the builder is not relegated to building the Enterprise, even if it is just changing the name painted on the stern. The names were painted on the sterns for a ten year period from about 1770 by orders from the Admiralty which then ordered them to be removed for security reasons ten years later.
Allan
 
AllanKP69 said:
A plus is that there were 27 ships in the class, so the builder is not relegated to building the Enterprise, even if it is just changing the name painted on the stern. The names were painted on the sterns for a ten year period from about 1770 by orders from the Admiralty which then ordered them to be removed for security reasons ten years later.
Allan
Click to expand...
Thank you for this interesting piece of news!
 
By the way, "Enterprise" is maybe the most iconic name of all. My ex girlfriend, a huge fan of Star Trek, planned me to buld whichever boat or ship with that name, starting with the USS 1701 and backwards to the America's cupper of the 30's (even the US carrier of the WWII) aiming to the whole collection of "Eterprises" as she saw in an episode of that show.
 
Modelship Dockyard said:
For the use of 3D fitting parts like cannons, we would like to have these, they are good for us and some builders in many ways. But not all players are willing to accept these. Some of you may have seen the PoB kits that we designed, we have mode bold changes innovating the old PoB designs, adding many 3D printed parts as internal structures. Although we think there are many benefits for builders to have structures like that, many simply disagrees. But anyways, we will be market testing 3D cannons in the very near future, and we might include them in some of the kits as a optional feature.

A image of 3D cannon that I printed a while ago, we have now done many rounds of production testing on these.
View attachment 497876

Talking about additional feature, we are considering to add half planks as a additional feature like what I had on my 1/96 Enterprize. I think that was pretty cool.
1/96 Enterprize:

New finished model - PoF 1/96 H.M.S. Enterprize 1774 - Modelship Dockyard

https://shipsofscale.com/sosforums/threads/pof-1-96-h-m-s-enterprize-1774-by-modelship-dockyard.12153 The 1/96 PoF HMS Enterprize 1774, built by me (Victor) using Modelship Dockyard kit. Boxwood, roughly 480mm in length, with planking and decks on starboard side. I won't say it's a perfect...
shipsofscale.com
Click to expand...
I don't like resin parts in this models, but I must admit this barrel is absolutely perfect!
 
Modelship Dockyard said:
I'm late replying this request lol, but yeah, like I just posted, the planks can be a optional feature.
Click to expand...
Victor,
I ordered the kit. If you have the extra planking set available before you ship my kit, please let me know so you can send it together with the kit. Also, if you can send me a set of the 3D printed cannon barrels, please do it-just let me or Zoly know how much $ so can pay you.
By the way, have a very happy New Year Spring festival. Looks like it is a lot of fun, and each day has a theme ! Lots of family stuff. Here, I like the Christmas Holiday, but thankfully it is short 'm happy so see some family members, and even happier when they leave !......
Enjoy
Thanks
Alex R
 
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 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
Click to expand...
Agree completely There are three ways to make a model. Build a kit as is. Built a kit and replace some of the parts. Build from scratch. There is nothing "right" or "wrong" about any of these methods and there can be a lot of compromises no matter which way you go (I'll bet very few scratch builders lathe their own canon from bar stock)
 
albertmary said:
By the way, "Enterprise" is maybe the most iconic name of all. My ex girlfriend, a huge fan of Star Trek, planned me to buld whichever boat or ship with that name, starting with the USS 1701 and backwards to the America's cupper of the 30's (even the US carrier of the WWII) aiming to the whole collection of "Eterprises" as she saw in an episode of that show.
Click to expand...
You could be kept very busy trying to build all the various ships that have or will be named Enterprise! You might be in real Stardate time line getting them all done.

Being a avid Treckie, I have seen the display at least 3 or 4 times in reruns of the shows and movies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top