Mary Rose 1512-1545 from Caldercraft [COMPLETED BUILD]

Joined
Feb 8, 2021
Messages
417
Points
278

Location
Victoria Australia
Go to P3 for start of pics.

General hints for anyone building this kit.

1. There are no sails, there is no sail plan., the kit quality is good. As for historical accuracy and the sales blurb that it reflects Mary Rose Trust studies... well maybe it did 20 years ago but the research has moved a long way since they thought it only had the two decks. To get a more updated idea get the AOTS book which is on Kindle. You can then decide whether you want to hybridise a build to reflect later knowledge. Having said that the hull is fully attested... but really everything from the gunwales up is largely speculation. If I built it a second time I would do this but adding two decks forward and maybe three aft within the constraints of the full length tumblehome will get a bit closer to a scratch build that I really want but am not qualified for.

2. The plans are excellent and need to read carefully. Several times I thought things were wrong but they ended up being right,. Some areas like the changes in deck levels are not that easy to read what is required.

3. The gunports are critical and do present you with a couple of problems..there is some inconsistency in the plans around the minor gunports in particular. The six near waterline are in a straight line and OK...although it is not totally obvious they are in a straight line. When setting them think ahead to where the port lids will need to go. Approach the gunports with much reading before any cutting. You would expect them to be a PITA and you wont be disappointed.
More on gunports..... If you are not careful or very lucky you can end up with guns aimed at shroud lanyards and deadeyes. ..also when you have made the guns the barrel height is not the right height for the plan position, in nearly every case the gun with wheels on axle is too high to fit.

How I will do it next time is...
3.1 Mark the gunports from the plan in pencil on the hull both inside and out
3.2 Make the cannons offline.
3.3 Cut out all the channels and temporarily attach to the gunwale position as on the plan.
3.4 Position your guns in the gunport pencil marked positions...
3.5 Adjust the gunport positions you have marked so the guns are in centre of the port (vertical) and dont sit behind shrouds (horizontal), and have room for port lids to be attached above them

4. Discussion by some builders that the shrouds foul the topsides and you need to add false channels to widen out the deadeyes at the chainplates. If you check the scale you can see that the kit masts are too short at the scale by a fairly significant 11%.... if you make the masts the "right" length then the shrouds dont foul on the topsides. there is documentary evidence {see AOTS} that the maimmast was "at least 150 ft"... converted and scaled down you get better lengths.

5. For some reason there is no main topgallant in the kit ...guess it wasnt accepted before the AOTS was published. Easy enough to include if inclined.

6. The chain provided for the chainplates is very fine. It will not allow the copper anchorage pins through a link,so you have tho thread it and tie it...then you cant get a thread through the link.... it is probably about 12 links to cm. I had some slightly larger chain which I used and it was much better to work with.

7 Recent work on the wreck has revealed a wooden emblem of Tudor Rose which is shown on Anthony Roll mounted facing Fwd next to the bowsprit. I did a big kit bash and had a Tudor Rose embroidered on the foresail... yeah I know, stretching it a bit but looks good.

8. Rigging.... everyone has their own order of rigging but having just been through it here are some thoughts.

8.1 The shrouds are 21 per side and pretty effectively block access to the centre of the ship so my decision to do them dead last proved a good call.
8.2 Do the mast stays which are along the centreline and then the spar handling running rigging.
8.3 If you belay the running rigging internally as the plan mostly suggests then you can install anti boarding netting on the aft deck because there are lines everywhere. If you belayed them to the exrternal belaying rails then you would have the option of netting that deck. You can net the mid-deck as there is no rigging there.
8.4 Be sure to rig the top shrouds before you install the masts as if yuo forget they are extremely difficult at the end when you are doing the main shrouds.
 
Last edited:
Hi M
Just seen your blog and will follow with interest
I bought this kit nearly 4 years ago and was very disappointed with it. Having seen the quality of the Jokita Victory I expected a lot better. It certainly was not worth the money. Although it transpires it was worth it in other ways.
Perhaps understandably, the representation of the Mary Rose is poor. There is mitigation for this in that the kit was introduced I believe round about the millenium, based upon what they knew at the time, but which later evidence revealed to be incorrect. For example the stem bar later confirms the Anthony Roll depiction of the lower forecastle being one deck higher than the kit. Digging into this further, I found numerous discrepancies. But the stand out one is the superstructure. The ship was a carrack - it had a castle at each end. The kit does not. The book by McElvogue appears to be much more representative. As is also shown in the Hunt depictions. This was not realised until I had completed the basic hull, so too late to modify the stem bar. At this point I decided to disregard the kit and scratch build the superstructures to what appears to be a more correct version. Having done that I also disregarded the rigging as well and set up my own rigging plan ( it took an entire month of hard work) as best as I could from reference books although for this period of shipbuilding the records are very limited. And this is what I meant by being 'worth it' as I have spent a lot of time researching the ship and devising my own build - the process of which has been extremely enjoyable, though I do not think Jokita should really take the credit for that.
Historical accuracy is one thing but there is no excuse to my mind for confusing instructions - you highlight this over the splitting of the deck into two pieces. My instructions mention this but does not show it on the drawings referred to - and also misleading drawings and poor quality fittings - on this latter you draw attention to one : the deck planking. Mine, included in the kit, were very poor - rough cut and rough finished and quite unusable. Bearing in mind the need for deck planks to be exactly the same width for decent fitting, I spent a lot of time just trueing up these strips - and not completely successfully either.
My previous builds were from Corel, which had even worse instructions but far superior drawings and, as you point out, it is the drawings that are the most important.
No matter, Modelling is what you make of it....
best of luck
 
I rest my case. Building wood models from kits is often a lot of scratch building, with Just enough basic stuff to get you started, and often with enough discrepancies and contradictions to get you into difficulties and be deterring. I believe that the makers of these kits should include the admonition: "Proceed with caution!


Pete
 
Last edited:
Hi John. It is great to see you building the Mary Rose. I think she is one of the more interesting subjects out there and her storied history makes her even more unique. I will be following along and wish you the best of luck with your build.
 
Thanks, Mallacoota, for taking point on this and your build log, and leading a path through the mine field and booby traps that seem to be custom designed into every kit! Your progress looks very skilled and clean so far. I expect you will have a treat of a model when you're done. I look forward to following along and benefitting from what you discover along the way. :D

Pete
 
Coincidence. Visiting 'Rare Books' shop early this afternoon I found hidden behind a pile of marine related books "The Mary Rose, the excavation and raising of Henry VIII's Flagship" author Margaret Rule 1982. First published by Conway Maritime Press Ltd. 1982 and revised second edition 1983 which is the version I now have. I never knew King Charles (then Prince Charles) was active in the excavation and scuba dived on the wreck.

Mary Rose_Book.png
 
Back
Top