• Win a Free Custom Engraved Brass Coin!!!
    As a way to introduce our brass coins to the community, we will raffle off a free coin during the month of August. Follow link ABOVE for instructions for entering.

USRC Harriet Lane Model Shipways 1:96 scale circa 1863 COMPLETED

The Gavel said:
I was hoping Pete would drop one of his wisdom bombs :p I think the 3rd law is my favorite!
Click to expand...
These are, of course variations of the Murphy's laws as taught to me by my engineer-physicist dad from WWII:
1)"Anything that can go wrong will go wrong."
2) "Nature sides with the hidden flaw".
3) "The trend is from bad to worse".
 
BMT said:
yes along with a 68 S Type, 2000 S Type and 2017 jaguar xjl portfolio sitting in my garages.
Click to expand...
Awesome! I had a 2001 XJR but the Great Recession crushed me and I had to let her go. I absolutely love the Mark 2 - such gorgeous lines. You'll probably cringe, but I'd love to have a Mark 2 with a modern engine :eek: and other modern conveniences :eek::eek:. I see them sometimes when I'm window shopping on the internet. :p My Admiral says that I can have one, but I think it will have to wait on other more significant things like remodeling our bathrooms and relandscaping so that rain and snow melt drain away from the house.
 
The Gavel said:
Awesome! I had a 2001 XJR but the Great Recession crushed me and I had to let her go. I absolutely love the Mark 2 - such gorgeous lines. You'll probably cringe, but I'd love to have a Mark 2 with a modern engine :eek: and other modern conveniences :eek::eek:. I see them sometimes when I'm window shopping on the internet. :p My Admiral says that I can have one, but I think it will have to wait on other more significant things like remodeling our bathrooms and relandscaping so that rain and snow melt drain away from the house.
Click to expand...
I had a white on black '62 Impala convertible for my mid-life crises for about 10 years, but she too went the way of all flesh and other things financially unsustainable (classic car: a hole in the road you throw money into)
My mom said in its defense "It gets great smilelage":D
 
Peter Gutterman said:
I had a white on black '62 Impala convertible for my mid-life crises for about 10 years, but she too went the way of all flesh and other things financially unsustainable (classic car: a hole in the road you throw money into)
My mom said in its defense "It gets great smilelage":D
Click to expand...
I love it! So we're also car guys :cool:. I had a '66 Ford Fairlane convertible with a 289 in the late '90s. I caller her Lucille You'll never believe what I did - I let my first wife convince me to sell it and I bought a 1st year PT Cruiser:eek:. I've also though to re-acquire a Lucille, again with a modern engine.
 
The Gavel said:
Awesome! I had a 2001 XJR but the Great Recession crushed me and I had to let her go. I absolutely love the
The Gavel said:
I love it! So we're also car guys :cool:. I had a '66 Ford Fairlane convertible with a 289 in the late '90s. I caller her Lucille You'll never believe what I did - I let my first wife convince me to sell it and I bought a 1st year PT Cruiser:eek:. I've also though to re-acquire a Lucille, again with a modern engine.
Click to expand...
- such gorgeous lines. You'll probably cringe, but I'd love to have a Mark 2 with a modern engine :eek: and other modern conveniences :eek::eek:. I see them sometimes when I'm window shopping on the internet. :p My Admiral says that I can have one, but I think it will have to wait on other more significant things like remodeling our bathrooms and relandscaping so that rain and snow melt drain away from the house.
Click to expand...
 
Drove a 72 405 Peugeot, then an 85 505 STI until we got the 2000 S Type. At that time, Jaguar was owned by Ford, so it was a Lincoln chassis with a Jaguar body and a 4.0-liter V8 engine. It is probably the sloppiest transmission in any car built (but I never sell it). So parts back in the '70s and '80s for Jags were so scarce that we were afraid to drive the 68 Stype or 66 Mark 2. By the way, both of them came with my wife 50-plus years ago... That's why I married her...:cool:
 
Excellent, again! The parts problem kept me from revisiting the 2000 - 2003 XJR. Your Admiral sounds like a keeper - but you already know that. 50 - plus years! Hat's off to you both! I was a better man and made better choices when I remarried. Thank God the Lovely Renee saw that I was worth her love. We'll have 15 years at the end of the Month!
 
The Gavel said:
I love it! So we're also car guys :cool:. I had a '66 Ford Fairlane convertible with a 289 in the late '90s. I caller her Lucille You'll never believe what I did - I let my first wife convince me to sell it and I bought a 1st year PT Cruiser:eek:. I've also though to re-acquire a Lucille, again with a modern engine.
Click to expand...
BTW my mom, who made the "smileage" remark's name was lucille :D
And PT Cruisers must be getting collectable by now. There's gotta be a dedicated club, complete with website!
(I could go for a basket handle convertible' or maybe a tin woody!)
 
The Gavel said:
Excellent, again! The parts problem kept me from revisiting the 2000 - 2003 XJR. Your Admiral sounds like a keeper - but you already know that. 50 - plus years! Hat's off to you both! I was a better man and made better choices when I remarried. Thank God the Lovely Renee saw that I was worth her love. We'll have 15 years at the end of the Month!
Click to expand...
And a happy Valentine's Day....
 
The Gavel said:
Excellent, again! The parts problem kept me from revisiting the 2000 - 2003 XJR. Your Admiral sounds like a keeper - but you already know that. 50 - plus years! Hat's off to you both! I was a better man and made better choices when I remarried. Thank God the Lovely Renee saw that I was worth her love. We'll have 15 years at the end of the Month!
Click to expand...
Put my wife Kate and I down for 43. She was the best decision I ever made!;)
 
Back on topic: I have been doing a though experiment about raising the bulwarks. I'll make some drawings to share (probably won't happen 'til Saturday).

Here are the issues I see, so far. Assuming an increase of about 1/8" - a scale foot - I will need to increase the height of the deck house by that much as . . .

I just had a brainwave - I am mainly trying to avoid throwing off the roundness of the paddle wheel assembly as seen from the side. As built, the top of the sponsons are even with the top of the bulwarks. The upper assembly is meant to sit on top of the sponson BUT as it meets the side of the ship there is a gap of 1/32" for the rail. If I simply increase the height of the bulwark I don't actually have to add 1/8" to the top of the sponson, thus raising the top of the upper assembly (paddle wheel cover) by 1/8" which has a cascading effect, I think, of requiring the deck house to be 1/8" taller and to add that amount to all ladders and stairs and the king posts. But if I don't change the dimensions of the paddle wheel assembly, I don't face the other changes. I will have to adjust the placement of the chains, probably, but that's it. Right?

Thoughts and input gratefully accepted.
 
Peter Gutterman said:
Remember that the railings over the gunport for the forward Dahlgren pivot gun were removable. or may even dropped down still attached to the bulwark cover lid. (I've seen a contemporary picture of this.) I went with removable as indicated by lines scribed in the rail (hardly visible at 3/32"=1'). I believe the problem of the gun sitting too high to be squarely in the center of the port was an issue in reality, dealt with by getting the railing covering board out of the way when cleared for action.
I don't think this was a problem for the Parrot gun on the forecastle deck.
Of course, I don't know if this is a problem for the guns aft of the deckhouse on your models. It IS a common problem with these wood kits.
Click to expand...
Pete, I agree with you about the forward Dahlgren and the Parrott. I'm mainly concerned with the guns aft. If I had to list a main problem with this kit - this is the one. In every log I've read (and I tried to be comprehensive) every modeler either commented on the problem or their pics show the problem. I think shrinking the guns a bit, placing them lower in their carriages and shrinking the carriages a bit plus adding a bit of height gets them more squarely in their ports so that when run out for firing they are not overly depressed and rubbing the underside of the rail. A little more height forward will probably help the look of the forward Dahlgren.
 
The Gavel said:
Not the placement of the chains - the chains will need to be 1/8" longer. Take a look at BMT's pics here.

View attachment 427995

View attachment 427999View attachment 427999
Click to expand...
I've always had this problem with MS kits, which are splendid otherwise. I don't think they allow for the thickness of the deck planks when they measure how high the guns will sit. I know they build the prototypes, but something gets lost in translation. And it isn't just MS kits. The problem seems to be endemic. I've used the "Dapper Tom" BC kit to build a variety of Baltimore clippers because of its adaptability. I always toss the gun carriages (oval trucks), stash the barrels, and order guns from Bluejacket. The MS guns are out of scale and the carriage castings are crap! Look at that barrel in the photos. It's TOO DAMN LARGE overall to be of the proper proportions. I don't give a S**+ what the numbers say. If it looks wrong, IT"S WRONG!:mad:
Don't change the ship to fit the guns. The problem isn't the ship! IT"S THE GUNS! Change the guns to fit the ship! Put all that extra work into making the guns right. Don't f*(k up all the work you've already done properly on the ship. Even if you have to source (or turn) other barrels, and build the carriages, etc. from scratch.
None of the guns and carriages on my model came out of the box. they're all a combination of outsourcing, modification and scratch building.
Every time you tear apart some work you've already done and re-do it, it loses something. You've already gotten all that stuff you want to tear apart right the first time. Do whatever you need to do to get the guns right as many times as is required. That way you don't lose a thing in the final analysis.
You can F**k up as many gun iterations as you like. Your only gonna use the ones you like best. Who's gonna know?!;)

Pete
 
Last edited:
This is my first build with any armament… my next one will be a little, will be more in tune with what’s really going on in the build.

You both have given me a bunch of stuff to think about in my next build..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top