kurigan

I feel I must chime with a few point of contention on this. I’m sure nothing if what I have to say will help my popularity at all. I will make a sacrifice of myself in hopes of serving a greater good if that’s what it takes though. 1. I take exception to the assumption that MOC’s as they are, occur at random or without a common thread of affiliation. Failing to know about or recognize a thing, does not negate it’s its existence. For one, myself and many like me, strive to develop whole worlds through our MOCs, which there in, must relate if they are the member parts of a story. What’s more, if you are building a historic model, then no extra effort is required to tie it into any larger story as real history serves as the idiom for the work. 2. This isn’t your play house; you are in someone else’s home. Not only are the moderators of this given forum in charge of and responsible for what goes on here, but eurobricks in general has its own staff above them. It’s all well and good if you all want to start your own game, but respect if you are told it cannot happen here. Perhaps it doesn’t fit, or you should start your own dedicated forum, just for the game? I’m not saying “get out” or “take your game elsewhere”, but rather, if the powers that be say it cannot happen here it doesn’t mean it cannot be done. 3. The MOC forum is not suppose to be about relating similar designs together, but rather an open forum for all designs within our theme. The perceived randomness is the very sprit and essence of the thing. If you do anything to change or hinder that, you may as well close up shop now, as you will not only ruin a good thing, but no one aspect (Historic, Classic Pirates or POTC) will draw enough active members to support the forum. 4. On a personal note, I sincerely dislike the idea of anything that will so monopolize the MOC forum. Frankly I find ToR quite trying, but it has cut its teeth, so to speak, and been so well managed that it is at the very least tolerable. The issue here is, if you are not participating in the game, there is little point to attempting upon anything else until it’s over. Mind you it’s not a matter of being a poor sport or an outsider; some members just can’t afford the time or bricks to compete, particularly those who are working on long term projects which tie up their supplies. Does it seem fair to you to essentially cut off non-participating member from their rightful showcase or the assistance and advice of the community? 5. One more area of concern, I’ve only though of after deliberating back over the thread before posting. The concept of mixing different aspects (Historic, Classic Pirates or POTC) has come up several times. I really cannot see how this could work out fairly in the slightest. The standards of history versus the fancy of fiction will always place one or the other at a disadvantage. Either historic wins by backing their designs up with data and real numbers or the fantasy takes the prize, simply by overbuilding or otherwise ignoring real world physical limitations. Seems to me the game either needs to be a hardcore historical reenactment or an outright fantasy. P.S. I’ve used the term “game” a lot but I don’t mean it in the strictest sense. Despite any lack of formal competition, it’s still proposed that teams be formed and comparisons be made based on established rules and standards. Even if no winner is declared that still qualifies as a “game”.

Yes,yes, the "seat of ease" is immediately abaft the figurehead between the head rails on larger ships. It's the reason modern navies still call a lavatory "the head". but on smaller ships, like any of those "Surprises", where there isn't space for the convenient seat, raise the question, where did the common seamen take their more urgent business? Having never had the oppurtunity in my adult life yet to phsycally walk the decks of a wooden warship, as such, i really don't know. Study of many a model haven't revealed the answer either, as none of this type show seat between the head rails with a closed bow, like this. The ladder at the front of Surprise could be used to access any number of technical things at the bow, other than toilet. Anglezoo, i jumped in to talk about the question and for got to mention you ship at all, apologies. She wonderful. it's impressive how you made everything out of Lego. I wonder would you plan to ever put under press of sail? Your furled method is impressive, but would be even more impressive if you had unfurled sails too :) Thanks for sharing her!

That's a very good question you pose. I too have always wondered but assumed they would just use a pot or "let loose" over the rail. I would love to have a definitive answer!

I honestly wish I had more to say about your ship. More that is to say but swooning and fawning over her. I have nothing to offer but praise. Clearly you’ve done your homework and your attention to accuracy and detail is apparent. I sincerely doubt I’ve even witnessed so realistic a representation of a wooden warship in Lego. I’ll grant that you’ve reduced your model to little more than the bow, but I still find the curvature and scaling there of astonishing. That capstan is gorgeous as well and I would love to see a break down. Your timing in updating your thread is remarkable; it really lifted my sprits to see her. I was losing hope for real world modelers around here. Don’t get me wrong, a lot of the fantasy builds are due respect, but I much prefer realism and sometime feel quite singular in the quest. Enough of my “soap box”; I hope to see her develop even further, and soon. Thanks for sharing!

Ask and Ye shall receive. Hat Tutorial Instructions are in the descriptions If you choose to view the album as a slide show, some of the text will be unclear. I do not know the cause of this. It's likely best to view the images individually.

Thanks! All three of the black hats pictures were hand made from card stock (recycled cereal boxes). I customize a lot of my figures to make sailors and officers with hats like that and torso designs. I'm still trying to figure out how to make a descent bi-corner from card stock though. I've though about posting them here but I figured they be sent over to the mini fig customization forum anyway.

[pid][/pid] 206C I’ve been working to build a network of fortifications to defend my fantasy harbor. This is a centrally placed battery that occurs at the end of a mole which divides the bay into two harbors; an inner and an outer. The last rendition of this post was a simple tower, meant to look run down with a field piece for artillery. More images here. This newer version, recently completed, is a much different structure. The tower is intended to have been a much older structure than the gun wall. The battery was added some time after the tower was built by a conquering nation, whose victory was possible due to the lacking in the original structure. I angled the wall in an attempt to make the structure look more up to date, but I’m not sure it works the way I wanted it to.

Nothing on her is permanent, nothing; she is still in the prototype phase. The masts, bow sprit and even the prow are just place holders ATM. the guns are meant to be so small, she's not a man of war, those are maybe 3 or 4 ponders. They serve as nothing but a precaution, her first weapon of defense will be speed. Those are not cannon on the lower deck; those are where the chains connect through the hull to the chain plate and will extend up to the channels to anchor the shrouds.

Update 7/8/12: to skip straight to the update click here. Original post: Since the loss of Hawk I’ve started a new project to replace her: Raven a schooner. I’ve implemented an entirely new technique to simulate tumble home on this hull. I took the idea from the CGH method, but having only a few hinge pieces in assorted colors I needed to hide them with in the structure. Being a brick built hull she also needed a lot of bracing and internal structure which ruins any chance of a below deck. I also used center stud 1 X 2 plates to “half step” the hull sections, giving her a slightly smoother ventral profile. There is still much to do on her, but I’m so pleased with her progress thus far I wanted to share. Her color scheme is my own, it represents a fictions priveteering company in a grander story line I’ve been developing through my MOCs

Though no decision has as of yet been reached as to the fate of HMS Scorpion, Hawk has been deemed a loss and a project has begun to replace her. My new schooner Raven

The "brown" portion on the model pictured is actually copper plating. The bottom of a wooden ship’s hull, the portion below the water line, needs to be coated in something to keep critters from attaching themselves. On older ships, a lime based white wash was conventional, but by the 19th century copper plating became more popular, especially on war ships. Without some sort of coating, plants and animals would attach and bore their way into the hull, slowing the ship down while destroying her. The Lego pre-fab hulls pieces were never intended to be part of a "full hull" model plan. Their curvature is too abrupt, bending in ward too much before cutting off at the waterline. It would look far less "ship like" if the pieces were contoured to scale, and since TLG sets are in no way intended to be models the decision was made to make more dramatic shapes. If you intend to make a "full hull" model I would suggest brick building it in its entirety. The concept you shared, with white bricks added below the pre-fab hulls, just looks awkward. IMO she looks just fine as a "water line" model, and think you should stick with it. If you don't like the blue Legos, consider using a mirror.

I don’t intend to be disparaging in anyway. In fact I’ll only be so honest because I like you. She looks good, but you could do better. Mind you, I don’t mean as a Lego ship she is insufficient, I mean that I believe you, Jack, have the capability to make an even better model. I know your first one is special and dear, even if she’s not quite the thing; in my own experience, love is blind. You definitely have about all the necessary components and elements particular to this vessel, but they could be approached with a greater attention to detail and accuracy. Eight months is a long time to pour your heart into something and have someone tell you you’ve missed the mark, but I beg of you not to be the slightest bit discouraged. Instead be inspired and forge on. What are some of the issues I have? For one the utter lack of curvature to her hull for to aft. On the lateral view, though you do have a fine tumblehome, she doesn’t bow along her keel, a feature rather prominent on Interceptor’s hull in your reference image. What’s more on that point is her hull in the ventral view is completely slab-sided on account of those pre-fab hulls. The channels, the boards where the shrouds meat the hull, seem unusually short, for to aft so to speak. If you intend to use Lego shrouds, I suppose this makes sense, but why not include them in the LDD model? If you’re going for string shrouds, wouldn’t they be better longer, so the shrouds and stays could be farther spread at the base; again your reference image lends me a hand here. She also seems awkward astern and I even have some questions here. Firstly some of the gun ports were false, added for the film as I’m sure your research showed. That last one in particular, is a rather ridiculous notion, though and always bothered me. If the gun were placed so close to the rear most wall of the ship, how would the crew work it? Wouldn’t it have been simpler to just move it forward? I digress though. On the reference image it looks like only that one port hangs over the narrow part of the hull, while you have at least two, which seems a bit too much structure suspended above the water for so small a vessel. Sure a great galleon could support a large stern cabin, being so long and large, but Interceptor wouldn’t have the mass to counter balance so much weight very well at all. I’m going to guess that your situation came down to, having the hull too long, or two short considering one more hull section? Though I don’t have a solution to offer, I would humbly suggest tackling this problem before building. My final point is more of a question and considering you with 8 months research on her more the expert than me, perhaps you can help me out. Is Lady Washington’s wheel really up on the quarter/poop deck like that. It always seemed out of character to me for a vessel of this type and time period to me in the film? I always figured they mocked a fake wheel up on the poop to make it more “pirate” like, and that the wheel would have been down on the main deck, perhaps built into the cabin wall, more like HMS Speedy. On a far more encouraging note, your tops are spot on. Since this is a man of war, she’d need “fighting tops” which needed to be larger than on merchant ships. I’m sure when the film makers were modifying Lady Washington this was a detail they over looked or purposely omitted. The extra space allows for a parcel of armed men to operate firearms from aloft in an action. Some ships with large enough platforms would even mount swivel guns up there. Your attention to detail shows in the inclusion of a “lubber’s hole”, even if the scale doesn’t allow for one large enough for a mini-fig, kudos! I do thank you for sharing her, despite my criticisms, she is a fine vessel and I hope to see her develop. P.S. Much of what I talked about in this post, was covered by others over the time it took to compose. I’m going to post it in its entirety to save time but please don’t think I’m harping.

My Classis pirates friends; tragedy has befallen my fleet once again. Last night brought the loss of the merchant cutter Hawk and HMS Scorpion. Both vessels were shattered when balance was lost as the projects were being moved across the room. The damage to both vessels is quite extensive. More than just broken down to their member components, as with the first destruction of Scorpion, individual bricks were scattered about the room with the force of the impact. Though it is entirely possible to reassemble both vessels from pictures and memory (they are Legos after all, the epitome of modular building) it would be quite an undertaking. I ask the community their opinion in this matter. Have these projects, either or both, enough merit to warrant rebuilding and forging on with them, or would I do better to start anew? Hawk was started as a platform on which to experiment with new construction and rigging techniques. Scorpion is a very important project to me as she’d be my first post ship in live bricks, though I’m afraid my meager supply of bricks cannot sustain such a vessel. What say you? On a slightly more humorous note, the captain did stay with his ship. The figure actually stayed affixed to the deck through the disaster.

My posts in this thread have been cautionary, attempts at advising a different course of action. In the original post repetition of terms such as "actually" and "no real", potentially inflammatory, are what spurred on my initial efforts. Tone does not translate to text and though I did come to realize what I figured was the original intent, it was only after first feeling offended and through later deliberation on the matter. In fact it is very exclusionary when you suggest that one era belongs and another does not; that’s the very definition of exclusion. As for, what I admit may be a bit of a “soap box speech” on my part, going on about accuracy, it was asked “Is it really necessary to go all historical here ? Etc.” No we have no actual need to, but why step into a conversation about apples only to suggest we all have an orange, but to cause further discord? I apologize if I’ve gotten a bit too loquacious, but I don’t feel unjustified. My advice remains the same, don’t ask or challenge others to do in your stead. Step up, fill the void and invite others to join you. Even more importantly, be careful how you present your proposals. Honestly take it from my experience, even the best intentions can be sorely misinterpreted from text. Check out this thread for which I still feel like a villain, if you don’t understand or believe me. I’ll also offer a piece of perspective. Napoleonic era projects likely tend to be popular on account of the availability of information on the subject. One can find volumes of reference material for all things from that era. Much of the Golden Age is obscured by myth and legend, and even more simply isn’t readily available. The characters may also be of greater appeal. In the Golden Age, pirates, essentially bad guys, are the celebrated heroes. Men like Henry Morgan, or Blackbeard, though brutal in actuality, are built up as legend. In the Napoleonic era our heroes tend to come from the other side, men like Nelson and Cochran. Sometimes it’s fun to play the bad guy, but if you’re going to pour a year and more of your free time into a project, are you likely to follow fancy, or focus on a more lasting diversion? Though I would not suggest the formalized division of the community with guilds, I do wonder if we could use a few more “bad guys” so all our “good guys” would have something to do.

Wow looks really good, very clean. I have to caution against those lower gun ports though, they appear so close tot eh water line, that the slighted swell, let alone pitch or roll of the hull and the sea would flood right through them. perhaps add more hull underneath them to raise her out of the water more or go for a lower rating by plugging them up?

A point to the detractors before this thread is likely to be closed: Historical accuracy is not the enemy of good fun or imagination. There is definitely an increased interest in accuracy (which has apparently been mistakenly perceived as entirely Napoleonic) on this forum as it provides for several benefits to a community as such. For one it generates an empirical standard by which to judge and associate projects by different builders. One can most definitely tell if their project is up to snuff by virtue of the same research they did in the creation of a given piece, or lack thereof for that matter. Attention to accuracy will also affect the reputation of a group, as a whole, positively even the pursuit is not unanimous. On lookers will think more highly of that group and even more will be attracted to a place where an education may be had. Since this is an adult group a certain level of discipline rather than pure fancy is reasonable to expect, even if only on occasion, from its members. There is another important point to be made, which does not seem to be universally understood by the example this thread offers. Builders bent on accuracy, like myself, are not opposed to fascistic builds, nor do we in any way impede builders with such aspirations (I’ve even commented rather encouragingly on a few fantastic projects I found quite outstanding). This entire thread can very easily be perceived as offensive and exclusive, which may account for why it has been so “smacked down”. I myself have found myself irrationally fuming at it more than once, however briefly. Honestly it seems the wisest course of action to me, to put this topic down entirely and simply do; encourage through action, rather than challenge a community already busy with its own pursuits.

Having figured what little fervor my projects generate had once again faded, I let the thread dye off forgetting your question, Foremast Jack; apologies. On Snake I used a combination of 2X2 rounds and barrels as they are the bricks of which I had enough. At the time I was quite proud of myself, thinking them a rather clever solution. I have something of a distaste for many of the pre-fab pieces, the black masts being no exception. Though their taper is certainly more like a real wooden mast, they fail me in my efforts to make accurate models of varying sizes. As you state, the protrusions are often incorrectly placed as well, their solid construction limits the overall height of the full mast to some increment of whole sections. Such is the case without the often awkward inclusion of other bricks. I also find that they tend to be on the slender side for square rigged vessels of this size or larger. Though the 2X2 may seem a slight bit too thick, they are still closer to the real thing than the too thin pre-fab pieces. I do not find the lower portion of the bow sprit to be any great detractor, no more than the masts since tapering simply isn’t an option with these bricks. To my eye the difference in thickness between the 1X1 upper portion and the 2X2 lower portion, tricks the eye to some small degree if the audience isn’t studying too intensely. This is the case, as on much of the model, where compromise needed to be struck between method and available components. Being near-sighted I figure, if I see the intended shapes with my glasses off (the digital effect of the bricks being blurred) then I’ve done a good job recreating the aspects of the vessel in such conditions. It is a marvelous thing, what others achieve with more options, making smooth, evenly curved structures. To be sure I would greatly enjoy such luxury, and am certain I wouldn’t fail to take full advantage if it ever became available. I forge on, however, with what I have making compromises and striving to add as much accuracy and detail to my models as I can. On a somewhat simpler note, the windows are just what they are, Admiral. If I had more of the same type I might consider putting bigger windows on the stern but I don’t even have two of the same color, as is. I avoid photographing the starboard side as the grey widow frame on that side is like a pimple of the ships face. I’ve looked for the piece on brick link but haven’t found a seller without a minimum purchase or enough bricks I actually need/want in their inventory to meet the minimum, in order to get one. I’d just as well go without any windows on the back, save that it looks a little strange and it seems that these would still be useful if not as gun ports then as access to the rudder. In time I may find another solution, but for the moment, I’m going to back up to her rigging and forgetting the windows. This entire project has been a learning experience for me and I’m thoroughly enjoying it. I came into it thinking I knew a lot and expecting to throw an awesome vessel together, only to find how little I did and the vastness of what there was to still learn. Both in terms of ship modeling and Lego building, each new step leads me on path of discovery. Snake and my other ships may not seem the most amazing or fascistic vessels out here, but to me she’s priceless and dear. Thanks to all who have participated and commented on my thread so far.

for a day and a half, she's awesome! If you wanted to take more time to refine her there is room for it to be sure, but you've got a wonderful start here. Thanks for sharing!

I like her already as you went with an all brick built hull, can't wait to see more. Thanks for sharing!

I prefer to use tan for decks where I can. i find the lighter color seem more like a man-of-war's deck, holy stoned and swabbed daily. I find white or light gray can have a similar effect.

I’d like to show some updates to Snake. Though I was keeping her under wraps till I had her rigging squared away, I’m breaking the curtain as I’ve made some significant changes to her hull, which some may find interesting. Firstly I found the pieces I needed to improve her astern. Using hinged bricks to set the rear most wall on an angle, rather than relying on inverted roof tiles as before. There is still a hitch where the red stripe breaks at the railing, but the overall effect is a definite improvement and I’m sure the Admiral will be pleased. At the head, I reworked the prow to be more accurately shaped and sized for this vessel and decided to try out some head rails. I vehemently disagreed with Perfectionist on this point before, but after studying a lot more models and drawing of ships of this type I’ve changed my mind. Though there is still too little space for a head with a convenient seat of ease, it seems it was quite fashionable for vessels of this size to wear head rails as decoration as well as false stern galleries. I suppose they were compensating, trying to make their vessels look larger, like ships. Please don’t mind all the stray rope ends, much of the rigging is only belayed in place and the strings have been left long until I’m certain of these placement. As always, more pictures on my photobucket, linked in my signature.

To be sure, I had written a much longer post, but would rather not be checked simply for standing up and offering correction. I will say this however; you are off base on several points. There are plenty of pirate specific MOCs. Piracy has never been stamped out and is still a problem today. The Napoleonic Era is expressedly stated as part of this forum’s intended period. Your land based scenes are nice but if , then I suggest you be the one to fill the void, if in fact there is a void. I’ll also submit a query to you: What does make a vessel a “Pirate Ship”?

Lead by example.

The removable posts may have something to do with removable bulkheads for dividing up the space below deck.

I do believe we are of the same mind, but not at the same stage. The three ropes shown are merely the shrouds. There are only the three fairly well centered due to a lacking of parts, I may be able to overcome after all. Like most ships have, I did intend to ship more lines, in this case 4 instead of 3, with the last further back, skewing the overall effect in that direction. I couldn’t accommodate this, however and settled for just the three. The image shows what she may look like if I had the fourth, by way of dangling one of the shrouds from the opposite side, somewhere close to its place. I agree that this looks much better and am now looking to modify Hawk’s plan accordingly. If I were to move the whole of the apparatus aftward so that the for most shroud no longer reached out ahead of the mast, I would destabilize the structure leaving it prone to collapsing backwards. As for the back stays, they are not installed as of yet. If you look closely at the after most section of her hull, you’ll see a horizontal clip protruding from her side. This was initially intended to be the mounting point for the back stay, but I doubt that it’s not too far back and plan to research it again before committing to it. The stays I’ll tie with blocks instead of dead eyes so they can be belayed and more readily adjusted. Not that plastic Legos on a shelf are quite as susceptible to wind and weather as a wooden vessel, but the beauty is in the details. More views her shrouds here As for Snake’s windlass, thank you I though it pretty cleaver myself, but it’s not an original idea. I’m afraid I forget who to credit, but I do recall it was on a model of Endeavor, where I first saw the arrangement. The spears and any such tubular members fit, but loosely and anything a whole stud or thicker will not fit at all. The spear heads filled the gap well enough for the images so I used them in that moment, but I don’t as of yet have a long term plan for bars. I may entirely omit them from the design ( out of sight is out of mind), suggest at their function with a gallows of “light saber blades” to merely look like they’ll serve the function or go so far as to carve bars to fit from balsa wood, if a better solution doesn’t present its self in time. For the name, the predatory aspect seems to flood my mind whenever I mention it. It seems more a name for a small man-of-war, perhaps something like a post ship or even a brig, than a merchant, even flyer. It seems to have a distinctly American quality about it, which as an American I shouldn’t mind save that I was aiming for something more English. If I weren’t as superstitious as it seems I truly am, I could remove the figure head and open my options to a much wider realm of possibilities. So long as that gray bird perches on her break water I can see no way around it influencing the vessel’s name, it being so prominent.