not being familiar with ships, I was curious what type of finish the paint was on naval ships such as the H.M.S. Bounty, Victory etc… would it be very glossy or dull in finish, and was the paint always maintained or would you find it wearing off in places?
thanks for any help
It was usually satin, not too shiny. Also there were finishes other than paint. Navy ships were pretty well maintained. When modeling a naval sailing ship, prim and proper is the way to go.
For instance, on HMS Victory, there were close to 1,000 men in the crew, as 100 guns with 9 men each, even accounting for the fact that a maximum of 50 guns or so would be fired at a time, meant that there were a lot of hands unemployed on a ship that probably took less than 100 to sail.
Idle hands are the devil’s etc.
Bounty is a special case, but as Bligh was a tyrant, again well maintained I am sure.
Thank you!
Hi !
What is not known is the make-up of the paints of those eras .I would suggest you think about this carefully . Tallow and and boiled tree sap was used for wood colored places and a darker pitch like substance was used on many .The Bounty more than likely had a white lead concoction on the hull below the wales .
This did wear off and had to be re-done to prevent the wood from being eaten up by Toredos . A very nasty salt water worm much like termites that would turn a ship spongy in about two or three years . Remember the voyages averaged two to four years minimum or more .
In this instance they would find a good shore and " Careen " the ship , clean the growths off and re-coat the bottom .Careening was done by attaching gear to the topmasts and pulling the ship over on it’s side to allow access to the bottom .
This is why in later ships were " Coppered " or covered with a Copper infused metal and was called " Muntz metal ". The sea critters that ate wood definitely did not like those substances . T.B. P.S. As " G " said , the finishes would be like a satin finish if at all . Many were flat , but we are not talking twelve year old cheaply maintained ships here . Satin would be correct
HMAV Bounty was coppered after the Navy bought her.
well I’m going to be doing the old revell 1/110 bounty for my first go at ships, I figure to just do the bottom white since its just a woodgrain molded on the model. and the upper hull in green & black with the yellow and red accents
Another thing to remember. At this period the crew couldn’t just walk down to the paint locker and get a bucket of topside ochre. Paints had to be mixed according to recipes. So many pounds of white lead, lamp black, ground oyster shell, and/or ochre mud to so many gallons of linseed oil. Painting would be an all hands evolution taking a significant amount of time just to prepare the materials. Linseed results in a flat to satin finish. Glosses didn’t come in until the shellacs & lacquers (beetles disolved in alchohol).
The white hull was probably tallow coat. White lead in tallow (beef fat). The lead would help cut down on sea-borne critters.
Another of those white bottom treatments (stuff) was lime in tallow- looked about the same, though. While in olden days fleets were kept pretty shipshape in both peace and war, as fewer but bigger guns became the rule, the over-abundance of manpower shrank, and even warships began to get a bit grimey and rusty in a serious war.
On the other hand, commercial ships (other than big passenger ships) looked pretty crudy all the time. Fun to do a commercial ship- you can really turn your weathering skills on 
If you are building the Revell Bounty in service for the expedition (not sure what the other options are), her bottom was coppered. It’s a really fine model esp. if you can find one with the figures.
Revell messed it up, not casting the hull sides with plates. Most, like John Tilley as the high bar, make the plates in one way or another. I would do them with copper tape, the Prof. in fact made up the plates.
At a minimum, I would suggest you paint the bottom copper colored.
I agree with all comments so far. The HMAV Bounty was coppered before the breadfruit expedition. And, as with quite a few other examples, Revell got it wrong when they failed to copper the bottom, and by referring to the ship as “HMS” instead of “HMAV”, the later meaning His Majesty’s Armed Vessel. John Tilley can cite other inaccuracies with the kit, which seem to be minor. I would strongly recommend that you copper the bottom using copper tape; it is inexpensive, it adheres well, and it looks good. I would not recommend painting the hull bottom copper since the bottom shows wood grain and planking detail. It would not look right. But, as John has said, that is up to the individual modeler.
Bill Morrison
Thanks for all the input! I went ahead and ordered a role of copper tape, hopefully 108 feet is enough lol, how many mm long is each tile? and when you get up to the water line do you leave the uneven cutoff tiles or do you run one line of tiles to clean up that edge?
Hi ;
Here’s a tip .Go to Hobby Town next time and get the tape used by Stained Glass Hobbyists .It works great for that and is infinitely workable . T.B.
The things were usually around 48 inches long and less than 12 inches tall.
In my limited experience, the plates are cut off at an angle at the bow and stern, without an added “belt”.
For what it’s worth, here’s a link to a thread I started some years ago about my model of the Bounty:
http://cs.finescale.com/fsm/modeling_subjects/f/7/t/155394.aspx?page=1 .
To my knowledge, both “H.M.S.” and “H.M.A.V.” are perfectly appropriate for this particular ship. I’ve read a whole lot of eighteenth-century naval documents, and off the top of my head I can’t recall encountering either abbreviation in manuscript form. I’ve seen “H.M. Ship,” “H.M. Transport,” “H.M. Frigate,” etc. But I have the impression that the practice of attaching a three-letter abbreviation ahead of a ship’s name began in the latter part of the nineteenth century. (I’ve never seen a contemporary reference to the Constitution as “U.S.F.,” or the Victory as “H.M.S.O.L.”) I wish some scholar of nautical language (Dr. John Harland, are you listening?) would do a meticulous study of this stuff. (I’m not sure I’d want to read it, but I wish it existed.)
Nowadays, “H.M.S.” is used in reference to any commissioned ship of the British Royal Navy - just as “U.S.S.” refers to any commissioned ship of the U.S. Navy. (William Bligh’s book is titled The Mutiny On Board H.M.S Bounty. I think we can trust him.) I’m not sure any contemporary would have said “H.M.A.V.,” but “H.M. Armed Vessel” was commonly written (I think).
(I’d also like to see a study of the use, or non-use, of “the” in front of ships’ names. Samuel Eliot Morison and C.S. Forester notwithstanding, I contend that the practice of omitting “the” didn’t become common in nauticalspeak until well into the twentieth century.)
As for the Revell Bounty, what you think of it depends on how much you fuss over historical accuracy. When it was initially released, in 1956, it represented the state of the art, and some of its features have never been surpassed. (I love the crew figures, and the subtle shape of the ship’s launch is masterful.) I won’t list all the goofs in the other pieces; I took up most of them in that other thread. (Maybe the worst: the misshapen bow, the anachronistic jackstays on the yards, and the omission of the water closet at the stern.) But several other Forum members have demonstrated that it can be built into a nice, highly attractive model.
Back to the original subject of this thread: I think experienced sailing ship modelers are pretty much agreed that small-scale models are best painted with flat paint. A glossy finish has a way of looking faky and out of scale.
You’ve just struggled through one more of the pointless, overlong ramblings of a newly-retired Olde Phogey killing time to avoid doing anything useful.
great info, thanks again!, also really awesome build you did there! I’ll start a build thread as soon as i get something done on it lol.
JT, it is nice to see one of your projects. You put a lot of nice detail in that build. Very nicely done. I really like the look of the spars and how you furled the sails.
Model Master has a nice line of acrylics designed primarily for railroaders that work extremely well on ships. For example, I like their Aged White for the lower hulls of most non-coppered sailing ships. They also have a shade of gray called Concrete that works well when painting wood decks, Burnt Umber, Burnt Sienna, Yellow Ochre, Caboose Red, among others. Vallejo has just come out with a “Wood Effects Set” in acrylics that is intriguing. Go check them out if you have a local hobby shop.
Bill
Keep in mind that bright, clear colours (even when they were available) were basically a no-go simply due to cost. Preussian blue, for example, was something like 10 or 20 times more expensive than plain yellow ochre. Not a huge problem if you are painting a portrait but when your canvas is a ship’s hull… The really good stuff, bright paint and gold leaf, might be used on small details like the royal coat-of-arms, not elsewhere.
A peripheral comment… Strangely enough, Captain Bligh (actually, I think he was only a lieutenant at the time) is not generally thought to have been a tyrant by most historians. If anything, the mutiny might be in part attributable to the lax discipline on board the Bounty. Bligh had a temper to be sure and was known to throw fits at those who didn’t measure up (he was also a perfectionist), but his tongue lashings did not generally lead to physical lashings. He was a disciple of Capt. Cook and preferred witholding grog and other privileges instead of resorting to the lash. The Bounty was undersized for its mission, which led to limitations on crew. Bligh did not ship any marines on the voyage, preferring to use valuable space for seaman. When Christian tied up Bligh and assumed control of the ship, many (perhaps half) of the crew elected to stay with Bligh… There were more volunteers to leave with the Captain than space in the boat. The mutiny was mostly a power grab by an underperforming subordinate and his close cohorts who wanted to return to the lusty frolics offered by the south pacific natives and not return to the rigid world of the Royal Navy. His voyage to safety in an open boat ranks among the great feats of navigation and survival. He later served well at Camperdown and Copehagen (under Nelson). At Copenhagen, he knew that Nelson was ignoring the direct order to break off the battle and continued to lead a line of ships into close engagement and was praised by the great hero in his after battle report.
To Bill’s underlying point, Bligh did try to run a tight ship and tried to keep the crew healthy during the long voyage and expected the Bounty to be in peak condition.
Not a perfect Captain by any means, but likely not the despotic martinet depicted by Hollywood.
I’ll stand corrected. An old school commander.