? Oh yes ? in what way Dave
? Oh yes ? in what way Dave
If they're annoyed at anyone it should be directed internally or towards their Chinese production facility.
"It's not the towering sails, but the unseen wind that moves a ship."
–English Proverb
Just a feeling, lack of response etc.
It's not like the community has any control over design, production, QC, etc. ... I can see maybe a little cheesed with me personally, but what do they have to be cheesed off at the rest of you for? (I mean, I specifically TOLD them facing painful questions like this can be a consequence of some decisions...)
We know Andrea has been focusing more on Wings of late given his activity there and not here, but we also know Sails is largely out of Andrea's hands now. David, between him and Rob which one do you think would be better to try to reach out to, or should I just assume we're all Burned until indicated otherwise? (Though A.A. DID ask my advice on a confidential matter recently... so at least he's still talking, or at least WAS.)
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
I'm going to ask a few more times and then give up and assume that they just don't care enough to reply. Langton make good ships, is their customer service better?
I've found very few folks that equal, let alone exceed, Rod Langton when it comes to customer service.Originally Posted by Hjl
"It's not the towering sails, but the unseen wind that moves a ship."
–English Proverb
Really? Excellent! I think I'll buy some merchants from him
That's what I did Hugh.
Scale is no problem with A Merchant as they come in all shapes and sizes. I just bought a size up from the one I wished to portray, and it seems to fit in O.K.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
DB, i usually chat on game design aspects with Andrea, production and marketing with Roberto.
Ill see if I can get hold of this Roberto chap.
Could somebody who has a Bahama, an SGN102 and an SGN104 side-by-side line them up stem-to-stern and take a broadside pic? Ditto the four three-deckers?
Last edited by Diamondback; 02-27-2017 at 21:16.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
Or just run a tape measure down SGN112's centerline?
BTW, I did get a reply from Rob at Ares, but I'm treating it as Confidential until specifically authorized to release.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
I got a reply on Facebook too. Looks as though they are quite keen to deconstruct my arguement rather than explain it. I'll post it up in a bit.
Sails of Glory Hi Hugh - I think what you have there in the photo is SGN110 (Portland class) not the Artesien. I measured the Artesien here in the office and the waterline is about 51/52 mm, and matches the scale plan by Fichant we have, where the waterline length is 51 metres.
Threedecks has Artesien gun-deck length at 50.02m and 1100t--which is within the "reasonably precise" range for a French 1100- to 1300-ton 64-gunner or EIM. The heaviest of these I've found, 1765 Vengeur, was 1250t and 52.6m; the shortest "heavy", 1200t 1754 Duc d'Aquitaine, 48.6m.
My recommendation is going to be group Duc d'Aquitaine and everything below 1000t with Bonhomme Richard in the Wave 4 sculpt even though we'll all have to do some quarterdeck-chopping and mizzenmast-splicing; everything from 1756 build-date on at 1000t+ with Artesien and everything kiloton-up before 1756 with Wave 4 Ardent.
Hugh, please note I'm not taking a side here, my job is to gather objective data and try to account for *any* possible error in the dataset regardless of origin. The pic *does* look more like the aspect-ratio of a Portland, which were a bit stouter proportionate to length than an SOL. Hence my request for a side-on photo... not as a dismissal, but as an "objective control"--God knows I occasionally get things mixed up with the ninety ships we already have, and I think your namedropping Argonauta (which as I said is a Temeraire; this is why I always try to refer to a sculpt SKU rather than a specific ship name unless it's an issue specific to that version of the product) may have thrown some confusion into the mix. If your smaller mini measures ~45x12mm it's probably a Portland; if it found its way into an SGN112 package that's a Factory Mistake.
Meregildos is clearly out-of-scale, that is beyond any reasonable dispute.
Last edited by Diamondback; 02-27-2017 at 19:31.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
I just posted info from here on Facebook, it's all from these threads without naming anyone.
Was that you on Facebook?
Clark is a false-flag I use from time to time.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
An interesting note, is the Portland that small? They look smaller on the waterline than some of the frigates
Hebe should be 46mm on Main Deck (which is actually the one *below* the gun deck); two-decker cruisers tended to be more "short and stout" because they were built for endurance rather than speed, primary roles being convoy escort (where they just needed to be fast and maneuverable enough to chase off raiders without temptation to stray away from their vulnerable charges in pursuit of prize money) and blockade duty. So Portland should be longer than SGN101 and 103 (which at 43-44mm are in the ballpark of "correct"), shorter than 105, *much* shorter than 202. A Portland should be about 80% of a Temeraire's length, an Artesien about 90%.
I think what they're trying to do is define the scope and magnitude of the problem; it sounded here like "entire wave" but is now looking like it may just be 111 and possibly 112 undersize. Of course, a model designer can only be as good as the drawings they work from.
Last edited by Diamondback; 02-27-2017 at 21:22.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
Out of interest, which Facebook group?
I've taken some photos with a ruler for scale.
SGN102
SGN104
SGN112
and the 3 deckers
SGN108
SGN106
SGN111
and a comparison of SGN108 v SGN111
Weird perspective on the photo makes it look like the ruler either starts or finishes in the wrong place so I tried on making the front line up.
Having issues with picture uploads tonight but I think they are in my album- will try again tomorrow.
Last edited by twsl; 02-28-2017 at 06:57.
Links broken, Alan. :(
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
Looks like I managed to fix them - hope it helps
My 50's and 64's should be arriving later this week or early next week so I don't have any comparisons of them yet.
Something I notice that may be confounding things: Meregildos's Lower Deck length includes the Stern Gallery--SGN108's does not, as the Gallery terminates at Middle Deck. If we offset Meregildos so its Gallery LD and the end of 108's LD in Alan's photo lined up, they look very close to my eye--on my screen, the forward end of Meregildos's LD starts 1/3 of my index-finger width at distal knuckle behind SGN108's, and extends all the way through to the gallery which is somewhere between 1/2 to 2/3 of that same distal-knuckle width behind the end of 108's LD. My guess here is that we're used to thinking more in "overall length" and forgot to take that massive overhanging gallery projecting well past the aft end of the LD in British/French design practices into account while Late Spanish seem to be a lot more "vertically stacked" without the overhang.
I'm predisposed to call False Alarm here on 111, particularly as just measuring these ships is such a complicated business. On 112, Rob quotes a source citing a 51m length on Bahama--I think what happened is that somebody had the measurements of sister San Pedro de Alcantara which was never rebuilt, and down-scaled the Bahama post-rebuild drawing to the pre-rebuild length,but that's just a guess.
Right now, I think we could all stand to step back, take a breath, let Rob and I follow the evidence and see where it leads us, and I'll keep you posted as I'm allowed to do so.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
This also illustrates the importance of having your length measurement and measuring system consistent between ships: 108 and 111 are very close to a match at the LD, but from tip of beakhead to extreme rear of gallery SGN108 has longer OAL due to its combination of an overhanging MD (gallery projects out over water *behind* the rear of LD, while Meregildos LD goes all the way to the glass) and a sharper rake of the gallery once it starts.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
Having taken all that into consideration, I'm with you on this one DB. Let us assume all is well until Rob has a chance to look at all the evidence from his end and do the business.
I would quite like a chance to get back to doing my Band of Brothers item for now.
In fact you could say that over this conundrum I'm < wait for it > in denial.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
One other closing thought I'd like to note is that part of why things stand out is Ares generally punches way above their weight class, which makes things stand out all the more--to be honest, I would rate most of their releases above some "serious scale models" I've tried to build over the years. (If you've ever fought with a hideously warped Monogram F-106 Delta Dart, or tried to correct the way-off-shape "gooseneck" of a Testors Blackbird, or fought with the Death Star Trenches where the fore and aft fuselages of an AMT B-52 meet, you know what I mean.)
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
Sorry, I'm not going to buy into the wait and see stance, especially for the Meregildos. Even to my poor eyes the Santa Ana is not scaled correctly.
One thing I will say that in future I will not pre-order (or Kickstarter) anything from Ares until it's been vetted on the forums or I can look at the ship (or plane) in person.
Last edited by Nightmoss; 02-28-2017 at 11:37. Reason: typo
"It's not the towering sails, but the unseen wind that moves a ship."
–English Proverb
Another thing to consider is there's a good 2+-meter range in sizes between the shortest and longest Meregildos--I've been using Salvador del Mundo as my basis, as it's in the low 57mm range (shortest of the class) and the one I could get drawings for. Combining the architectural differences with that...
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
Interesting things here, for me the issues has been with the Meregildos SGN111 models, the measurements I have taken and the information I have had clearly show the model smaller than should be, so I dont understand DB your comment of false alarm, are you saying the Meregildos is correctly sized ?
The Second issue in the wave , again for me, is the Portland's SGN108 reading through my Winfield book I still see this as smaller, or am I reading wrong here?
The Nepochumeno/Bahama SGN112 not too sure of this, its smaller than some 74's I have but these I have not delved too deeply into.
The last sculpt the 64's I am happy with, the measurements look correct and by comparison look smaller than the 74's in scale as I would expect.
Now I am no expert and my knowlegde is no where near that of some of our esteemed members here but I clearly have issues with two of the models in this wave. So I wait the out come with great anticipation and really an explantion as to how the two sculpts I have the issues with are correct .
I'm saying that when you take architectural differences into account things get a bit closer, particularly if you consider that the draught I found for Meregildos was the *smallest* of the class. I'm not saying it's a nothingburger, I'm just saying "put the torches and pitchforks down for a minute."
Item: The draughts Ares was working from for Artesien and Portland match the models very closely. Cross those off the concern list, unless you propose to demand that they let you personally vet every drawing source, in which case a lot of ships will never be made because sometimes we do have to look at similar designs and take our best guess. If Portland is between Hebe and the Wave 1 frigates, say around 44-45mm (per Winfield 146' LOD, 44.5m), she's right where she belongs. Artesien, the LOD recorded for Prothee (only one taken) is 164'1", 50.01m. Bahama, the numbers they had were 51m (50.79 exactly), which I suspect is a pre-rebuild length. I *think* a wire got crossed using the draught of the 53m 74-gunner but scaled to the size of the 51m 64-gunner. 2mm... well, nobody complained about the British First Rates having more difference than that except me. And I think a lot of us were getting thrown off because of midget Bahama being the sculpt model but most of the names being 55m built-as-74s.
On Meregildos take a look at Alan's last photo in post 221 above. The mini does seem a skosh lower vertically, BUT the LD lengths are very close between the two models when you take architectural differences like significantly less stern-gallery overhang into account. Anything in the stern gallery past the rear of the LD does not count for Length On Deck, nor any rake of the bow ahead of where the fore-end meets the stempost--so by this logic, a ship with deeply-raked bow and long, deep-raked stern gallery at say 57m LOD, could in fact have greater OVERALL length than a ship at say 60m LOD with less gallery and shallower rakes, DESPITE having the shorter Main Deck. I should note that when researching Sails, we generally use Main Deck Length because that's the most consistently available measurement--waterline can vary wildly on the same ship under different conditions from Empty to Normal Displacement to Maximum, and while most American ships are measured Stem-to-Post in the official USN records that is yet a third, fourth or Xth length so we have to go back to the draughts, find the Main Deck plan and calculate LOD from that. (Unless we have a sister ship taken by the British... then they did it for us.) And then there's converting between French, Spanish and English feet... which is why we usually rely on the length figures at ThreeDecks as those are already converted to metric.
Another question... is it possible that Langton might have went high on his Meregildos's size if that's your point of comparison? I'm not saying he did, just trying to account for all possibilities. Assuming the longest recorded Meregildos (Santa Ana), the Langton should be 48mm from inner edge of beakhead (that's the vertical plank-like thing ahead of the main bow section) back to the back wall under the gallery with chase ports (which seems stupid to me putting holes in an area that close to the water and subject to violent pitching, but that's just me), while a 1/1000 model assuming based on SdM would be 57mm. (And yes, I'm cherrypicking the extremes deliberately trying to minimize the difference.)
Looking at the original draughts, we see that a Meregildos had less overhang behind that back-wall than an Umpire despite a similar Main Deck Length--and we're also being thrown by the Meregildos mini's mounting pin being proportionally farther forward than SGN108's. Taking these into account and measuring Alan's photo on my laptop screen, both miniatures in the on-screen photo measure at ~70mm LOD, plus-or-minus 1-2. I'd bet if Alan lined them up on Transoms instead of Pins in that photo the models would seem a lot closer--not Pitch Perfect mind you, but probably a whole lot more evenly matched. Though I do stipulate that the SGN111 model's rake looks a little shallower than the SdM draught...
See what kind of fun I get to have on a daily basis trying to crunch these numbers?
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
I would say I've mostly been bothered with finding out what ship the British first rates are and don't know which one I should compare it to for size. Not that I thought that I would need to. I started talking of side profiles not matching back in the stats committee. I wasn't even talking about gun ports back then. Some things I can fix... some I can't.
Ares just said that their ships are accurate when I asked why the Spanish first rates were so short. It seems that they are confident atleast in their numbers.
I'm not sure what to think now.
I'm going to try this again and came up with a different way to show this.
I lasercut a baseplate that allowed me to sit the ship on top and slide it back until the rudder or the flat on the rear underside of the frigates hung over the rear edge to discount the stern gallery.
I then drew a line at the beginning of the forepeak at the bow of the ship. This was a consistent measure for every ship type I have.
This example is SGN106 Orient.
I then went to threedecks and looked up the ship length in metres.
Ares is the one telling me that this is a model of this particular ship, this is how they advertise it, not that is representitive of a compilation of ships of a similar class but I'm perfectly fine to overlook certain distinctions - I don't care if 2 versions of a similar ship were historically a one or two metres longer or shorter for example. Even at this scale it doesn't really mean much to me.
Once again I looked up the main name of each ship type and noted the length of each one.
Rather than put up pictures of each one I made a quick graph to show the results.
I believe this shows that the San Juan Nepomuceno is the same length from stern to bow as a Hebe Frigate and the Santa Ana is likewise to a Bellona
As I said I can forgive a couple of mm but 10 and 11 on the 2 new Spanish ships seems a bit on the goofed side.
I still have the Artesien and Portland to measure when they arrive and I am interested to see where they fit in the above chart.
If I've measured something wrong let me know but I figured this was the best way to show an exact comparison rather than a series of photos of ships that a slight slip of angle gave false impressions.
If I'm going to be quoted on something I want to make sure it's right. The research is fun though.
What I'm finding more frustrating at the moment is how on a lot of the later ships the inner and/or outer jib sails are pointing straight up in the air and not in line with where the rigging is supposed to go.
By the way I work at a large plastic injection moulding company and know too well the tools and machines that would make these components and what our engineers and quality people measure and check for before a single part goes into a finished product and how long it can take.
Holy cow, that is some detailed investigation!
can anyone list what the SGN numbers refer to for those of us (me) who have no idea?
Hugh, the SGN numbers are the SKU's for each sculpt. Adding letters gives you the specific Ship Pack, I just use the base SKU as shorthand. The first four have Kickstarter companions, SGNKS##, where the numbers are the last two digits of the SKU, and the Starter versions are similarly designated SS## sharing the SKU's last digits.
101 = Concorde/similar French 12# 32-gun frigate
102 = Temeraire Middling/Large 74-gun SOL
103 = 1773 Amazon British 12# 32-gun frigate
104 = Bellona/related Common 74-gun SOL
105 = Hebe/related French and British 18# 38-44-gun frigates
106 = Ocean 120-gun three-decker
107 = Swan 14-18-gun ship-sloop
108 = "Generic British First Rate" 100-120-gun three-decker
109 = Artesien 64-gun SOL
110 = Portland 50-gun cruiser
111 = Spanish Meregildos 112-gun three-decker
112 = Spanish Bahama 64->small 74-gun SOL
201 = HMS Victory
202 = USS Constitution
Numbering system is a carry-over from Wings, adapted.
0xx = Starter/Rules Products
1xx = Standard Ship Packs
2xx = Special Ship Packs
3xx, 4xx = Unassigned
5xx = Accessory Products
Alan, what I'm telling YOU is that you're measuring against the wrong ship on 112--you need to be measuring against BAHAMA (51m as built to San Pedro Alcantara design before rebuild, 53 after), which has been repeatedly noted until we're all blue in the face to all who will listen, not SJN or her 55m near-sisters. I TRIED to find them a blueprint of HMS San Juan as taken in Greenwich's collection, but they didn't have one. So sue me. The model is specifically Bahama.
And "compilation" has been happening from Day One, with the Charmantes sharing a sculpt with the similar but different-forecastled Concordes, the Bellonas and their progeny's stats and names piled on to the SGN104 sculpt, the mishmash of First Rates on SGN108... I pointed things out on 108, and none of you wanted to listen, so it's a little LATE to be laying on the sanctimonious self-righteousness.
I too have a set on the way, and as someone a bit more familiar with the intricacies of naval architecture of the period, though not at David Manley's level, I will be taking my own measurements and post those--if memory serves, the tapering-in portiion of the bow is also included in the gun deck's length.
Last edited by Diamondback; 03-01-2017 at 15:32.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
Start by having a look here Hugh.
http://sailsofglory.org/downloads.php?do=file&id=77
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
So the spanish first rates are supposed to be smaller than the british and french thirds? and the spanish thirds are supposed to be smaller than a frigate?
Ares seemed pretty sure of themselves on facebook.
What a close run thing DB.
Rob.
The Business of the commander-in-chief is first to bring an enemy fleet to battle on the most advantageous terms to himself, (I mean that of laying his ships close on board the enemy, as expeditiously as possible); and secondly to continue them there until the business is decided.
Ya know what, I'm done wasting my time in this discussion. When my set arrives, I will take measurements myself and illustrate precisely how and from where to where, and cite relevant points to note in the research process.
Until then, I'm out. BYE!
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
Sorry if I had anything to with this I thought I was offering info to aid in your discussion with Ares not arguing with you.
Does this mean there is/will be another Spanish large 74 that may be in the pipeline?
If my Bahama measured 50-51 and not 44 that would be fine with me.
I believe the issue is they (not you) refer to them as nepomuceno/bahama class when they are really one and not the otherI look forward to hearing back when yours arrive and seeing your measurements to compare.
Update:
My Artesien and Portland ships arrived today and I did the same measurements as I have done with all the other ships I have and the results are:
Artesien - Gun Deck =50m Measured mm =50
Portland - Gun Deck =44m Measured mm =45
From what I can see looking at the models is that the SGN112 Bahama is the same length but beefier as the SGN110 Portland and carries a smaller ships boat.
I can say that the front sail reversal isn't really noticeable unless you know about it, it's more the angle I'm not fond of.
I still believe SGN's 111 and 112 are smaller than they should be but they are still nice looking ships.
David, apologies for late reply, that was the company Sails FB page IIRC.
--Diamondback
PMH, SME, TLA, BBB
Historical Consultant to Ares, Wings and Sails - Unless otherwise noted, all comments are strictly Personal Opinion ONLY and not to be taken as official Company Policy.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks