Model Fleet: Revell Freighter/Tanker/Troopship: Clones or No?

Revell Freighter/Tanker/Troopship: Clones or No?

Posted by Matty on October 21, 2009, 21:50:54, in reply to "(MERCHANT / WORK ships:) 1:400 and 1:500 scale kits"
Message modified by board administrator October 21, 2009, 22:07:52

This is a question occurring to anyone familiar with any two, or all three of these "flat-bottom boats":

At top, the tanker, most recently re-popped by Revell-DE as Glagow, and at middle and bottom the C-3 freighter and Haskell-class attack transport (PA), in their latest re-releases as Hawaiian Pilot and Montrose, respectively. All three molds have the same "look and feel" - particularly in their flat bottomed (well below the waterline) hulls, completely devoid of any surface detail. The beam of the tanker and freighter, in particular, are also so close that their main deck pieces fit almost interchangeably, especially amidships. Still, when built as waterline-displays (or when sunk partway into a shag carpet, as originally intended) all look remarkably like their intended depictions - in actuality some very different ship types. Could Revell have remarkably achieved such variation simply by cloning from a single, "generic" hull - say, by tweaking only its length, or a bulwark here and there? For years, no answer to the above was obvious to me - until I compared all three hulls, directly, side-by-side, to obtain a definitive "No".

In fact, all three hulls are so different that it seems remarkable that they could ever "look and feel" so similar, in the first place:

Click on Image to Enlarge The lengths are indeed different, as indicated here by the extent of their fantails, with bows (not shown) roughly aligned. From left-to-right, we have the tanker (red), C-3 freighter (white) and attack transport (gray), respectively. But even more than their lengths, it is their contours - especially visible at the flat bottoms - which really prove the point. Note the tanker hull tapers aft rather abruptly, the contour going concave to end in a long skeg-like termination. In contrast, the C-3 hull tapers far more gently into its more gracile fantail, the flat-bottom contour making almost a perfectly straight line to its terminal point, aft. And the PA is an intermediate case, more like the C-3 than the tanker, but ending in a more rounded fantail than either. I don't see how any of the above could profittably have been converted from any other, or from any single, "generic" master - unless by "generic" we're backing up all the way to a featureless, rectangular block!

Additional differences at their bows only emphasize the point:

Click on Image to Enlarge The leftmost three, again in the same lineup (AO-C3-PA), reveal bows which are again all distinct, in significant degree. Possibly the forepeak bulwark on the tanker and freighter are very similar, as is the identical rake of their stems, however their forepeak heights are very different, eliminating any possibility of direct cloning. Meanwhile, the bow of the attack transport exhibits a very different taper, with significantly more flaring of its top bulwarks. The only reasons I can think that they even "look and feel" similar, to begin with, are those already mentioned: the flat bottoms, the complete lack of hull-surface detail, and the similar-to-identical beam dimensions.

In contrast, two other contemporary merchant hulls with (even a hint of) curvature in their bottoms - the Revell Hope hospital ship (white) and Lindberg Navy Tanker (gray) are the next two hulls to the right, respectively, and have a very different "look-and-feel". These kits are also classics, in their own right:

Click on Image to Enlarge The Lindberg tanker hull is not even fully-rounded (at the "turn of the bilge") but exhibits the characteristic "half-rounding" found in several Lindberg, Renwal and Aurora kits of the day. However even this small amount of curvature is enough to give it a much more realistic (full-hull) appearance than the flat-bottomed Revell tanker - even while the shape of the Lindberg stern is far less accurate.

On the other hand, the hull of the Revell hospital ship (variously released over the years as Hope, Haven and Repose) appears highly accurate (or at least, believable) in all respects, and is probably a near- if not perfect match for a seaplane-, submarine- or destroyer tender, right OOB. Note from the previous pic, the taper at its bow is also a good match for the Revell attack transport, in smaller (1/500) scale. And the hull is deep - good for bashing into a tanker or freighter alike, with the wide flare of its upper fantail appearing easily narrowed, given the skeg-like aft keel - again, very much as on the Revell tanker.

I am already engineering a full-hull extension for the Revell PA (Montrose, also released over the years as Burleigh and Randall) above, but what I am really excited by (though I have yet to build anything from it) is the Revell hospital ship, released in great numbers and accordingly available at reasonable prices - and with a little more luck, perhaps one day to be re-released at a real bargain by Revell DE, just like the above, flat-bottom boats. The Lindberg, in contrast, is a very rare kit, long OOP. (But I even snagged a boneyard example of that - so keep a lookout for what I might bash out of that one, too...!)

Cheers,

-Matty