Welcome to our continuing series documenting the history of classic model kits.  It’s now been well over a half-century since the U.S. Navy’s first atomic submarine Nautilus began her amazing quarter century of service in the defense of freedom.  We’ll discuss Nautilus history and the interesting development of the Nautilus model kits.  We’ll also weigh in on Classic Modeling.

SSN Nautilus 571 as shown in a famous U.S. Navy photo which has been rotated and cropped to match Aurora’s box art.

What goes into—or onto—a model kit box?  Aurora’s artwork from the 1960’s release of the Nautilus model kit demonstrates the similarities to the Navy photograph

There’s no denying that modeling has changed a lot in 50 years or so.  For one thing, we modelers have grown to become a picky bunch.  Nowadays, when a model kit of a revolutionary new type of vehicle is introduced, one of the first things we do, besides tearing off the venerable shrink-wrap and enjoying that wonderful new-plastic smell, is to ruthlessly pick apart the accuracy of the model.  Remember a few years back when the first models of the new X-35 Joint Strike Fighter were released?  I recall lots of grousing.  The nose is the wrong shape!  The canopy is missing its framing!  The tail is too broad!  These doors open the wrong way!  The markings are wrong!  The kits are too expensive!  I lost parts in my carpet!  Picky, picky, picky!  I wonder if the model kit manufacturers are sitting back thinking, see if we give you any more new kits, you ingrates!  Of course, they realize that they have to keep feeding their families, so they do give us new kits in spite of our whining.  I, for one, think they do a pretty darned good job.  

​Way back in the good old days, model manufacturers reasoned that the best way to sell the most kits was to get them to market as soon as possible.  Perhaps this still happens today, but many early models traded accuracy for haste in the race to reach hobby shops first.  A great example of this is the trio of Nautilus SSN-571 submarine kits released by Aurora, Revell, and Lindberg.  Dem Brudders invite you on a journey back in time.  Grab a ride in your time machine of choice.  Our destination is the early 1950’s.
 
The Nautilus (SSN 571), represented the biggest breakthrough in submarine technology since reciprocating engines.  Her new atomic reactor allowed the sub to remain submerged for weeks and months, not hours or days.  Any submarine could be detected once it reached the ocean’s surface, and prior to Nautilus, submarines had to surface fairly often to run their air-thirsty diesel motors required for charging batteries.    These batteries had a relatively limited capacity to run the power-hungry aspects of underwater operations such as propulsion, air handling, lights, instrumentation, and weaponry.  Atomic power for vehicular propulsion was a new concept—in fact, the non-destructive use of atomic energy for anything was still quite revolutionary when the Nautilus was being designed.  As the superpower Cold War was likewise in its early stages, The United States Navy closely guarded information about the development of the Nautilus.

Three classic kits from the 1950's and boxes from the 1960’s, 1980’s, and 2000’s

​The Nautilus’ revolutionary reactor used only a handful of uranium—less than ten pounds according to some sources.  A development version of this reactor was built and tested at a secure facility in Southeastern Idaho’s high desert.  A mock-up of the Nautilus’ propulsion section was built there, hundreds of miles from any ocean, and all aspects of real-life operations were carefully tested before the real Nautilus would take to sea.  This facility was used into the 1990’s.  Many naval submariners trained there.   Visitors report that it was a fascinating sight to see scores of Navy personnel dressed in submarine garb learning their jobs on nuclear submarines—in the middle of landlocked Idaho.

Of course, the general public was quite enthralled with the technological breakthroughs of the early 1950s, and early model kit manufacturers wanted a piece of the Nautilus action.  The U.S. Navy wasn’t especially interested in giving them even the most rudimentary drawings of the new defensive system citing the need to protect national security.  Paranoid?  Maybe, but remember how protective the U.S. was about stealth aircraft technology in the 1970s.  An attack submarine that could remain hidden for weeks and months at a time was seen as a valuable strategic asset, and our nation wasn’t about to give up one shred of data that might benefit the wily Soviets, who were actively pursuing the same goals.

​The Navy finally decided to share some information with the public through Collier’s Magazine, a popular weekly news and culture publication of the period.  

From this profile view, the three models are quite consistent in shape.  Aurora kit is at the top, Revell in the middle, and Lindberg below.

​In the December 20, 1952 issue, an article with drawings appeared, and the public saw for the first time just what the Nautilus would look like and learned some aspects of its operation.  The engineering departments at Revell, Lindberg and Aurora hopped into action, using the information from the article to create kits of the new submarine.
 
The models began to show up in stores in 1953 and 1954.  All of them were fairly simple kits as were most models of the period.  Each ended up with a deck missile not present in the art from Collier’s Magazine.  Later versions of Aurora’s and Revell’s kit had a missile storage chamber, and the Lindberg kit even included a deck gun, reminiscent of many World War II submarines, and certainly not present (or necessary) on the real Nautilus.

From the top, the kit differences become apparent.  This demonstrates the benefit of a good three-view drawing for designing a model kit (Top:  Aurora, Revell in the middle, and Lindberg at bottom).

When looking at the three models from the side, it is quite apparent that the model companies got the profile generally right.  Of course, the profile drawing in the Colliers article was fairly accurate and is quite representative of the real Nautilus.  When one looks at the models from the top, however, it becomes obvious that the model companies were pretty much on their own when extrapolating hull shape and horizontal tailplane configuration from an overhead angle.  ​Granted, the Nautilus’ blunt nose shape may have thrown them off a little.  When looking at these three models from above, it is almost hard to believe that they are supposed to represent the same vehicle!  At that time, however, many aspects of the Nautilus were still complete unknowns to the public at large, and the model companies certainly deserve credit for their efforts.

Each kit has its strengths and weaknesses, and each one seemed to capture certain aspects of the sub quite well from the article.  There are variations in certain details of the Collier’s Magazine artwork, and some of these are reflected in the three models.

The bow of the Lindberg kit closely resembles the cover art of the December 20, 1952 issue of Collier’s Magazine.  Perhaps Lindberg's interpretation of this image is responsible for the decision to give the hull its bulbous shape.

This view from the Collier’s article seems to have most greatly influenced the shape of Revell’s kit.  The shading on the hull artwork may be responsible for the decision to make the bow section more tapered than it should have been.

For example, Lindberg’s kit captures the open torpedo doors as featured on the magazine’s cover, and Aurora’s depiction uses the profile drawing in the body of the article that seems to show twelve doors.  Revell’s six open ports appeared to have come from an additional three-quarter view picture. 

Aurora’s model was quite faithful to this Collier’s side view, especially the sail and its details

Of the three models, the shape of Revell’s tailplanes was the closest to the Nautilus’ actual configuration.  This detail is probably what netted them a visit from some stern government officials who were curious about the sources used to design their kit.  Lindberg got the rear hull shape quite close.  At the rear, the Aurora kit depicts the hull as being way too wide, and the tailplanes are too broad.
 
One interesting problem emerged in two of the three kits—the instructions tell you to install the bow planes upside down!  Both instruction sheets from Revell and Aurora show the bow plane strut on the bottom, not the top as it was on the real submarine, and in the Collier’s article!  Lindberg got that detail right in their kit instructions.  All three kits represent the thin cylindrical bow plane deployment strut as a blocky triangle that connects each plane to the hull.

​Aurora’s kit was one of their most popular and sold through the 1970s, prior to their demise.  They also released it as the Seawolf (SSN 575), although the Seawolf was quite a different submarine with its longer, raised nose profile and stepped conning tower.  The Revell and Lindberg kits have been more recently available through reissues.  All three kits can be found with varying availability and prices on EBay.

BUILDING THE MODELS:
 
All three Nautilus kits are engineered with two hull halves providing a centerline seam which will need to be filled to varying degrees.  Flash, sinkholes, mold mismatch, and poor fit are present across the board.  Ah, the joys of vintage kits!  I built each model without the inaccurate missile and gun features.

​AURORA KIT:  Aurora’s Nautilus appears to have been engineered for beginning modelers.  Its few parts are heavily rendered, making a durable, easy-to-build model.  While building it, I wondered just how many youngsters first experienced the pleasures of modeling with this kit.  Filling the center seam around the top hatches requires sanding prowess.  The gap around the periscope/antennae installation is considerable.  

Note the thinned Aurora propeller blades.  The end of the hull is way too broad.

​Repeated sanding and priming is recommended until the remnants of these seams are gone.  The shaft side of each propeller is completely flat.  I decided to thin the blades a little, providing them with more realistic pitch on the front-facing shaft side.  The decals from my 1970’s vintage edition silvered badly.  Luckily, I had copied them before cutting the sheet; this copy was cut into a mask exposing the clear, silvered areas.  A quick shot of base color covered up the silvering; the taped-on mask preserved the markings.  Just be sure you don’t get the tape near the decal, or it is likely to pull the decal up when the mask is removed.

Revell’s sail profile is very similar to Aurora’s.  Raised Lettering on the stand was first airbrushed with a fairly thick coat of white paint and then overcoated with black.  Simply sanding off the top layer of black until the white shows through gives the lettering a more consistent appearance than hand-brushing.

Lindberg’s multi-row mast complex adds a sense of realism.   The kit’s engraved deck detail is also well done.  Holes for the deleted missile and gun were easily hidden with Cyanacrylate filler.

LINDBERG KIT:  The center seam atop Lindberg’s Nautilus isn’t a problem as it is covered by two flat parts representing the sub’s teakwood deck.  These parts have their own issues, however, with gaps around the sail.  After gluing the hull halves together, it was apparent that the rear horizontal tailplane mounts didn’t line up.  I shaved one of them off with a razor blade and simply moved it over a little until its location better matched the other side.  The petite periscopes and antennae comprise nine individual parts which is one of the virtues of this kit.

These masts more closely resemble the actual configuration than those on the other kits which only give a two-dimensional representation.  Although they suffer a little from mold mismatch, once they are cleaned up, they are easy to paint individually and install once the rest of the model is complete.  Lindberg’s decal from the kit’s most recent releases consists of large, white numerals outlined in red.  I’ll be darned if I can find references supporting this decal artwork.  I used a spare Revell sheet.  The 1982 vintage “History Makers” decals went on like a breeze.
 
REVELL KIT:  This model seemed to go together much like the Aurora kit.  A few issues caused me to divert somewhat from the IPMS/USA definition of building the model out-of-the-box.  First of all, the propellers were hardly recognizable as such.  At some point, Revell replaced the original issue three-blade props with five-blade versions which didn’t look so good in my 1982 issue of the kit.  I decided to scratchbuild replacements. 

Props on the left were scratchbuilt.  Compare them to the "Flower-Power" ones that came with Revell’s 1982 “History Makers” version. Stay tuned to dembrudders.com in the future to learn a nifty method of creating your own props.

​The next problem was covering up the holes added for the bogus missile components.  Revell’s representation of the teakwood deck is molded into the hull half, and consists of a series of light steps to avoid mold undercutting which recessed lines would create.  Filling a square hole in this structure requires duplicating the stepped profile.  To cover the other hole, I decided to scratchbuild an extra hatch.  Cutting a circular piece of sheet styrene was easy; it was a little more difficult to create the hexagonal rivets or bolt heads, or whatever they’re supposed to be.  I shaped a piece of sprue to hexagonal cross-section, cut off thin slices, glued them to the circle, and sanded the rivets to the right thickness after the glue was fully dry.  

There’s something that seems perverse (in a modeling sense) about replicating an inaccurate item, but at least it was fun.  Those rivets would have to be close to a foot across if scaled to full-size.  Oh well!  They looked consistent with the rest of the kit.  Revell’s centerline  antenna/periscope complex required the same procedures to clean up seams as Aurora’s.

Another modification to Revell’s kit was performed on radar mast number four (counting from the front).  My kit had an affair which looked like a tuna can on its side.  I simply created a ring by drilling a hole in the center, and then cut off the forward half to create the arc-like radar reflector present on older releases of the kit.  The "tuna can" probably came about from a lazy effort to repair some mold damage that occurred between kit releases.
 
The Nautilus wore different color schemes through her career, but I remember her best in ominous black.  That’s how I decided to render my three models.  In the future, we'll discuss how to fancy-up "basic black."
 
So there you have it; these kits have numerous issues with accuracy.  But I had a lot of fun building them anyway.  Some modelers that open a kit and see inaccuracies have conniptions, and put the model at the back of the closet or get rid of it.  Some see it as an irresistible challenge to produce a presentable model by making the needed corrections. 

CLASSIC MODELING:  Generally, as modelers, striving for accuracy is one of our primary goals, but sometimes Brudder Dick and I enjoy the Classic Modeling approach.  To us, this means rendering the model straight up from the box in all of its inaccurate, vintage glory as a historical tribute to those who did the best they could to render the kit with what they had.  It’s a lot easier, and also helps one appreciate the model kit in its own historical context.  Say what you will, but I had a lot of fun!
 
Sure, there are better submarine kits out there, and I like building them, but Dick and I enjoy these old kits on several levels.  Dem Brudders endorse and recommend old, now-obscure kits!  Those who’ve met my brother Dick know that he really likes Airfix 1/72 aircraft kits.  

I’ve got a soft spot in my heart for anything old and Revell.  It’s been nice to see these companies and others reissue the really old stuff, and they are awfully fun to collect and build.  I, for one, hope to see more of these old kits reissued with their original box art.  ​

Three boxes, three models, a magazine and a photo.  Collier's, which ceased operation in 1957, was known for its investigative journalism and introducing the general public to concepts that were fanciful at the time such as space travel. 

I, for one, hope to see more of these old kits reissued with their original box art.  For the modeling companies, there isn’t a whole lot of investment, other than cleaning up an old mold, and duplicating an existing version of box art.  Many of them even have copies of the original instructions.  Perhaps their market analysts question whether or not anyone will want to buy them, but in today’s world, nostalgia is always a popular product.  Who can resist that classic box art in fresh, new shrinkwrap? 
 
I wasn’t even near being born when the Nautilus kits came out, and brudder Dick was pretty darned young, probably not eating solid food yet during that period of history. However, researching the history behind these early kits and the real prototypes is something that gives me lots of satisfaction.  Finding and building these old kits is awfully rewarding, too.  Whether I get these models from modeling pals, swap meets, model shows, online auctions, or hobby shops makes no difference.  If you’re the type of modeler who has to have the latest technology kits from the crispest molds, try an old kit for a change.  Research the history behind the manufacturer, and the model.  Go to your hobby shop, and pick up this stuff called “Modeling Putty.”  You may want to buy the big tube.  Correct all the model’s glaring inaccuracies, or just slap the darned thing together!  It’s fun—certified guaranteed from Dem Brudders! ​

EXPERIENCE IT:  The Nautilus SSN-571 has been preserved as the premier attraction of the Submarine Force Library and Museum in Groton, CT, USA.  It is well worth a visit!  Walking the topside deck and boarding the real Nautilus for a self-guided tour is an unforgettable experience!  You can see the torpedo room, command center, living quarters, and other parts of the boat.
​
As of our posting date, admission to the museum and the Nautilus is FREE!  Check www.ussnautilus.org for details.
​

The Nautilus as she appeared during my last visit in 2014.  The submarine is moored on the east bank of the Thames River near Groton, CT, USA.