Hubac's Historian

Well, this looks to be another fantastic Fleuron. I will happily follow along with what is becoming a very fair hull. Fantastic work, so far, Jusek!

You are probably right about that, David. I am going to have to pattern the QG windows, anyway, so it will be better if these lower windows match, as they wrap from stern to quarter. We shall see - I’ll do some preliminary experiments, when the time comes, and I’ll see where to go from there.

Thank you to everyone for your likes and comments, and thank you MD! Yes, EJ, the process of making and fitting bulkheads seemed okay, theoretically, but I was a little skeptical about how my planking would ultimately resolve into the plank rebate, along the hull sides. In the end, I will have to file the outer hull flush with the new transom planking and re-scribe the joints into the plank ends, but that’s a small price to pay. The next big litmus test for this build will be - as Druxey notes - planking the stern counter, which is a subtle reverse curve. And I will likely be modifying the profile of those false balcony extensions, once again, to match the profile I drew for the quarter galleries. It is that shape I drew, after all, that will be used to pattern the upper bulkhead formers that are spaced between the stern windows. After that, though, I get to see whether I can re-cycle the kit’s stern windows to make up the six-window span. At the moment, I have no fewer than three stern plates to cut from, thanks to Henry and Guy. That will give me enough spare stock to figure out how best to bend the windows to the round-up curvature. As Daffy has done with his Victory, I will also be thinning the window mullions down so that they don’t appear so heavy. Hopefully, if all goes well the new windows will look like this photo-copy cut and paste job: In truth, a part of me would prefer to make the lowest tier from scratch, in order to achieve a closer fidelity to the size and shape of what Berain drew. There is also the consideration that the windows of the QGs will all be made from scratch, and will be slightly different from Heller’s version. I’m not sure that bothers me enough to ignore the time-savings of recycling. The other variance with what was likely the reality of the ship would be the placement of the two stern balcony access doors on the middle and upper balcony. The following survey drawings were made of the ship’s actual interior, in 1688, while the re-build was well underway: Perhaps I can do a little surgical gymnastics to match this, or just bash the doors from scratch, into their proper locations. I just haven’t put any real thought into it yet.

Johnathan, your Alabama looks amazing, and she’s really rounding into form. You’ve commented frequently that the masting and spars are extremely fragile. Is this particular kit a very old pressing? The plastic kit I’m working on is almost as old as I am - well over 40 years - but I have found the plastic to be as supple as if it were cast yesterday. I have the benefit of knowing where the kit has been, all that time though, and that it was properly stored. Funnily enough, I remember that my neighbor also had an un-built Alabama in his stash, but I think his oldest son took that one, after he died. His wife passed Soleil Royal on to me because she understood my obsession with the ship. Anyway, I have very much enjoyed your willingness to take it to the Nth degree, and the high quality results you are achieving are testament to your sense of craft and respect for historic accuracy. You give us plastic builders a good name! I can’t wait to see your work with the sails.

Ya know? - just spectacular! I haven't read this log in detail, yet, but I will. Who doesn't love an awesome Bismarck? The decking is particularly good, but does not outshine any of the other excellent detail work. I will follow along with great interest.

I kind of like the imagery of your head on a seagull’s body, Vic. Please - just don’t bomb the ship!😂

Baby steps. Baaaby steps 😀

Planking is FUN!!

Hi EJ - thanks for weighing in! Yes, definitely, the camera exaggerates the degree of shine. I just use my iphone to take pictures, which are decent, but highly dependent upon whatever ambient light I have going.

Thanks, EJ, and thank you, O.C! To answer your question: if I were actually representing bare wood, then, absolutely, I would flatten the sheen. When I get to them, the upper decks will have a flat finish. On French ships, though, the planking between the wales would have been painted as a means of protecting all of the iron fastenings. Although the distressed color I have arrived at is very wood-like, it is intended to represent “ventre-de-biche,” or belly of the doe. In reality, 17th Century paints would also probably have had a flat finish. When I made my sample work-up, I tried flattening the sheen, which was a little too burnished, after distressing with the oil paint and a chip brush. I didn’t like the result; the dull-coat seemed to rob the surface of all it’s depth and vitality. The matte spray medium that I ended up using is a sort of middle-ground between dead flat and a lustrous burnish. This is a preference that satisfies me, and the pictures don’t quite capture the effect accurately. It looks better, in person. I am still debating whether to flatten the finish of the wales. I may yet do that. What I wonder, though, is whether the “black stuff” would not have had an oily appearance, considering the ingredients that it was made up from. Anyway, a little more research, there, should help clarify that question. Please feel free to weigh-in, anyone, if you have a theory or an answer to that one. All the best, Marc

Dan, you will be first with a complementary copy - signed first edition! Mike - thank you for the kind words. Personally, though, I would hesitate to place my project in the realm of any of the MSW superstars (Amalio, Mark Tiedens, Druxey, Chuck, Kudin, among many others); their research is much better grounded in historic fact, while much of what I’m doing is merely an educated guess. I certainly appreciate the compliment, though.

Druxey and EJ - thank you very much! I suppose that if I hadn’t cut away the lower hull, there wouldn’t be as much necessity for custom framing. On the other hand, representing the closed-in, “false” lower stern balcony, as well as the stern round-up kind of necessitated it. In any case, I am having fun playing with the boundaries of what can be done with a plastic kit. I view this model as a great introduction to scratch-building. There have been numerous opportunities to develop new skills. At some point, I do plan to start printing out the build-log. There are specific blocks of research that would help make up the substance of my proposed book. Whenever I do get around to printing it, I’ll make you a copy, as long as you cover the costs for paper and postage. It is gratifying to me that you have found this information to be of use. The Gilded Ghost, on the other hand, would have very little to do with this model that I am making now. It would be a conjectural monograph that attempts to resurrect the early bones of Soleil Royal on the basis of her known dimensions, and what is understood about her better documented contemporaries - particularly Brest-built ships by Laurent Hubac. My operating theory is that early SR looked very similar, structurally, to the Monarque and the Royal Louis, but that the stern allegory would have largely resembled Berain’s designs, while the bulwark friezes would have been more specific to the profusion of heraldic ornament that is seen so clearly on the Monarque and the latter Dauphin Royal drawing. In my mind’s eye, what all of that would actually look like becomes clearer, by the day. Several people have already produced credible hull forms for first-rates, of this period. I would never be able to definitively say that this is what she looked like, but I believe I could make a plausible argument for my case. Anyway, locating that portrait would go a long way towards propelling that project forward. As always, thank you to everyone for your likes, comments and looking in!

The pics:

Oh, interesting. I had so many problems with this post, this morning. Initially, it seemed to want to embed a video file, when I hadn’t even uploaded a video. so I copied and pasted the text into a word doc, and cleared the editor. When I pasted back into MSW, the pictures showed up again (at least on my screen), and I was able to save the post. When I get home, in a while, I do just a picture post for anyone else having similar issues. I love this forum, but the site is awfully wonky at times. Thanks for letting me know, guys!

The framing of the stern continues in this installment, up to the stern counter. Initially, the process was identical to what I did below. The key difference was that I had to space my bulkhead framing to accommodate the placement of the stern chase ports. My initial layouts had the chase ports too close together and too close to the stern post. Eventually, I settled on the following layout: BTW, I have found my plywood build-board to be a great help in freeing up both hands for fitting and eventually painting. I can clench the board between my knees, with the bow end resting on the floor, and it is quite comfortable to work. This will be critically important when it comes to painting the stern. The board also keeps my grubby hands off the paint 😀 The location of the ports is hash-marked in pencil on the transverse round-up formers. I got lucky, in that I did not actively consider the fact that there are caryatid carvings, between the chase ports, whose placement must align between the 1st/2nd & 5th/6th stern windows. Directly above these caryatid carvings are the middle balcony supporting figures of Spring and Summer; if all of these carvings do not align properly, then the finished result will destroy the harmony of Berain’s design. Anyway, as I had only realized this, after I had glued-in all of the bulkhead formers, I am very glad that I didn’t have to cut the whole lot out and start over, again. I thought I might be able to simplify waste-removal if I made stock for the port sills and headers that followed the transverse curve of the round-up: I glued in the sills by eye, adjusting them for level. I then made a 5/16 spacer block to mark the parallel location of the headers. The resulting ports appear taller than they are wide, but this is merely an optical illusion; the openings are 5/16” square, just like the broadside ports: Above, you can see that I used a coarse drum sanding attachment in the Dremmel to rough back the starboard side. I don’t think I really saved myself any time, as I still needed to do quite a bit of fairing-in by hand to get the sills to follow the compound curvature of the stern counter. Additionally, their in-board profile was not as perfectly symmetrical as I had hoped, but it won’t matter in the end. After painting, there will still be a sense of the transom being bolstered by its internal structure. The ports and bulkheads faired: You may notice a partial doubling of the bulkhead formers at the top of the stern post. This was to accommodate the cutting-in of the “jaumiere” opening for the rudder head. The stock Heller transom plate shows the juncture of two angled, straight lines, extending out from the stern post, and intersecting with a shallow arc. All of the best Arsenal models I have observed show a softer, almost heart-shaped opening. This remains a work in process, but the starboard side reflects the finished shape I will match to, on the port side: I now have a fair surface that I can plank to. I will begin by establishing the lowest horizontal plank that nibs beneath the sills of the chase ports. Below that, I will establish the herringbone angle of the planks for the lower transom. Following all of that, I will create the ornamental transom wale, as well as my addition by authorial license: a flowing, carved banner (like the Provincien name banner) that is inscribed with what could be considered the motto of Louis XIV NEC PLURIBUS IMPAR Roughly translated, this means: not un-equal to the illumination of many [suns]. Well, while I am very happy with the process, so far, this is a long and winding road. Sometimes I like to daydream about where all of this is going: Maybe today, my latest title will arrive. After struggling mightily through Uber Den Wellen, I went ahead and ordered another German language book: Versailles Der Meere. The author beat me to the title, so I am eager to learn what he has to say... if I can translate it. Perhaps the author will have located a better image of my Gilded Ghost. Oh wait a minute - that sounds as though it could be the title of an, as yet, unwritten book: The Gilded Ghost: A Forensic Reconstruction of Laurent Hubac’s Soleil Royal, 1670 ©️by Marc LaGuardia Now the title’s mine 😉

It is just remarkable (spelling pun intended 😀) to me that the care and attention you are taking will result in a model that puts the original dockyard model to shame. It is all really that good, IMO. Cheers to you, Mark!

My book recommendation would be: Les Trois-Ponts du Chevalier de Tourville, 1680. Although La Belle represents the smallest of armed vessels - the barque longue - she is a microcosm (IMO) of all of the larger ships of the line, from this time period. From a general construction standpoint - what applies to the big ships, would mostly also apply to the smaller ships.

Marc - happy to see you back! Vermeer could not do a better job of imparting realistic flesh tones. All of that is impressive. However... How’s’bout a few more broad photos of all of the planking work you have been doing 😀 Can we see some more of that, s’il vous plait?

Something more like this:

I remember this kit well from the ModelExpo catalogs, in the 80’s. I always liked the model and thought Amati did a decent job of representing the ship. You make an interesting point about the number of bulkheads; that should make for a more fair hull. One thing you might consider - because I think it can he done convincingly without having to alter anything else - is to modify the profile of the cutwater; Amati represents a more curved shape, but in reality, English ships of the period would have had a cutwater that was a straight line from the turn of the figurehead to the footing of the stem. It will look great, either way, but it is something to think about. You are off to a great start, and I will gladly follow along!

Oh, cool. Well, if you haven’t already - check out md1400’s build of the Corel version; he really did so much to make the model more authentic. A lot of really good ideas there.

Hi Johnathan! Which maker’s model of the Vasa are you going to build?

I’m sorry to hear about the loss of your Dad. We lost my mom 3 1/2 years ago, and my father has long out-lived anyone from his side of the family. Nevertheless, at 85, he soldiers on and we are lucky to still have him. I wish you healing and fond memories as your family grieves his loss. The model looks spectacular, by the way.

Marc Yeu is also a first-time scratch builder, but his innate talent and willingness to take his time are producing first-rate results - as are your talent and patience. Keep it up! I will definitely take a look at Olivier’s build log. Merci, for sharing.

Are you familiar with this builder? http://olivier.gatine.free.fr/og/index.html His model of La Belle is, in my opinion, just one of the cleanest, most elegant, and most superbly carved models I have seen. Olivier really captures the elan of French design. He is an inspiration to me, and whenever it is that I am equipped to build my first Arsenal style model, La Belle will be the subject; she’s the perfect microcosm of French naval architecture from this period that interests me the most. The model you are making is on track to be every bit as good. I am following your resourceful methods with great interest.