Attention Marc. A few comments !
It is better to start from the original drawing of the prow drawn by Berain. That of Compardel is already a copy that includes notable deformations. Ex: proportions of the body of the naiad, the breasts in "washcloths", And the horse of prow too thinned, with a horrible tail.
The frieze of the spur must be of the same height from one end to the other .;
At the prow the gap between the first and second pairs of pre-wires must not shrink, but on the contrary widen. Same way to the stern.
On the other hand, it is an invention of Tanneron. Look in the work of Lemineur (The Ships of the King) and also on the Monarch, the flaps are much more flexible.
Big error for the ports of the third bridge, the sides must be vertical and not follow the sheer of the bridge.
The ports of the second bridge are too small and do not respect the dimensions of the time.
cordially
Attention Marc. A few comments ! It is better to start from the original drawing of the prow drawn by Berain. That of Compardel is already a copy that includes notable deformations. Ex: proportions of the body of the naiad, the breasts in "washcloths", And the horse of prow too thinned, with a horrible tail. The frieze of the spur must be of the same height from one end to the other .; At the prow the gap between the first and second pairs of pre-wires must not shrink, but on the contrary widen. Same way to the stern. On the other hand, it is an invention of Tanneron. Look in the work of Lemineur (The Ships of the King) and also on the Monarch, the flaps are much more flexible. Big error for the ports of the third bridge, the sides must be vertical and not follow the sheer of the bridge. The ports of the second bridge are too small and do not respect the dimensions of the time. cordially
