John Clements
-
Posts
73 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by John Clements
-
I followed your advice, Michael, and it's worked a treat, so thank you very much. Here is a not very good picture of the fore channels and chainplates with some of the shrouds now in place (yet to be tightened hence the unevenness). I used a tiny brass pin to close the hole in the hull and will paint them black in due course. Being so small and under the channels, they will hardly be visible. This is the first time I've rigged shrouds from scratch so it is taking a while. I think if I get all the shrouds and ratlines done by the end of the year, I'll be very pleased. Slightly off topic but last week I had my first experience of sailing in a yacht on the open sea which gave me a real insight into what's involved when one is dependent on wind and tide. Fascinating.
-
Thanks for your advice. Much appreciated.
-
Thank you, Michael. That's a most ingenious solution and one I didn't think of. I'll give it a try and see how I get on but it sounds quite simple. You are lucky to have a kit of the SoftheS as they've been out of production for so long. I'll have a look at your logs as you suggest.
-
I'm afraid there's been another long gap when I just haven't been able to find the enthusiasm to get on with this kit but I have recently gone back to it. I've now done the tackles (see photos below) but am stuck again with trying to work out how to make chainplates that look remotely realistic in this scale. The gap between the underside of the channels and the wale to which the plates would be attached is hardly 5mm, most of which is taken up by the metal extension loop to the deadeye fasteners which go through the channels. The best I've come up with so far is to drill a hole in the wale and poke a piece of brass rod into it, the other end being hooked over the end of the deadeye loop which is then squeezed and pushed back at an angle. It doesn't look great and is really difficult to do in such a confined space without damaging other parts. You may notice that the sprit topmast is broken off which was the result of one of these struggles. So if anyone has any suggestions, they would be gratefully received.
-
Progress is very slow - for two reasons. The main one is having to do the tackles which, as I pointed out above, are not on the original model (which was re-rigged at various times) and hence not in the usual diagrams, and in this small scale use 3mm and 2mm blocks of which I've had to order more than I thought I had in stock - and when the 2mm ones pop out of my fat fingers, they really do disappear. Top marks to Radimir at HisModel for turning my orders round quickly but postal delays have been frustrating. The other is that the age of the kit shows in the brittlenesss of the plastic and during normal handling both the foremast and mizzen have snapped off at the deck level and had to be pinned in place. I suspect this will prove a problem with the other spars too when it comes to tensioning the rigging, or even cutting the smaller ones off the sprues without breaking.
-
Slow and careful progress. I decided to get back into practice by doing some of the stays first. They are only loosely tied on and I will move them when I do the shrouds. Further reading showed that the rigging diagrams I have are incomplete. They do not show the tackles which need to be installed before the shrounds and require the channels to be in place first, and some belaying pins. Luckily, I am able to raid my stock of blocks intended for the Soleil Royal for the ones I need for this but looking at the channels, and drilling holes to take the pins, made me realise how much more difficult it is to work in this smaller scale. Parts are so vulnerable and so small that tricks I used on larger ships don't work here, and my hands just feel far too big. But then if it wasn't a challenge, would it be worth doing?
-
It is a nice kit but lacks some important parts which do not appear on the model in the Scince Museum (like the bitts by the foremast). It would have been 1969 or 1970 when I made the kit for someone else who lacked the skills to do so, although I only rigged it according to the kit instructions with 'blocks' made out of slices of plastic rod (!). I have started with the stays and already come across differences between the old model and the guidance in Mondfeld's book; I tend to prefer the latter. Also, I think the flimsy nature of the masts will make it difficult to ensure they remain straight whilst the rigging is applied. As you can see from the photo, some masts are already bowed! An exercise in patience, really.
-
This is my new project which is temporarily replacing my build of the Heller Soleil Royal whilst I get back into large scale scale ship modelling (large scale compared to 1:700). I have made rapid progress since I began only a couple of months ago, but this is the easy bit. I found this second hand kit at a good price. I guess the retailer hadn't realised that the box contained all the sprues for two kits; only the major hull parts were not duplicated. This is fortunate as some parts are broken and many have come detached from their sprues and so difficult to identify whilst other have become distorted. The plastic is also quite brittle. So why this ship? Partly because I made it myself over fifty years ago, but for someone else, and partly because it will make a good companion by size and comparison of change in warship design over time with my Heller Glorieux which currently has pride of place in my living room. That does mean that I hope to make it to the same standard so the first step was to cut out all the gunports and, with the help of Radimir at HisModel, replace all the plastic gunbarrels with brass ones. The photos below show where I have got to. I am awaiting delivery of the material for the standing rigging in the next few days.
-
Thanks very much, Patrick
-
I think it's time for me to explain what has happened since my last post and where I am with this model. My wife passed away a year ago. As I wrote above, I had to stop work on the SR and stored it safely away. There it remains. I really don't feel like re-starting it at the moment for several reasons. One is that I need to get back into my comfort zone for rigging the shrouds and making the chainplates, and that feels rather daunting. Another is that because of the re-configuring of our house space after my wife became bed-bound downstairs, I had to get rid of the unit that held all the SR bits and pieces, and the top of which was my elevated workbench where I worked standing up, which I preferred. What I have done recently, to re-start sail era modelling on a more modest scale, is to find a second-hand unmade Airfix HMS Prince which I intend to make to what I call 'Heller' standard, so it will have fully open gunports, proper shrounds, fully rigged, etc.. I will open a new project page for that shortly (to my surprise there doesn't appear to be another Airfix Prince on this site). So I'm hoping that this simpler model will get me back on track to finish the SR sometime in the future.
-
Again I have to apologise for a long gap in postings and I'm afraid it's likely to continue for some time. I don't see myself returning to this project any time soon. For some months we've been concerned about my wife's health and now we know she has had two strokes and has cancer, so you'll all understand I have other priorities. I don't know how or when I will be able to pick it up again but I hope I'll be able to come back here eventually. I'll just sign off for now and say thanks for all the comments, help and inspiration from this community, and wish you all the very best with your own projects.
-
Looking at your Sunday post and colour photo of the stern to date, I am just speechless! The colours are so striking and your painting skills second to none. Getting that absolutely clear definition of highlight detail over background in the contrasting shades is quite beyond me, and I suspect many others. Something we all strive for but rarely achieve. It's a real tonic seeing your progress. I hope you and your family have a restful and enjoyable Christmas and wish you continuing success and pleasure in your project in the new year (and in everything else too, of course)
- 2,590 replies
-
- 5
-
-
-
- heller
- soleil royal
- (and 9 more)
-
Bill, if you go back to June 2021 on here, you'll see the difference between the 2, 2.5 and 3mm blocks as I tried all three before taking the middle path, and why I did so. It's not an easy call. The 2mm blocks are really difficult to thread, and to attach the hooks as they are just so small. As I said before, to me the main issue is the size of the hooks which are overscale at 1/100 making the run of the ropes very short and difficult to get all straight and looking anything like the real ones I saw on the Victory. The run of the tackle was taken from the diagram in Mondfeld's book, page 169, the continental system where both the gun and train trackles are attached to the same eyebolt at the rear end of the carriage (getting both hooks through that tiny loop is another strain on one's patience). Warning - this part of the project will drive you crazy!
-
Sorry, Bill, to have been so tardy in replying to your message. I've just been really tied up with other stuff, and also dealing with a close family health issue which is diverting a lot of my time, and haven't looked at this site for some time. The short answer is that I only rigged the visible cannon as you saw in my photos. If you go back, you'll see the different size blocks I tried and what they look like. I ended up using 2.5mm blocks from HisModel all round. I did find that the very short gaps between the blocks were a problem as the short lengths of rope make it hard to tighten everything up, which is why some of them look a bit loose - they are. The real issue there is that the hooks are inevitably overscale and make the tackles shorter than they should be as the hooks take up too much of the length between the eyebolts. I hope that makes sense. In the end, you just have to do what you think is best. The thread is 0.1mm. The other issue is not being able to tighten them enough as doing so can pull out the eyebolts from their locations in the plastic bulwarks or deck. Even with CA glue, the bond between metal and plastic is not good enough to take the strain of trying to pull the thread tight to make it look better. I'm just about to turn in, so I'll do the photo you ask for tomorrow but hopoe this helps in the meantime. I have to say it was not a job I enjoyed, although I was reasonably pleased with the result.
-
Thanks! I stuck to doing one gun a day to keep my sanity. In fact, getting the eyebolts secured to the inside of the bulwarks was the worst part, and trying not to pull them out when tightening the lines. I used the 2.5mm blocks from HisModel. Glad it's over and done.
-
HI BIll. Some wise comments here from more experienced modellers than I. I agree with everything Marc and Henry have said. There are fit problems but with care you can sort them out, and doing the extra work on the stern galleries is well worth the effort. Like you, I feel I can get away with some oddities as no-one who will view the completed model (and heaven knows when that will be!) at home knows enough about the subject, as I've discovered with my previous large sailing ship model. You commented about replacement parts. So far, I have replaced all the gun barrels and also the visible carriages with those from HisModel, wooden channels also from HisModel, and will replace all the plastic blocks with wooden ones, and the hooks, eyes, etc, with brass ones. I have bought some Amati chain plates to see if they can be adapted to fit. In the meantime, I have fitted the channels to one side and amended my decorative scheme to look better, so I've removed the home-made sun emblems, extended the ribs right to the stern and filled the spaces with fleurs. I've just discovered that Amati do an etched set of fleur-de-lys but they are 3mm high so a bit on the small side. If they were 4-5mm, they would have been perfect as the gap between the ribs is 6mm but they could be useful for a different configuration. Next up is to do the same on the other side, then fit the deadeyes and chainplates, which starts to get more exciting............
-
Hi BIll. I'm lucky enough to live not too far away and when I visit my brother who lives near Portsmouth we always spend the day in the dockyard. I have always loved ships; my mother's family were merchant seamen, and she worked in the Admiralty during WW2, so I heard a lot about ships when I was a boy. I found even visiting the Victory without her masts and rigging gave me a lot of inspiration, seeing how the crew lived, stores shipped, etc., and using my imagination. Transatlantic language problems - 'not a patch on' something means 'not nearly as good as', so it is a compliment on your excellent model, which I have had a brief look at and will do so again when I have more time. I am just fitting the channels now on the SR, an exciting step forward (wooden ones, not the kit plastic). It's led me to re-consider some of the external decoration as the channels are very prominent and have quite an impact on how it all looks, especially the long sweeping decorative lines which border the coloured sections.
-
Hi Bill. Thanks for your comment on my SR. Not a patch on your Victory, I have to say. Have you been to Portsmouth and seen the original? Quite an experience. My kit had the original paper instructions and certainly not in full colour. I printed off the English (Aurora) version as I don't know enough French, and have looked at the Imai instructions too, which are different again. Like others, I also refer a lot to the St Phillipe monograph to clarify things. I'd be doubtful if Heller have changed the kit at all. They are constantly re-issuing old kits and never seem to update them - I have many of their French and German modern ship kits, most of which are many years old, and they just change the box art. I am building the SR for fun; it's not at all my main model-building hobby, just the odd half hour now and then. It's not meant to be a museum piece, so whilst I am following Marc's build with amazement and respect, there's no way I could replicate his skill or patience. And you are right, being able to exercise one's imagination and judgement I think adds a lot to the interest. I'll follow your own build with interest. I like to think we all have something to bring to the table.
-
Too quick off the mark with that last comment, as usual. There are a few annoying paint repairs to be done first and I've spotted the bolt heads for the gun tackles on the upper decks have yet to be installed. As the holes I originally drilled for those are now occupied by the eyelets on the inside, they'll most likely be a blob of acrylic moulding paste then painted. I am inclining towards not altering the bowsprit angle. Apart from having to redo work already done, I did a bit of research which leads me to think it might not be so far out after all.. My measuring showed the actual angle to be about 32-33 degrees. The St Philippe plans show that angle to be 40 degrees. Mondfeld says that around 1650 the angle would be c30, then in 1665 40, but by 1675 reducing to 35, so whilst 32-33 is on the low side, it is potentially not that far out. If Mondfeld had stated that bowsprits were 40 degrees from 1650 to 1700 then I would alter it but it seems there is room for manoevre there over the period of the ship.
-
Thanks for that very full explanation. Like so much, it immediately makes sense when you explain it whereas it was utterly opaque before. If you do manage to get all this information together and in one easily accessible place, it will be a source of inspiration to many. And it does show how minimal the decoration on the Hller kit is, compared to what might have been.
- 2,590 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- heller
- soleil royal
- (and 9 more)
-
I see it's been over two months since I last posted. I was away from home for the whole of June, but have been slowly working away since I got back on the various access stairs and ladders as I mentioned before. We know there are lots of details missing from the Paris model which must have been present, so it isn't really a guide for these. Mondfeld's book is pretty clear that ladders had handrails and I'm happy to follow him. There is a photo in his book of the model of the Royal Louis which shows the light handrail round the edge of the uppermost deck, so I feel that is supported too. That photo also shows a lot of decoration on the inside of the ship which I would have loved to replicate to some degree but I lack the skill, time and patience to do all that from scratch, so red oxide with a bit of gilt here and there will have to do. Next steps: deciding whether or not to alter the bowsprit angle and making a start on the channels, so plenty to think about.
-
Catching up after months off-line.....your continued research is fascinating and you are doing us all a great service by putting it all on here too. The idea of a book at the end of it (but is there ever an end of research on ones' main interest?) is definitely welcome. It would be something to treasure, I'm sure. I was also interested to see your proposed gun layout. It seems to mean squeezing another pair of guns on the lower two decks which, if you use the Heller hull length, I think means having one gun on each deck firing through solid sections of the quarter galleries. Is that what you intend, or have I misunderstood?
- 2,590 replies
-
- 4
-
-
- heller
- soleil royal
- (and 9 more)
-
Have a great trip. Having just come back from a month away myself, I can see that some time away from the work bench really helps to de-clutter the mind so that one can focus on what's important when you return to work and hobbies (or just hobbies in my case). And leaving the plastic to set itself in the light whilst you are away is just genius.
- 2,590 replies
-
- 3
-
-
-
- heller
- soleil royal
- (and 9 more)
-
Awesome indeed. Although I don't intend to - and indeed couldn't - emulate your dedication and craftsmanship, these detailed posts are fascinating and an inspiration to continue my own efforts with this particular kit with all its imperfections and question marks. I can see I'm going to have to try my hand at plastic carving at some stage; your step by step pictures are so useful. Thank you for being so generous with your time in writing all this up. Won't it be interesting in some years time to see all these different versions that are being worked on in a hopefully complete state?
- 2,590 replies
-
- 7
-
-
-
- heller
- soleil royal
- (and 9 more)
-
As I am going to be away from home for a month and not taking SR with me. I thought I would do a brief update. As mentioned before, I've been pondering the lack of access to the upper decks and have decided on a way forward which, for the poop deck, is in the picture below. It solves the problem of the guns being in the way nicely, I think, and is aesthetically pleasing (to me at least). I don't make any claims as to historical accuracy but that's true of a lot of the detail on this ship. I will be adding handrails to the steps. For the uppermost deck, I will have movable ladders stored against the bulwarks by the end doors. I've also made a start on the masts, making the wooldings and painting them, and am taking my books and plans away with me to try and work out the rigging more clearly so hopefully when I get home I can order what I need for that mammoth task. And I've decided that I will change the angle of the bowsprit, which I think is do-able even at this stage. Part of that will be to slightly reduce the height of the head rails at their terminus behind the figurehead which looks too high compared with the Berain drawing. Incidentally, the spar itself looks much smaller and frailer compared to that on the Saint Philippe. I wonder if the SR spar is another error.
Our Emblem ®
