Soleil Royal by Hubac's Historian - Heller - An Extensive Modification and Partial Scratch-Build

[shipmodel]

Hi all - 

 

In some spare time I have been trolling the net to see what other images of SR and other contemporary ships exist that might add to the discussion of the true shape of the ship, especially at the stern.  Here is one that I found of the Battle of Barfleur (May 29, 1692) painted by Ludolph Backhuysen.  He is known as the primary Dutch marine painter after the Van de Velde family left for England.

And here is a close-up of the central ship, which is confidently identified as the SR.  Note that the sheer at the stern is quite flat.  Perhaps this is due to the perspective of the artist being much further away than Berain's image.  It may be some unfamiliarity with the ship, but note that the Dutch ship to the left of the SR has a much steeper sheer, while the British ship to the right also has a flat sheer, which we know is correct.

Just my way of adding to the confusion.    

 

Dan

 

[Hubac's Historian]

What I like about this Bakhuizen portrait is that it provides some sense for the grandeur that must have been Soleil Royal.  From my perspective, there are two corroborating pieces of information that can be taken from this portrait (painted by a man who likely had first-hand knowledge of the ship), however the painting raises many more questions than it answers.

 

First, like the Peter Monamy paintings of the Destruction of Soleil Royal, Bakhuizen shows SR's upper bulwarks painted blue; deep ultra-marine blue, in this case, as opposed to Monamy's lighter blue bulwarks that are topped by ultra-marine and fleur-de-lis arming cloths.

 

Earlier in my discussion of the ship's colors, Mr. Lemineur had posited that it was feasible that her upper bulwarks would have been painted red (like the Vasa), with ultra-marine reserved for sections of the tafferal.  These contemporary artist depictions, along with the color Compardel interpretation of the Berain bow and stern are enough supporting evidence for me to paint my model with a lighter blue for the majority of the upper bulwarks, and ultra-marine as a secondary band of color, just above the main deck guns.  I've thought of a way to use the lattice frieze, at this level, as an interesting line of demarkation between these two colors that will set off the row of gilded fleur-de-lis nicely.  I will also use ultra-marine for the recessed paneling of the quarter galleries and stern.

 

The other point of confirmation with the Bakhuizen portrait is the apparent presence of an upper bulwark frieze, which is, here, represented as a continuous field of fleur-de-lis.  One can argue that with the ship set in the middle distance, from an artistic perspective it would be easier and better to simplify the depiction of the frieze, rather than to more accurately suggest the latticework, the shells and scrolls, etc, of the Berain drawing.  Monamy's painting also suggests the presence of some kind of frieze.  So, in summary, there should be an upper bulwark frieze, and I personally enjoy the layered complication of the Berain lattice frieze, so that is what I will model.

 

But, then, there are the questions that the painting raises. First, are questions of perspective as they impact the relative realism with which he depicts the various ships in the portrait.  Bakhuizen has a tendency to lavish more time and attention to the realism of the central vessel, and less so to the rest of the composition.  The stern of the English ship seems poorly proportioned, in comparison to similar sea battle paintings by the VDVs, for example.  And there are many examples of details that are out of proportion on the ships around SR.

 

But it is SR, herself, that raises the most questions.  First, he shows her as having only two levels of stern windows, but with a similarly shortened tafferal as seen in Berain's stern drawing.  Yet, she is still depicted as a large three-deck ship of 100 guns or more.  I have not encountered anything yet to suggest that the ship was cut down and lost a deck during her re-fit.  But if a three deck ship like La Reyne, for example, only has two rows of stern windows, she would also have a correspondingly taller tafferal - which La Reyne does.  Along that line of inquiry, I also think that Bakhuizen is mis-representing the sheer of the stern, which appears too flat.

 

So, there's that, but there's also the apparent open stern balcony, just above the counter.  The thing is that it does not appear to be a projecting balcony, but one that is recessed within the quarter galleries like a screen bulkhead.  As far as I know, this was not a feature of French practice at this time in the latter 17th century.

 

There does appear to be some rudimentary depiction of Apollo and his horse-drawn chariot on the tafferal.  The tafferal does appear to have the reverse cyma arched pediment.  And the four seasons are represented as supporters between the middle deck stern gallery and the main deck windows above it.

 

But then, those seasonal figures seem to wrap around to the quarter galleries, which is wholly inconsistent with any other depiction of the ship.  The theme was exhausted on the stern (winter, spring, summer, autumn), so what would these figures be on the quarters?

 

The Bakhuizen portrait does seem to confirm round ports on the main deck level, but he appears to show the quarter galleries as  being completely closed in, which is something that I don't agree with.

 

So, in summary, it is a fascinating portrait and appropriately dramatic, but a problematic source of information.

[shipmodel]

And to add another quirk - the SR seems to have banners or ribbons running under the stern chase ports below the counter.  Marc, you suggested this for the location of the motto, and I said that I never saw any evidence of such a decoration.  Now here it is.  

 

Go figure

 

Dan

[Hubac's Historian]

As a matter of fact, Dan, this was the painting that gave me that idea in the first place.  It isn't clear whether that scrolly thing represents a decorative banner or the rudder chains, or what.  I was reading in Laughton, recently, that the surviving ornamentation of La Reale makes use of this  motto, "nec pluribus impar" on the tafferal, which also features Apollo and his horse drawn chariot.

 

I have been thinking about your advice concerning following seas and carved ornament close to the waterline; if I decide to include this bit of ornamental license, I thought that instead of doing a relief ornament, the scrolled motto could be painted on.  In this time period, for the Dutch at least, it was not uncommon to paint decorative friezes onto the coved arch of the stern counter.  On SR, this area has too much other necessary ornament and the tafferal with Apollo is similarly crowded, but a painted scroll beneath the chase ports is both practical and somewhat plausible.

 

I remain steadfast that the motto should have a place somewhere on the ship, and am open to suggestions.  The sentiment behind the motto seems to speak to the grandiosity of Louis XIV's ambition and self-conception.

[Hubac's Historian]

The other interesting thing to me, about the Bakhuizen portrait is that the way he has chosen to "illuminate" Soleil Royal as almost a guilden, glowing object suggests that much of her ornament would, in fact, be guilded.

 

I still like the idea of using yellow ocher for a lot of the background, moulded detail of the lattice frieze, which would be ornamented with select guilded ornaments.  It would look distinct from other models I've seen, and I think it would give the guilded ornaments a jeweled aspect.  This is mostly an artistic choice.

 

 

[Hubac's Historian]

And so, the long slow journey begins and there's no turning back now!

 

I had the opportunity to get into the shop early, before work began today, and I cut away the bottom of the hull on the bandsaw.  The blue tape indicates the raised waterline by 3/16".  The instant you cut away the lower hull, IMO, this becomes a much better model.

 

Here, I'm showing the hull halves separated by the 1/2" I will be adding at the stem.  The distance across the transom was approximated by eye, but that is very close to what it will be.  I'm making a long sanding block to flatten out the waterline.  Once I do, these hull blanks should stand with their stem pieces perfectly parallel to each other.

 

I'll be saving the lower hull pieces in order to experiment with my treenail and through bolt simulations, as well as for working up a layered paint protocol that will simulate the look of wood on the water, but not overly weathered.

 

As this is a diorama model of the ship, shortly after her re-fit in 1689, I am thinking about placing her at anchor, on the Penfeld river with the Brest Arsenal towering in the near distance, the morning sun rising to illuminate her gilt work and Tourville on a launch, being rowed out to take comand of his ship.

 

Next week, I go on vacation, and I may bring the blanks with me to start detailing.  Substantive updates like this will be slow coming, because I will still work on the drawing when I can.  But this is a start, anyway.

[Hubac's Historian]

One thing Cedric has pointed out, with his build of La Reyne, and which becomes much more apparent with the hull cut down, is that the sheer of the wales at the bow rises too sharply.  In fact, the sheer at the bow should be flatter and more closely to parallel with the waterline, only rising sharply aft of the main channels.  Cedric, I believe, will be making efforts to correct this flaw because he is re-positioning all of the port locations to correspond with 16 port openings per side, on the first battery.

 

This is one issue I will reserve for the future scratch build. It bothers me, somewhat, but not nearly enough to go to all the trouble of correcting it.

[EJ_L]

Woohoo physical work!

 

It will be nice to start seeing all your planning take shape. This is going to be a very interesting build as I rarely see builders mutilate their plastic hulls.

 

By the way, nice shop!

[Hubac's Historian]

Hopefully she'll be closer to bride of Frankenstein than Frankenstein, himself!  I'll aim a little higher and hope for the best.

[Hubac's Historian]

Last night, I went to visit Dan Pariser who very graciously invited me over to discuss my project.  After offering a number of helpful tips and suggestions, Dan brought out his recently acquired, two-volume boxed set of the collected paintings of the Van de Veldes, by M.S. Robinson.

 

Upon looking up SR in the index, I discovered the above thumbnail of a large (4'x8') painting of The Battle of Barfleur.  I had never seen this painting before, and was immediately intrigued because it features SR, from her port quarter, facing off against Britannia.  Here is a close-up of her stern detail:

Upon publication of these twin volumes, it was noted by Robinson that the painting was housed in a private collection at Euston Hall, in Sussex.  The painting is not directly attributed to either the Elder or Younger VDV, but is believed to at least be a product of their studio.

 

Later, last night I sent an inquiry to Euston Hall, and the curator responded, promptly, this morning.  She told me that, in her time there, the painting had not been in residence and that she was not familiar with it.

 

My next move will be to contact the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich to see whether they have it in their collection, or know its whereabouts.  I am hopefull that they, or some private owner, can ultimately provide me with a high-res close-up of SR.

 

Given the rather large size of the painting, this small thumbnail suggests that there is quite a bit of detail painted into the portrait, which may be insightful under magnification.  My internet image searches have turned up exactly zero results connected to this painting, so I suspect that it has not changed hands often, and as a result, there are few photographs of the work in the public realm.

 

That the work is attributed to the VDV studio lends the image of SR a degree of credible authenticity that is more or less suspect at the hands of other contemporary marine painters.

 

I am sending this out to the MSW community in the hope that some of you may be familiar with the painting, know where it is housed, or even possess some better imagery of the painting that they can share.

 

As always, any help along these lines is greatly appreciated, as are any visitors to my page, for taking an interest in this project.  And special thanks to you Dan, for availing me once again, of your hospitality, insight and resources.

 

Thank you,

 

Marc

 

 

 

 

[shipmodel]

Hi Marc  - 

 

Here is another illustration of what I think happened to the Berain drawing of the quarter gallery - and how it most probably was originally drawn from an angle off the starboard stern.  This first is a photo posted elsewhere on MSW of an excellent build of HMS Sussex.  You can see how the aftmost gunports are situated just in front of the QG, but they are complete.

While here is a view of the same model from a slight angle on the stern.  Notice how closely it matches the Berain drawing with the two ports occluded.

I think this optical issue has to be taken into account by anyone who wants to draft a plan that is closer to the working ship.

 

Have a great summer.

 

Dan 

[Hubac's Historian]

 Hey Dan,

 

Your illustration of the paralax issue is made quite well, with these examples from the Sussex build, and the point you are making is well received.

 

With regard to the black and white Berain drawing that I am using as the basis for my quarters and the bulwark frieze, it is difficult to say how literally one should take the drawing because there are a number of similar perspective issues that seem a little screwy;  was this drawing a proposal for the ornamentation, or a portrait of the actual ship?  No one seems to have an answer to that.  Personally, I suspect that it is a proposal drawing and that the ship, as actually fitted out, probably differed according to the practicalities of applying ornament to the necessary architecture of the ship.  We'll never know, unfortunately.  As a general rule of thumb, though, I agree that the model builder should err on the side of designing a plan with complete port frames, as an example.

 

Progress on my drawing has stalled, for the time being.  I was making great progress with the quarter gallery drawing, but as I got to the two pair of dolphins that flank the two main deck windows, my ability to add nodes, to move them around and manipulate curves with the bezier handles slowed down dramatically.  Suddenly, I could no longer create a node with handles already extruded, by simply click/hold/dragging the cursor, as before.  Now, new nodes were just simple nodes without handles.  The only way I could extract handles was to pull on the line between nodes, and even then nothing happened without click/drag/holding the cursor for four to five seconds.  If I want to move a node - same thing: 4-5 seconds.  Obviously, that makes the process of drawing anything incredibly cumbersome.

 

... I'll finish this post on my break, but I'll post this much now so I don't lose it.

 

[shipmodel]

I'm having similar issues with my computer.  Others in the family are also.  Is this a concerted effort to disrupt the internet by Russian oligarchs?  Arab terrorists?  Space aliens?  Or is it just the people who market those thumb drives that are supposed to fix the problem?  

 

Welcome to the Brave, but Confused New World.  LOL

 

 

 

 

[Hubac's Historian]

I tried a number of experiments to see whether I could identify the problem.

 

First, I closed my working document and opened a new, blank workspace in GIMP.  My thought was to see whether it was a problem within the document I created, or a computing problem with my relatively old MAC from 2007.  Although I'm running the current operating system, and I've maximized the machine's RAM, I thought that perhaps the computer was struggling, now, to complete this exercise of connect the dots.  In the new document, however, I was able to easily create nodes with extracted handles, and I was able to move them and manipulate their curves instantly.  Stroking paths was also instantaneous.  So, it would seem, the computer isn't the issue.

 

Next, I made a separate copy of my master document, and I went in and deleted all un-necessary paths that weren't directly connected to, or adjacent to the quarter gallery path object; so, the upper bulwark frieze, the gunports, the sheer railing, the acanthus escutcheons, the filligree between the knees of the head - all of these path objects, I'm calling them, containing many thousands (at this point) of nodes were deleted.  The thought, here, was that perhaps the program becomes sluggish when you add too many nodes, as this use of the program (line drawing using the Bezier path tool) is not the primary intended use of the software.  Photo manipulation is what GIMP was primarily designed to do.

 

I was sure that deleting all extraneous paths - even if it meant creating multiple isolated documents, representing various areas of the design (quarter gallery, stern, bukwark frieze, etc), would restore the utility of the Bezier path tool.  It did not.  Still 4-5 second lag times.

 

Finally, I thought that increasing the size of my workspace and the layer images might provide a bigger, more manageable area for these many thousands of nodes to reside in.  As it stands, when I open my drawing, what appears is a very small (about 1/4 the intended scale) image of my drawing, which I then zoom-in on to work at. I have found that a 78.5% zoom provides the exact 1:1 scale that I need for my drawing.  When I post images of my drawing, this is what you are looking at  - a 78.5% zoom. 

 

.. Break over - will post this and more to follow.

[Hubac's Historian]

Increasing the work space didn't help either.  It dawns on me, just now though, that maybe I need to decrease the workspace so that my scanned JPEG pops up more closely to 1:1 scale.

 

As I recall, when I first created this document, one of the first things GIMP wants you to do is establish the size parameters of your workspace.  Not knowing any better, I picked a rather arbitrary size that, on the ruler scale, was bigger than the paper my original drawing was on, and then I imported the scanned image as a JPEG into it's own layer.  Maybe I just made the workspace too big, in the first place, and that is now compressing my image into too small an area.  I'll do another experiment to see if that helps any.  Of course, I am open to all suggestions from the more computer saavy contingent, out there.

 

Although, I'm sure I have done several things wrong to Eff this thing up, I believe (hope) what I've done so far is salvagable.  I really don't want to start the whole drawing over again in a different software package.  I've seen modelers like NekO use GIMP to draft their plans successfully, so I know it is possible.

 

In the meantime, though, I have begun detailing the lower hull halves so that the project is at least moving forward.  At the moment, I'm scribing scarf joints, at appropriate intervals, into the wales and am pleased with my engraving, so far.  I'll putty-in the original moulded butt-joints.  Then, I'll proceed with the myriad other detail additions: carriage tackle through-bolts, the anchor sweep timbers at the bow, simulated treenails, skids, scuppers, etc.  I'll post some pics when there's some substantial progress to see.

[mtaylor]

Is there a limitation in the number of "objects" in GIMP?  I've run into that with some drawing programs that the more stuff you add, the more it bogs down until no more can be added.  Sometimes the solution is to great an object, save and optimise it and then import it into the main drawing.  

[Hubac's Historian]

Well, Mark, I wonder the same thing, and despite my experiment in deleting path objects (and even saving the revised copy of the document after deleting, which didn't seem to help) I suspect that this very issue is the crux of the problem.

 

By the time I finished with the frieze and started the quarter galleries, I had already noticed a bit of a delay in processing, but it was not at all severe.  But then, very abruptly, functionality just seemed to shut down completely.

 

I like your idea for a work-around, Mark.  If that solves the problem, I will make it work.  Ideally, I would like to publish  a complete drawing for the project, but really for the purposes of this build, I really only needed an accurate layout for the frieze (which I have) the QG (30% complete) the stern and bow angels (got them - made them less haggard looking, BTW).

 

I will keep at it, though, and see if I can correct my mistakes.  Thank you for weighing-in, Mark!

 

 

[Jack H]

Hi Hubac'sHist

I took a cursory glance at your build log,I was immediately impressed by the magnificent 17th Century ships ,Exquisite relief, entirely of classical art.It is easy to match the perspective picture to your side view by photoshop-image morphing tool...I have just saw your build log,and i have 2 projects in-the-making...It's very easy for ZBrush to make this kind of relief--In the future,when I complete the two projects and would like to try this kind of "full sculpture" ship model - or just make the stern.

 

Your project is very good, very historical and artistic,and you have great stamina, great work! 

[Hubac's Historian]

Hello hjx,

 

Thank you for taking the time to visit my build log.  Your kind words are greatly appreciated.

 

To my mind, and spanning roughly 100 years from the 1660s, onward, the French were responsible for creating the most artistically interesting ships, and then as ship design moved into the next epoch, and ships became flatter, the French were responsible for creating some of the most widely emulated naval architecture of any of the great sea-faring nations.  As you can attest with your own projects, hjx, the French are an almost limitless source of compelling subjects.

 

Now that I have returned to the hobby after a pretty long hiatus, it is really fascinating to me how modelers have adapted technology to make better models.  You, for example hjx, are using Zbrush (full disclosure: I'ma have to look that up) to create 3D models that can be refined within the software and then fed to a CNC machine.  The roughed blank is, artisitically, a much better starting point than most of us would be able to achieve if we had to do all of that wasting by hand.  But what was really interesting about your figurehead, hjx, was that your manipulation of the 3D model seemed to make her appear like a more youthfull version of herself; if only plastic surgery could have this do-it-yourself-at-home user friendliness!

 

Anyway, I will continue to watch what you are doing with great interest, as there is much for me to learn there.

[Jack H]

Thanks Hubac'sHistorian

As a matter of fact, personally, I prefer to the ship model made by " pure hand", which is unique and more artistic. Maybe it's a more commercial approach to make ship model by cnc,It's like development kit-I try my best to reduce the manual and for a quicker process.

 

That figurehead wasn't very successful because it's the first time made a human body by ZB, and first time make 3d sculpture by cnc.My current project will  modeling figurehead in another way ,but by zb also.Why I make figurehead by CNC? Maybe you can not distinguish what  it looks like-if i make it by hand.

 

To do what you like is best,enjoy it and good luck!

 

HJX

[Hubac's Historian]

I am 100% in agreement; we have to find which methods work for us, that give us good results wihout too much headache.  If it isn't fun, then why bother, right?

[Hubac's Historian]

So, here are another two interesting little bits of ephemera that I found on the same site that Michel Saunier primarily posts his build-log for SR:

 

 

I have no idea, what this top image actually represents: whom the artist was that created it, whether this badly degraded print is some kind of postcard of a larger, original work, or of course, what ship is actually represented here.  It does appear to be a French ship.  It is pierced for sixteen ports on the first battery.  It does not seem to correspond with La Reyne, as there do seem to be three tiers of stern windows.  Interestingly, this is one of only a very few images of early French ships that show any substantial raking of the main mast.

 

Could this be Soleil Royal, numero uno, at some point before her demise in 1692?  Can anyone shed light on what this image is in reference to?

 

The second image is a line of battle schematic of the French ships involved in the Battle of Malaga, in 1704.  The SR pictured, as I understand it, is the ex Foudroyant of 1693.  This is not terribly useful, for my purposes, although it is interesting to note the blue upper bulwarks and the stern galleries on the main and quarter deck levels, only - perhaps in emulation of the post-refit SR of 1689?  Admittedly, that is all a stretch of plausibility!

 

---

 

In actual build work, the project is moving along nicely.  Wale scarfs are scribed, scarf bolting is under way, as is re-location of the aft most port of the first battery, which I am moving forward 3/16" in order to make a little extra room for the lower finishing.  So far, I've successfully closed in the aft portion of each port with sheet and strip styrene, and now I need to carve in the new forward half of the port into the kit styrene.  It has been interesting to me how the old plastic sands and scrapes; although it still seems plenty flexible, it is quite hard and sort of thready when you sand or scrape it.  I don't remember that being the case with the first SR I built, but that was a later pressing from the 80's, under the IMAI brand.

 

I'll post a few pictures in the near future, perhaps after I've gotten those two ports moved and fully reconstructed, and after I've re-shaped the lower transom profile, in order to accommodate the new round-up of the stern.

[Hubac's Historian]

So, as I mentioned in the prior post, my drawing process has stalled, and I don't have any good answers as to why, right now, so I've decided to go ahead and begin detailing the lower hull halves.  I will shift my focus back to the drawing, at some point, because I really need a good scale drawing for all of the ornamental work of the stern.  For now, though, the change of pace is welcome.

 

The first thing I wanted to do was to fill in all the butt joints on the wales and the eyelet holes for the chain plates because butt joints would never have sufficed for that application and I'm lowering the channels to the wale strake where these holes currently exist.

 

I'm using Squadron white putty.  Shrinkage seems minimal, it sets and hardens fairly quickly and it works easily with sandpaper, emmory board, or a knife.  For this particular application, though, I have found that maroon abrasive pads do an excellent job of levelling the putty, without completely erasing the moulded, raised grain effect that the putty inevitably covers, upon application.  The grain softens a bit, compared with un-abraded surfaces, but it should still show through the paint without the difference seeming jarring.  If I think it all appears too patchy, under primer, then I'll soften the rest of the grain later.

 

 

Here, you can see a few examples of the filled and leveled butt joints, as well as the simple, reversable jig I made to mark out scribe lines for my new scarf joints.  To cut them, I lightly drag the tip of an Exacto blade (#11 works) backwards, and against the pattern a few times.  Once a faint line is apparent, I use increasing pressure on the backward stroke to engrave the plastic to the width of the blade.  I found it helpfull to establish the vertical stop cuts, first, and then to drag the knife from the stopcut, towards center of the scarf, in each direction.  Once I had a rhythm going, it moved fairly quickly; I averaged one half of a hull half in a session.

 

The next challenge was a little daunting, at first.  I wanted to move the aft-most gun port of the lower battery forward by 3/16", in order to allow a clear space for the full lower finishing of the quarter gallery.

 

To begin, I inserted a new framing member (1/8x1/8" styrene, mostly obscured by the steel ruler) on the inside face, and 3/16" forward of the aft port stile.

 

 

Note:  this is an after the process photo, which also shows the re-located forward port stile; in reality, though, this second new stile doesn't come until later.

 

So, with a new ledge, onto which I can now glue small fitted pieces of sheet styrene, I began to fill-in the aft 3/16", on the outside face of the port.  The first layer of sheet styrene was the same thickness as the interior lip of the stock gun port.  This, I glued flush with the edge of the new aft framing member.  The second layer of sheet styrene was very nearly the thickness of the kit "planking."  The difference was less than a 1/64", which was easily filled with Squadron white, and leveled with a coarse emmory board (which provides some grain texturing) and a knife.  Also at this time, and before applying putty, I built out the missing bit of aft wale section with strip styrene.  I then scribed back-in the missing plank lines:

 

 

On break, I'll continue this post to describe the cutting in and framing of the forward half of the new port, as well as the through-bolting of the wales and the transom knees.

 

 

 

Edited August 2, 2017 by Hubac'sHistorian

[Hubac's Historian]

In order to cut in the forward half of the new port, I first layed out both the inner lip and the cut-back edge of the "planking" with a sharp pencil.  Once I liked the looks of that, and could see that it was a level continuation of the port, I then scribed in those lines with the Exacto.

 

Next, I took my new Dremmel Micro with a narrow, diamond crusted shaft, and wasted away everything within the inner lip lines. With needle files, I was then able to define the inner corners and fair to the scribe lines.

 

Next, I fitted the micro with a straight-sided cutting bit that has no tooth on the bottom surface.  I used this bit to cut the planking back from the lip until I was approximately close to my line and as far as the bit would allow into the corners.  I now had a very roughly thicknessed lip in the black plastic of the kit.

 

To clean up and define these edges, I used an 1/8" woodworking chisel for the corners and to scrape back the lip to a matching thickness, as well as a 1/4" chisel to trim the planking to my lines, making light passes and using a gentle wriggling motion.

 

Despite my care in doing these things, there were two small mishaps.  First, while using the straight cutting bit to rough back the planking, I dug too deep, the bit then grabbed and jumped out of the cut.  In the process, I nicked a decent chunk out of my new, aft port stile.  No problem: a touch of Squadron and the emmory board, and it was good as new.  I have noticed this tendency of Dremmel bits to grab and jump, in wood, if the speed and depth of cut are off, but I wasn't expecting that in plastic.  Lesson learned.

 

Then with the 1/4" chisel, I pushed too hard, at one point, and sheered off the top lip of one port frame.  No problem: I cut a small strip of sheet styrene, of the appropriate thickness and glued it in place.  Once it is painted, one will never know the difference.

 

The ease of repairs is what I like about plastic.  Those same mistakes, in wood, would be much more labor intensive to repair because you can't hide the repair under putty and paint.  To a large degree, in small scales, wood really determines your choice of tools and methods, so that you run the least risk of these mistakes.

 

To finish off the interior framing, it was necessary to extend the sill, with a simple angled scarf joint, and then fit and glue in a new forward stile.

Edited August 1, 2017 by Hubac'sHistorian

[Hubac's Historian]

The other thing I need to do, at this early stage, is re-shape the lower transom, in order to incorporate the round-up of the stern.

 

 

I apologize for the lack of in-process photos that would paint a clearer picture of what I'm actually doing.  My Iphone 4 😔 runs out of storage quickly, so I sometimes have to choose between clearing the phone or making progress on the model.

 

Anyway, what you are seeing here is the profile of the lower transom which has been reduced, inboard, by a heavy 1/16" and faired into the arc of the stern counter, so that it is now flush with the kit's glue surface support for the transom piece.  As I get closer to mounting the hull halves to their new styrene base, I will shave away this old mounting surface and recess the new one by the thickness of my transom planking.

 

Also visible, here, are the through bolts for the transom supporting knees (not sure what the propper name is for these interior timbers), which will eventually be scraped away, in part, where they interfere with the lower finishing; that is to say - not much.

 

My process for the through-bolting is something I learned from Herbert Thomesan.  All I do is take a single-edge razor to .020 styrene rod and - as square as my eye can tell - I shave off a hundred, or so, slivers that are not much bigger or smaller than 1/32".  I, then, sharpen the tip of a toothpick with which I can set a small dot of Testors liquid adhesive directly to the hull.  Then, with the very point of the Exacto, I pick up a reasonably square-cut looking sliver, on it's end, and place it onto the glue dot.  Hold for five seconds, and then repeat.

 

Despite wearing glasses, my eyes are still good enough for this close work, but I am meaning to purchase the type of magnifying LED visor that Dan Pariser showed me, recently.

 

It takes a little practice, but once you have the hang of it, this moves along at a pretty good clip.  At pace, I can do just under half a hull half in a session before I get too tired to continue.

 

 

After I finish bolting the starboard wales, I'll take a little break from that particular tedium, and I'll pattern skids for the waist.  Then I'll move on to the anchor sweep planking at the bows, scribing in the "hunting port," and making the lower and middle deck scuppers.

 

After that I'll tackle the truly tedious task of washer/through-bolting all the carriage tackles at each gun port.

 

And after that - I will move onto some form of simulated tree-nailing;  I'm thinking the blunted tip of a pin, slightly heated, in a pin-vise.  Here, it is usefull to have saved the lower hulls for conducting my experiments.

[shipmodel]

Hi Marc - 

 

Lookin' good.  I like how you are scribing the scarf joints in the wales.  Seems to be coming out perfectly.

 

One suggestion, which might speed up the bolting process a bit - drill shallow holes with an 0.022" bit, dip the end of your 0.020" rod into some glue and insert into the hole, clip close with cuticle nippers.  No need to cut such small discs off the rod and try to apply them individually.  

 

Also, for the treenails, they would have been flush with the surface of the plans.  So don't drill or melt holes.  After you have painted the planks take a mechanical pencil or micro-tip pen and draw in the treenails.  Much easier than holes, and easier to correct if you misplace one.

 

Finally, an offer.  I am upgrading my digital camera.  The old one still works well, and you are welcome to it if you want.  Just let me know, or I will give it to one of my grandchildren.

 

Dan

 

 

 

 

[Hubac's Historian]

I appreciate that, Dan!  The scarfs are a small thing, but a vast improvement to the impression the model makes.

 

I really like your idea for simplifying the bolting.  The Dremmel Micro is light enough that I should be able to control the drill bit, but again, I can experiment on my scrapped lower hull halves.

 

Also, your idea about the mechanical pencil, I think, is the way to go.  I imagine I would pencil in the treenails after the main colors go down, but before the wash coat for light distressing.  I think I would then need to spray some form of clear matte coating to seal them in, before going over that with a semi-opaque acrylic wash.

 

I also appreciate the digital camera offer.  I have a really good camera at home, but I often take my blog pics with the phone because then they are in the phone and I can create these posts, during my breaks, at work.  For this and several other good reasons, the time has come, really, for me to upgrade my phone.  There's also the single-handed ease of holding the phone and positioning the model in better light with the other hand.  What I could also stand to upgrade is the overhead lighting in my kitchen 😉

Edited August 1, 2017 by Hubac'sHistorian

[Hubac's Historian]

I've just been experimenting with Dan's suggestion for the through bolting, and it really works like a charm!  There is no excess glue and you can emmory board them to height immediately.  Huge time saver and now the carriage tackles seem like an actually pleasant job.  Thanks again, Dan!

[Hubac's Historian]

With the scarfs through-bolted, I decided to turn my attention to the skids of the waist - beginning by framing in the gangway steps.

 

In my most recent drawing, I show the gangway steps moved one gunport aft because I thought it made for a more balanced appearance with the three skids forward of the ladder.  I have decided, though, that this is an unnecessary modification because the spacing of skids, relative to the ladder, is often shown to be irregular in many of the VDV portraits I've seen.  Added to that fact is the strong possibility that moving the ladder aft may hinder my ideal placement of the main channel.

 

so, recently I picked up one of these scribe guages for exactly this sort of patterning application:

 

 

it only seems to work well, if you push the guage square into the hull - as though parallell with the imaginary vertical plane, running down the center line of the ship.

 

Then, I simply transfer the shape of the tumblehome and the wale locations to a sheet of .020 sheet styrene, which is thin enough to cut with scissors.  I refine the shape with sandpaper around a large dowel and needle files for the areas that saddle a wale, until the pattern fits snuggly:

 

 

Then, I tried the pattern in the forward edge of the ladder on the same side, as well as the fore and aft locations on the starboard side.  I can see that with small, additional adjustments, this one pattern will suffice for all of the ladder framing skids.  I then transferred the pattern three more times to the .020 styrene sheet, and then cleaned and refined to my scribe lines:

 

 

The next step will be to use that same guage profile to establish the outside curve and depth of each skid, which will be slightly oversize and transfered lightly to each of these .020 patterns.

 

I will then laminate these thin patterns to sections of .032 styrene sheet to make up the desired thickness of each skid member.  I can then waste away most of the excess with sheet metal snips and get close to my lines with the Dremmel before refining and hand-fitting each skid in place.

 

the ladder rungs, themselves have rounded ends, which I will cut square, in order to make a good joint with each vertical framing member.  I will repeat this process for each different skid location moving forward.

 

I should also mention that each of these skids extends into the upper bulwarks.  I've decided to construct them in a lower and upper section that will be faired together, later on, in the construction process.  The reason for this is that I want a solid plastic to plastic bond before painting of the lower hull.  It will be a relatively simple thing to line up and glue in the skid extensions to the upper bulwarks.

Edited August 3, 2017 by Hubac'sHistorian

[Hubac's Historian]

The first set of skids I patterned were the ones that frame the waist ladder.  I left the outboard profile oversize in order to make extra allowance for fitting close to the hull, but also because the parts, themselves, can be a little fiddly and difficult to handle if they are too thin.

 

Here's a pic of a set installed, but before thinning to final shape:

 

While the outboard profile follows the tumblehome nicely, the steps appear set back too far, and the overall impression is that the skid timbers are too heavy.

 

Here's a shot after fairing the skid timbers closer to the hull:

 

 

Now the treads are more visible, yet still protected by the skids.  There are a few spots where a skid saddles a wale, where a spot of filler is needed, but the inletting was pretty close, overall.

 

Here are a couple of side by side pics for the sake of comparison:

 

 

 

Next, I'll pattern three more skids per side, following the same process and to the same proportions.

Edited August 10, 2017 by Hubac'sHistorian