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

[md1400cs]

Marc,

 

Get well - indeed!!

[Hubac's Historian]

Guys, thank you all so much for your concern and well-wishes.  Today is the fourth day since I started feeling sick, and I already feel pretty much myself; no more fever/sweats/chills, no more headaches/body aches, no more weird chafing skin sensations, no more sinus congestion.  I still can’t smell anything, but if that’s the worst of it, then I am well ahead of the curve.  I am extremely lucky!

 

EJ, to answer your question, I will not be doing any special detailing or paint work on the interior.  The gun mounting blocks are painted flat black and are wide enough to close off any view inside because there is a fair amount of structure supporting the middle and upper decks.  You really can’t even see much around the main hatch gangway, as the double ladder takes up most of that space, and the grating openings are very small.

 

I will probably have someone seated in one of the stern chase ports, and reaching out toward the trailing launch as supplies are passed up to him.

 

Where I will spend some time is building out at least the facade of the galley stoves beneath the forecastle deck.  And I will also represent the hanging knees that would still be visible under the overhang of the forecastle and quarter decks.

 

It would be nice to trick out the whole thing, but my process and insistence on certain things is sloooooow.  Nevertheless, I would like to finish this model, at some point.  I’ll save all the bells and whistles for my true magnum opus.

 

I was marveling, the other day, at Ab Hoving on Ships Of Scale, as he laid-out very straight-forwardly his card modeling process.  This time, he’s building a Dutch mid-rate frigate while simultaneously building three or four others:

https://shipsofscale.com/sosforums/threads/a-143-feet-long-dutch-warship-from-1681-cardstock.4634/#post-94667

 

Ab doesn’t seem to take it to quite the level of detailing as Doris, for example, but the ships he creates are fantastic looking.  He starts with good and accurate lines that his research background helps him to ascertain, and then his process is very quick.  He uses the same distressing protocol as Herbert Tomesan, and the finished result looks highly authentic.

 

I’m happy with what I’m doing for a variety of reasons, but the speed of Mr. Hoving’s methods is very seductive.

 

Edited April 7, 2020 by Hubac's Historian

[Nek0]

Hello Marc, I wish you prompt recovery, I hope you're alright now. Take care my friend, for you and your family,

Marc

 

[druxey]

Glad to read that you are improving, Marc. Take it easy while you recover. We can wait for you!

[Hubac's Historian]

4 hours ago, druxey said:

Glad to read that you are improving, Marc. Take it easy while you recover. We can wait for you!

No you cant! 😂😉

 

Just a little quarantine humor.  Thanks for checking in guys.  More irresistible updates to follow.. 

[druxey]

Posting? Yup. Sense of humor intact? Yup. You must be improving!

[mtaylor]

Looks like Marc is back to his usual self.  That's excellent!!!

 

[Hubac's Historian]

It is refreshing, periodically, to shift between the intensive ornamental aspects of the build, and the more constructive bones of the project.  I enjoy the ornamental work very much, but it is fatiguing.

 

So, I’ve been fitting-out the lower gun deck.  The first order of business was to scribe and secure the side platforms that will support the dummy carriages.

 

Clamping these to my “beams” was tricky because clearance between beam and plinth base is very limited.  I could get a binder clip on, near the hawse holes, but I needed to develop a system for the rest of the way.

 

Since none of this will be visible, I decided to drill holes on each side of each beam, through which I could thread ties that I could pull taught over a short length of toothpick (temporarily secured with double-stick tape), and then fix down tight with a drop of cyano:

This worked beautifully.  I then found that I could increase clamping pressure by wedging the end of a second toothpick into the tie-loop:

Once the liquid plastic adhesive had cured, I knew that I had solid connection all along the length of the hull.

Next, I wanted to scribe and secure the vertical gussets to which the middle deck “beams” will be secured.  I was careful to space them so that they did not interfere with the lower masts.

 

Simple templates were cut from index cards, and with only slight adjustments one template could produce gussets for that location, on both sides:

This has become a pretty straight-forward framing exercise that I’ve gotten to be pretty efficient at.  Here is the full run of gussets in place:

 

 

Finally, I wanted to get a sense for where my dummy carriages needed to be placed, in order to have the right amount of gun barrel poking out the side of the hull.

 

Here is where I discovered a few issues that I did not properly anticipate.

 

First of all, my early estimate of the gun platform decking thickness, combined with the height of the gunport sills above the decking, was off.  So much so, in fact, that a barrel inserted into a dummy carriage was resting on the sill.  I drilled the holes too low.

 

Okay, no problem; I simply shimmed each dummy carriage with a length of 1/16” styrene.  In the following picture, you can see these shims (on the left row), which I’ve blacked out with permanent marker, as well as the annealed wire eyelets I made for the port lid laniards:

The other little surprise that I failed to calculate was the sheer length of the lower deck gun barrels, after cutting off the cascabels.  My Initial plan was to butt my blocks up against the slight raised lip of the carriage decking, and that would determine the outboard projection of the gun barrels.  The trouble is that would place the trunnions (which had been shaved off) and the dolphin handles outside the hull!

 

Instead, I discovered that I could place the dummy carriages a little further inboard, so that the new 1/16” shim butted up against the raised lip of the platform decking.  This provided me with the extra real-estate I needed for a reasonable projection.

I wanted, however, for there to be a little extra support for the carriage blocks, so I made small outrigger blocks that I’m in the process of gluing to the inboard edge of the carriage platform decking.

There is a generous 1/4” gap between these outboard gun platforms and the inboard central decking that supports the masts.  When it comes time to secure the dummy carriages, they will be cyano’d in-place to both the decking and the out-rigger blocks.

 

While I won’t glue-in the gun barrels until the model is rigged and nearly complete, here are a few shots that show what that projection will look like:

I think that my efforts to increase the breadth of the cannons provide a better sense of heft and scale than would otherwise be the case.

 

So, that’s where the work is heading.  I still have a fair amount of repetitive work to do before I can place the middle deck beams. I won’t get much beyond that, though, because I need to buy some appropriate anchor cabling from Syren, and it may be a while before Chuck is filling orders again.

 

Anyway, if I get stuck, I’ll turn my attention to constructing the quarter galleries from the lower finishing, on up.

 

Thank you all for checking in on me, and your well-wishes during my recovery.  I’ve had some relapse of symptoms - which is apparently common - but nothing concerning.  I’m going to be just fine.

 

Until next time, stay well and close to your loved ones.

 

Edited April 13, 2020 by Hubac's Historian

[md1400cs]

Mark,

A minor thought given such impressive research and execution - that said, I have never seen such excellent capturing of the look of wood - with plastic - as you are doing with this project.

Also the hull castings seem to have been really excellent, and they were well thought out. Well Heller - some things the French do well. I remember as a kid Heller aircraft kits were considered really high end.

 

Stay well  

[yancovitch]

 sure is great wood isn't it.........

[Hubac's Historian]

Thank you, MD and Victor.  Well, as you know, I’m a huge fan of the Heller kit, and the main reason for that is that they were extremely attentive to re-creating Tanneron’s sculptural work.

 

This is why I will go to some lengths to adapt as many of the large sculptural figures as I can.  With the exception of Africa, whose entire posture has to be altered, I should be able to re-use them all.

 

You made me think of another Heller prestige ship that was very finely moulded, and that was La Couronne, at 1:200.

 

I used to own this kit as part of a large stash of un-built plastic kits. When I moved into my then girlfriend’s studio, before we married, I divested myself of all but the Airfix Prince and Vasa, which I deemed to be the best among the lot.

 

I should have held onto La Couronne, though.  This is another kit that would benefit tremendously from cutting away the lower hull, and building all of the deck furniture from scratch and to scale.  The overhang of the stern counter is exaggerated, but it could be modified, somewhat.  The upper bulwarks were gems, though.  Aaaah, well - the things we sacrifice for love!

[md1400cs]

Aaaah, well - the things we sacrifice for love!  Indeed - Mates Please don't start a thread in Shore Leave with that topic! it will crash this site with too many postings hahaha 😂

 

Cheers 🍺

[Hubac's Historian]

Good couple of days.  I have all the lower decking installed, the cable mounts installed, and the starboard dummy carriages glued-in; the barrels are only temporarily placed to ensure they are centered on the port openings:

You can clearly see, here, the impact of broadening the hull.

The block, at center, is the foremast step (in progress), which will raise the height of the foremast proportionally with the main mast.

Barrel projection is maybe a bit more than ideal, but it’s not markedly different than Frolich’s L’Ambiteaux:

In any case, it’s a warship, and the artillery is supposed to feature prominently.  I have a good cross-vent going, but I have to take a cyano break for a little while.

 

Thank you for the likes, the interest, and for looking in.

[yancovitch]

what is the wiring for...working cannons? 😀....pink himalayan salt is much better for you.....cannons look great...i'm so so glad ya fattened the hull....that used to bug me to no end...is why i dumped the kit many many years ago🙂........

[Hubac's Historian]

The wiring is actually the port lid lanyards, which I’ve secured to the top of each dummy block with a clove-hitch.  I’ve coiled them up with blue tape for tidy keeping, until I pull them through the ports, at the very end of the build.

 

As a matter of fact, I cook with the pink salt, but I keep this other stuff for mouth irritations and stove fires.

[EJ_L]

While I love the detail work, it is nice and refreshing to step back and see some bigger scope pictures of the entire ship again. These pictures really start to put into better perspective, what was at first seen like tiny, insignificant changes, now added up to their dramatic outcomes. The overall effects of the work you spent all those months doing is paying off in great ways.

 

The narrow hulls in many kits has often been a source of problems to overcome or deal with as is when trying to heavily scratch build. I remember watching Michael (md1400cs) deal with that problem on his Vasa build. I experienced it myself on La Couronne and some on SR. On both of those builds, I discovered it too late to correct it easily. Fortunately, I was able to work within the confines to still create something nice. I am looking forward to seeing what your added real estate will allow you to do, not only on the stern decorations, but also with cannon spacing and the gratings on the main deck. 

[papsa]

Congratulations. 
I saw the way to better process plastic and wooden ship models, I think.

I have two questions for all Le Soleil Royal monkeys.
Where the pilot was standing so he could see.

and because the view behind the ship was not possible for the one who was on top of the stern.

Edited April 18, 2020 by papsa

[papsa]

2 minutes ago, papsa said:

Congratulations. 
I saw the way to better process plastic and wooden ship models, I think.

I have two questions for all Le Soleil Royal monkeys.
Where the pilot was standing so he could see.

and because the view behind the ship was not possible for the one who was on top of the stern.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/60226/60226-h/images/i_p189.jpg

[druxey]

Stove fires? Please have a fire extinguisher handy! Plastic does not do well in high heat, and neither do ship modelers....

 

Your work is certainly paying off now,

[Hubac's Historian]

Hello Papsa,

 

With regard to the tiller/whip-staff arrangement, here is what Mr. Lemineur drew for the St. Philippe:

Tiller entry is on the lower gun deck.  The whip-staff passes through the yoke, in the middle deck, and then through a slot on the main deck - all just aft of the mizzen mast.

The whip-staff slot is numbered 97, in the main deck drawing above.

 

There does not appear to be any visual accommodation for the tiller man, through the quarter deck.  It seems that commands to the tiller man would be shouted down, through the aft companionway, just forward of the mizzen mast.

 

I know we are accustomed to seeing on reconstructions, like Batavia, a small “grill” at the quarter deck level that the tiller man could see and hear through.  I, myself, have stood on the small bench platform on Batavia and peered put from this grill.  For all intents and purposes, though, it is not as though the view afforded the tiller man, in this arrangement, would enable him to guide the ship through his own eyes.  On a large ship like the S.P., or the S.R., as long as the highly specific commands could be heard, that would be sufficient.

 

I also have to imagine that the view from the poop-royal deck would provide a sufficient vantage point to see all around the ship, while the bow, midship, and quarter watches would be communicating, aft, anything unusual in their view.

 

Thank you, Druxey and EJ!  It is nice to have some phase of this project moving along at a swift pace.

Edited April 18, 2020 by Hubac's Historian

[shipmodel]

Hi Marc - 

 

The whipstaff question is one that I worked on for a while.  I have never been happy with the long slot in the deck above (#97 in your illustration).  It would weaken the deck and introduce a tripping hazard.  If there is such a slot on a contemporary model I have not seen it.  Moreover, it is, I believe, completely unnecessary.  Here's why - 

 

I took contemporary illustrations as well as the measured drawing from Goodwin's "Arming and Fitting".  Then I took out various parts using Photoshop and laid them in various positions to see how they related to each other as the whipstaff pivoted, the tiller arm swung, and the rudder turned.

Notice that, as you can see in the Goodwin drawing, the whipstaff is not fixed to the rowle that it pivots in, but it slides through the hole in the rowle so it can reach the end of the tiller arm as it swings side to side.  This is the key to my thinking.

 

I took the plan view and superimposed the drawing of the tiller arm in various positions, offset 6, 13 and 21 degrees from center.  (Although I have read that in practice the rudder would not be deflected more than about 15 degrees.  After that it loses its grip on the water.)

I combined this layout with the cross section view of the whipstaff stave and decks.   In use, as the tiller arm swings, its end moves further and further from the rowle, requiring that more and more of the whipstaff slides through the hole in the rowle, shortening the length above the rowle.  In almost all positions other than perfectly upright it does not extend up to, much less through, the deck above.

So rather than a long, dangerous, slot in the deck above, all that is needed is a little opening, like the hood pictured in the Goodwin drawing.  This has the added advantage of bringing the helmsman's head up one deck for easier communications and so he can see the set of the sails as they draw.  It keeps his body down near the rowle so he can manage the staff as it lengthens and shortens as it pivots and slides.  No slot required.

 

Thoughts?

 

Dan 

 

 

 

 

[Hubac's Historian]

Hey Dan,

 

Your points are well received, here.  The Goodwin drawings, as well as the contemporary French drawing, is of a two deck ship, but our discussion pertains to three deckers:  I wonder whether the extra deck of separation (the middle deck) wouldn’t provide the extra leverage that would make steering such a large ship much easier, particularly in a heavy seaway.

 

Admittedly, it is less than ideal to interrupt the deck planking, at the main deck level.  I wonder, though, whether the external wales, the internal riders, and all of the internal supporting knees mitigate this loss in rigidity.

[amateur]

We had that discussion some time ago in a German forum. The opening in the upper deck is only to accomodate the overlenght of the whipstaff. The helmsmsn is down under, near the rowle. Ad you drew it: to get a reasonable rudder-angle , the opening in the upper deck should be enormous and thewhipstaff even longer.  Doesn’t fit at all.
I sketched this one for the discussion in that other forum.

the end of the whipstaff goed under the upper deck even before half of the maximum rudderangle is reached.

check the internet: the william Rex is a contemporeneous model: it shows a short opening on the upper deck.

 

Jan

Edited April 18, 2020 by amateur

[shipmodel]

Jan - 

 

I think we are agreeing in different words.  The overlength staff doesn't give more leverage, since the force applied by the helmsman is all athwartships due to the rotation of the rowle on its fore/aft axis.  He pushes the head of the tiller to the side by sliding the staff through the rowle, he does not lever it aside.  The mechanical advantage is gained by the ratio between the length of the tiller and the width of the rudder.  Nor is a longer staff needed to enlarge the arc that the tiller head travels.  The swing of the tiller arm is limited by the length of the metal crook or the end of the tiller that the ring on the base of the whipstaff slides down as the helm is put over.   When the ring reaches the end button no further movement is possible.  The lower photo is from the Susan Constant reconstruction.

 

I went to Google and searched for William Rex.  I found many images for the very large model in the Rijksmuseum, but none of the deck with a slot in it.  Can you point me to a photo?

Thanks

 

Dan

 

 

[Hubac's Historian]

My issue with this is that the tiller man, the pilot, on the three-decker is standing on the middle deck, in this scenario, and that much further from the chain of command.

 

There’s a lot of superstructure above him on Soleil Royal, with no view of anything but the mizzen mast and the guns to either side of him.

 

And I’m sorry to disagree, but the pilot will have more leverage to push down through the yoke, the fulcrum, and to either side if he’s standing at the end of the whip-staff, as opposed to closer at the base.  The length of the whip-staff counts too.

 

In all fairness, this discussion of mechanical advantage heads straight towards why ship steering transitioned from the whip-staff to the wheel;  as ship sheer reduced into the 18th C., the wheel system provided greater mechanical advantage with every rope turn around the drum. 

Edited April 18, 2020 by Hubac's Historian

[yancovitch]

that setting seems like it would provide a great skit for harvey korman and tim conway

[druxey]

Is it significant that in the 'tween decks photo, there is an eyebolt in the end of the tiller? Could a relieving tackle have been rigged in heavy weather?

[Hubac's Historian]

Dorf hits the high seas!  Face first😂

 

Could be, Druxey.  Makes sense.

Edited April 19, 2020 by Hubac's Historian

[dafi]

15 hours ago, shipmodel said:

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the discussion, there is one flaw in the set of the last drawings. The whipstaff should almost be twice as long, as otherwise in the 73° positions - as already in the ones before - there is missing the space to hold and handle the staff 🙂

Especially in the positions with extreme angle, there is much force needed to keep it pressed down, as the pressure against the rudder would try to put it straight again. My guess is that place for many hands is needed.

 

Here is the set-up from the William Rex in Amsterdam. Behind the binnacle one can see the top of the whipstaff, with a cover underneath, that is why many people do not realize it, even I only discovered it afterwards on the pictures 🙂

My guess is - compared to other heights like the rails beside the companion way -  that it protrudes about 80 to 100 cm above the deck, too little to manipulate it from the upper deck. So my conclusion is, that it was worked from the deck underneath.

 

XXXDAn

 

Edited April 19, 2020 by dafi

[shipmodel]

Hi Dafi - 

 

Your point is well taken.  In a large ship or in rough seas it may have been necessary to have more than one handler (helmsman, pilot) for the whipstaff, and a longer staff would give room for them to work together.  In my illustration I took the drawing from Goodwin just to show how the head of the staff moves in as much as it moves down,  I did not really consider overall length other than to question the need for a long slot in the deck above.   As for length, below is a photo of the top of the staff for the Susan Constant,  which matches the below deck picture from my earlier post.  I know that she was a much smaller ship, but the staff only looks to be 5 or 6 feet long.  This agrees with photos of whipstaffs from other recreations, Batavia, Kalmar Nykel, and Mayflower.  I have a photo of the highly elaborate rowle from the much larger Vasa, but not the top of the staff, so I can't say how long it was.  Perhaps someone knows.

 

As far as the William Rex model - with all respect to the modeler, he has the staff coming up through a simple hole in the deck above, which is unworkable.

 

Dan