Le Soleil Royal by John Clements - Heller - 1/100

[John Clements]

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.

[John Clements]

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.

[yancovitch]

yea....have been waiting for some action...good shew.....i'll have to think about incorporating some of your ideas on my effort....really original......vc

[Bill97]

John I am a new visitor to your SR build. I am currently building the Heller HMS Victory (14 months in process) with help and advice from Ian and Marc who have commented here. I have what I understand to be the new production of the Heller SR in my stash ready to begin after I finish my Victory. My Heller SR model came with the new instruction book in full color. I am curious if your kit came with the older paper instructions or the new instruction book?  Which will then make me curious if Heller improved it’s part molds with the new production and corrected some of the flaws. I have your build along with Marc’s and two others saved for reading and reference once I start my SR build. I have taken note of the reference books recommended. Since the SR no longer exists and there does not seem to be much first hand reference to that ship, and of course no photos, it is good to have the artistic freedom to modify as you see fit without strict concerns for authenticity.  The SR will be the first of my 6 ships I have built and displayed that the original or replica does not exist. I am very much looking forward to my SR build and will definitely be referring to your build when I do. Beautiful job.

[John Clements]

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.

[Bill97]

No John I have not had the pleasure of seeing  the original Victory in Portsmouth. Hopefully someday I will be able to, maybe after all the renovating is done several years from now!  Were you able to find my Victory build? Am wondering if when you said “Not a patch on your Victory” if that meant you could not find the build blog. Once I dig into my SR I will let you know if I experience the same issues all you guys have reported. If so, I will know it is the same kit with just new clearer instructions. 

[John Clements]

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.

[Bill97]

John I envy the luxury you have living so close. With Kentucky being inland in the USA the closest ship I can visit is the USS Constitution in Boston, which I have done several times and thoroughly enjoyed. I built it back many days ago (blog here on MSW). I have learned so much since then I may do it over someday. 

[Bill97]

Well John and Marc (Marc if you venture over here to John’s blog).  I have begun reading SR build blogs and researching other references on line about the Soleli Royal at times when I am not working on my Victory. I have to admit I had not researched the model much at all prior to purchasing it. I was fully expecting it to be of the same quality as the Victory. I had read the Heller 1/100 Victory and Soleli Royal were the flagship models produced by Heller. I also understood the building instructions supplied by Heller for both were not very good, especially the rigging instructions. I purchased the Longridge book for the Victory and with the help of a few fine people here on MSW I have been able to build a model I am proud of. I have not opened my SR kit yet but I can only assume Heller produced it from the same molds as their previous editions you guys are building. From all the reading and research I have done, including both your build blogs here, it seems the model has some short comings to say the least. After my experience with the Victory I fully intend to purchase replacement deadeyes, blocks, and other rigging parts.  I am curious if the deficiencies you have experienced are related more toward ill fitting pieces and actual construction problems or more toward inaccurate authenticity, or both?   I am much more interested in building a beautiful model ship but not necessarily an authentic replica. No one I know that will ever see it will inspect it to point out period inaccuracies!  Based on your experience building it, does the out of box kit present the opportunity to build and complete the model, or are there numerous instances where pieces just don’t fit together or work the way Heller explains?  I am thinking I am glad I am building and learning from the Victory before starting the Soleli Royal instead of the other way around. 

[Hubac's Historian]

Well, Bill - the thing about the Heller SR is that it was an attempt to bring a famous museum model into peoples’ homes in it’s completed form (the Tanneron model is famously incomplete), at a reasonable price.  In my opinion, Heller did an admirable job of filling in the blanks.  As long as you are primarily concerned with making an attractive model, then building straight out of the box will be more than enough.

 

NOW - HAHA!! The fit.. of.. parts..

 

There will likely be some degree of warp in your lower hull, but this should clamp out fairly easily.  The real bear in this kit is fitting the upper bulwarks.  The first time I built this model, I did not do nearly as good a job of fitting them, and instead I had a heavy 1/32” of filler all along the outside seam, and even more filler along the inside seam.  It was fine.  The model is still perfectly intact and living at my buddy’s house.

 

This time, I really took care to seat the glue lip into its rabbet on the lower hull so that I would have maximum bond.  This process taught me the meaning of the word fettling.  Not satisfied with that, I added styrene glue tabs across the joint, in places where they would not be seen.

 

Not even satisfied with that, I realized I could add styrene spirketting over the joint in the waist, where it would be seen.  This killed two birds with one stone; it added a correct construction detail, while concealing the heavy 1/6” gap you will be left with along the entire lower edge of the rabbet.  It won’t matter how carefully you fettle the bulwarks home, you will still be left with this ugly gap.

 

Oh, and the other irritating thing about this kit is that the depth of the rabbet, inboard/outboard, varies tremendously along it’s length.  In order to establish a good bond across the joint with my spirketting, I found it necessary to sand this rabbet to a more or less consistent depth.

 

The next big bugaboo is that the whole head assembly is likely to be fairly warped and ill-fitting.  My advice here, as with anywhere on this kit, is to go slowly; dry-fit everything to the hull multiple times so that you fully understand what’s hanging you up, before you begin removing material.

 

Lastly, the quarter galleries are unlikely to conform neatly to the tumblehome of the hull.  If you do as many have, to remove the raised relief panels, thus opening up the galleries, you should have an easier time fitting them to the hull because the QGs should be less rigid.  I recommend doing this, anyway, as it significantly lightens the appearance of the stern structure, and historically it is more consistent with actual practice in the 1670s.

 

I have an early pressing of the kit from the 70’s and the plastic is of a very high quality - even to this day.  I’m not sure whether newer pressings are of the same quality.

 

Now, despite all that I have said, here, don’t be discouraged.  It is an amazing challenge to put this kit together well, and very rewarding when you do.  Just take your time and it will come out well.

[Bill97]

Thanks Marc. That lifts my spirits a bit about the pricey model I have yet to get into. 
I am surprised you commented here. I hoped you would but expected you were up to your elbows in paint and had no time for MSW! 😊
 

 

[Hubac's Historian]

I follow John’s build with great interest.

[popeye2sea]

7 hours ago, Bill97 said:

Well John and Marc (Marc if you venture over here to John’s blog).  I have begun reading SR build blogs and researching other references on line about the Soleli Royal at times when I am not working on my Victory. I have to admit I had not researched the model much at all prior to purchasing it. I was fully expecting it to be of the same quality as the Victory. I had read the Heller 1/100 Victory and Soleli Royal were the flagship models produced by Heller. I also understood the building instructions supplied by Heller for both were not very good, especially the rigging instructions. I purchased the Longridge book for the Victory and with the help of a few fine people here on MSW I have been able to build a model I am proud of. I have not opened my SR kit yet but I can only assume Heller produced it from the same molds as their previous editions you guys are building. From all the reading and research I have done, including both your build blogs here, it seems the model has some short comings to say the least. After my experience with the Victory I fully intend to purchase replacement deadeyes, blocks, and other rigging parts.  I am curious if the deficiencies you have experienced are related more toward ill fitting pieces and actual construction problems or more toward inaccurate authenticity, or both?   I am much more interested in building a beautiful model ship but not necessarily an authentic replica. No one I know that will ever see it will inspect it to point out period inaccuracies!  Based on your experience building it, does the out of box kit present the opportunity to build and complete the model, or are there numerous instances where pieces just don’t fit together or work the way Heller explains?  I am thinking I am glad I am building and learning from the Victory before starting the Soleli Royal instead of the other way around. 

What Marc said!!!

But one additional item that I would add is to be careful with the entire stern balconies assembly. The parts do not have any tabs or notches to align them so they just butt together, Getting everything in place and even from port to starboard can be difficult.

 

Regards,

[John Clements]

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............

 

 

[Bill97]

Thanks John. I appreciate your sharing what you have done. I am planning to use gold leaf on the decorations as Kpnuts did. That is going to require some practice before I actually start application. 

[yancovitch]

gads! rigging those guns is quite an accomplishment.......i just had some 3mm blocks, and tried....yuk...it ain't easy..getting old i guess....i'm trying to get some 2mm blocks....haha if i can afford them...

congrats, on the fantastic job you've done with them....

[John Clements]

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.

[yancovitch]

i gave up on the blocks...to get 2mm blocks now, just for the upper decks, would have cost me $70cdn.....and as i built this model only for the shape of the hull, it wasn't worth it......

[Bill97]

Hey John I continue to read and follow your build along with Marc’s, Popeye2sea‘s, Ian and several others. If you have by chance ventured over to my build you see I am very early n my build. At this point getting my hull together and painting it and starting the painting of my cannons is where I am. I know as I add the decks I will be putting in the cannons and rigging only the ones that will be seen.  Did you just rig those or all the cannons on every deck?  Since adding and rigging the cannons will be in my near future I have read over that section of your blog several times.  I see that you struggled getting the right size blocks for the rigging. What is the final decision you made on the blocks and rigging tackles?  If you have time and would not mind I would greatly appreciate if you would post a photo of one of your rigged guns and tell me the block sizes and rigging tackle. 

[John Clements]

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.

[Ian_Grant]

Bill, the best sized source for the cannon tackle blocks is 2mm singles and doubles from Syren.........

 

oops, I checked and they don't seem to make them now........never mind.........

[John Clements]

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!

[Ian_Grant]

I must confess that I simply tied the 2mm blocks to eyebolts on the gun carriage and bulwark, omitting hooks. That way there is a space between the blocks. At 1/100 nobody lacking a magnifier will ever see the difference especially on the "visible" guns on the main deck under the gangways.

[Bill97]

Thanks John. I appreciate your response and information. Hope all is well with your family member. I discovered the same thing you did n the 2mm blocks availability. I went ahead and ordered 2.5mm and will try to make them look OK. I may eliminate the hooks and just tie the blocks to the deck eyebolts. That should give a bit more space. And as Ian said no one without a magnifying glass will know. 

[kirill4]

Good day,

One more option... to ommit that( guns) blocks at all...??? 

Most of classical museum models don't have such details...but just guns...

Edited December 5, 2022 by kirill4

[John Clements]

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.

[yancovitch]

bless you both....

[Hubac's Historian]

I’m sorry for the sad news, John.  I’m hoping for better days ahead for you and your family.

[72Nova]

No worries, God Bless and many prayers to your family.

Michael D.