Le Soleil Royal by Bill97 - FINISHED - Heller - 1/100

[Bill97]

Ian that is what I am scratching my head about in reference to my desire to partially pull up the fore main sails. I know I use the rigging lines to pull them up but would I use the reef points to hold them in place, or would they only be used in a more long term setting?

[Bob Cleek]

18 hours ago, Ian_Grant said:

To help the men pull the sail up with the wind blowing, there are also "reef tackles"; ropes which attach to the leech (side) of the sail at the end of the reef band (horizontal reinforcing strip sewn along where the reef points pierce the sail). Men hauling on these tackles pull the sail up to the yard to let the men on the yard gather it and tie it off.

 

 

To put a bit finer point on it, the purpose of reef tackles is not to "pull the sail up when the wind is blowing." The reef tackles are attached to the garnets on the leeches of a square sail at the reef bands for the purpose of pulling the garnets of the "new" head of the reefed sail, i.e. the ends of the reef band, tautly out to the ends of the yard from which the sail is hung. This is done prior to tying the reef lines, which serve to gather up the surplus canvas created by the reef. The reef points also serve to secure the new "head" of the sail created by the reef tackles stretching the reef band to the ends of the yard to the yard itself.  While the reef tackles do haul the reef band upward and outward on the yard, gathering the reefed sail up isn't their primary purpose.  When reefing, first the buntlines are used to haul up the body of the sail to the yard, while the sheets are tailed from the deck to keep the clews under control, so the sailors aloft on the yard can attach the reef tackles to the garnets on the sail's leeches, haul the reef band tight along the yard, and then tie off the reef points.

 

Without the buntlines hauling the body of the sail up to the yard, the sailors would in most instances never be able to reach the garnets at the reef bands on the sail in order to attach the reef tackles!

 

18 hours ago, Ian_Grant said:

I do not know how multiple reef bands were handled; did the reef tackle just attach to the lowest band?  ... did they take in a reef, tie off the reef points, then shift the tackle connection down to the nest lower band (implying they had to take in sail one reef at a time even when wanting to reduce sail drastically?). Might make sense since I expect they would want all the successive rows of reef points tied off. Which begs the question of how, when loosing sail, would the men on the foot rope know which knots in front of them were for which set of reefs?  We need a greater mind than mine to answer this.

The reef tackles attach to the garnets on the leeches at each reef band. There is just one reef tackle for each leech, port and starboard, and it is moved to the appropriate reef band when a reef is taken in. To take a second reef, the sheets would be cast off and tailed by deck crew to better control the sail during the reefing evolution, the buntlines would be used to haul up the foot of the sail so that the reef tackles could be removed from the first reef band and attached to the second reef band and the new "head" of the sail at the second reef band stretched tightly between the ends of the spar. The reef points on the first reef are left in place where they continue to secure the surplus canvas created by the first reef to the yard. The reef points on the second reef band would then be tied off around both the previously tied-in reef with its reef points left tied, and the surplus canvas created by the latest reef to secure at the same time both the  first and the second reef to the yard. The buntlines would then be slackened, and the clews of the sail sheeted to set the sail. 

 

To "shake out" a reef, the process was simply the opposite: The reef tackles were cast off the leeches and generally secured beneath the yard, perhaps attached to the head cringles on each side, although the head would be secured to the yard or jackstay separately and remain so unless the sail were to be removed from the yard. The reef points would be untied, and the sail let fall, or the reef be "shaken out," and the sheets hauled to set the filled sail. Note, however, that if only the most recent of multiple reefs taken was to be shaken out, the reef tackles would be moved to the reef tied in immediately previous to the one being shaken out the clew garnets of the previous reef hauled tightly outboard, rather than securing the reef tackles beneath the yard. In this fashion, when the reef points of the most recently taken reef were cast off and the buntlines slacked, the sail was set, reefed, and ready to be trimmed without any further attention to the preceding reef.

 

There was no problem identifying the reef points of each reef because the latter reef's points are obviously the ones tied over the former reef's points. (Depending upon the size of the sail, the length of a square sail's reef points may vary, with the reef points on the second, and third, if there is one, reef band(s)' points being longer than its predecessors to accommodate the greater volume of gathered canvas it must secure. This detail is very rarely seen in modern models and perhaps is dependent upon the period. I can't say for sure.) 

 

If the sails were to be dried (often in port), they were frequently loosely gathered up by the buntlines and their clews triced up to the center of the yard to keep the clews from flailing about (or the sails filling if the wind kicked up and the ship sailing off on its own!) This practice is seen in many period photographs. 

 

Cutty Sark with crew aloft in the process of setting sails to dry in port. Note the fore and mizzen courses with their buntlines brailing up the leeches. Note the crew at the ends of the foretopsail yard apparently in the process of securing the clews to the center of the yard. What that looks like when completed is seen in the second photo below.

 

When the job is finished, it will look something like this if done "shipshape and Bristol-fashion:"

When a sail is stowed furled on a yard, whether with a reef or more already tied in, or without any reefs tied in, the sail is secured with gaskets which work much like reef points, but are not permanently connected to the sail. Rather gaskets live attached to the yard or jackstay and when in use they are tied all around the yard and gather the sail at points as required along the length of the spar in the same manner as reef points. However, as gaskets must circle the entire sail and spar (unless tied through a jackstay,) often with more than a single turn taken (unlike reef points,) they must be considerably longer than reef points and when not in use are coiled and left hanging from the yard (or jackstay.) I am not certain whether this practice is applicable to all periods, though. In earlier periods, the gaskets may have been sent aloft with the topmen when needed. One would have to do further research on that one, but if you are shooting for building a "hundred pointer." details like properly coiled and hung gaskets are not to me overlooked!  

 

This video better illustrates the use of the sail gaskets and provides a good idea of how a life-size square yard looks and works:

 

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by Bob Cleek

[Bill97]

Thanks Bob. This is very informative. Appreciate it. 

[Bill97]

So Bob as I am reading through this I see if I pull up the main and fore sail as in your photo above it is pulled up to the front side of the sail?

[Bill97]

So many new (to me) nautical terms in your comment Bob. Each needing to be researched as to what it is, where it is, and what it’s purpose is.  And to what extent  even possible, at 1/100 scale?

 

These are just a few:

Reef tackles 

Garnets

Leeches

Gaskets

 

[Ferrus Manus]

If you want to reef, you would want to reef the main. Having the fore open to the wind would, if i understand correctly, lead to better sailing characteristics. That's why clippers didn't have lower stuns'ls on the main or mizzen. 

[Bob Cleek]

8 hours ago, Bill97 said:

So Bob as I am reading through this I see if I pull up the main and fore sail as in your photo above it is pulled up to the front side of the sail?

Yes, as shown in the second picture. This is the way the sails are hung in order to dry them before furling when they won't be used for a period of time, whether they will then be "sent down" and stowed, or furled on the yard. The pictures show the way sails are dealt with when the ship is not sailing and the sails are not drawing. It was necessary to dry them before such storage in order to prevent mold and rot deterioration to the sails. If you intend to display the model with sails "set and drawing" as if the vessel were sailing, you have a much more involved task, since the sails will have to be formed to be "full" and all rigging set up to correctly portray the angles of the yards given whatever point of sail you want to show that the vessel is on (i.e. the direction from which the wind is blowing) and the model should be mounted at the  proper angle of heel, if not sailing directly downwind. That portrayal is generally considered to require a few figures on board attending to the tasks required to sail the vessel to provide realistic detail. Such "sailing" presentations are usually seen on "waterline" models mounted on a molded "sea" base with appropriate bow waves and such.

[Bob Cleek]

9 hours ago, Bill97 said:

So many new (to me) nautical terms in your comment Bob. Each needing to be researched as to what it is, where it is, and what it’s purpose is.  And to what extent  even possible, at 1/100 scale?

 

These are just a few:

Reef tackles 

Garnets

Leeches

Gaskets

 

Yes. At 1/8" to the foot, things start getting rather small sometimes. For this reason, rigging details are sometimes "abbreviated," which is to say, omitted. If you are going to put sails on a model, though, assuming you are committed to accuracy, most all of the items you've listed should, in my opinion, be portrayed. All would require rather fine thread, but nothing that would be particularly difficult to obtain. You would probably want to forego spinning your own scale rope because it would have to be so small. 

 

Nautical nomenclature is indeed a foreign language for most. As far as foreign languages go, it's fairly easy to master because the words and pronunciations are in English. It's only when you run into one of the older foreign made kits that you start having to learn all the terms again in French, Spanish, or Italian. That can be really crazy-making. Some of us were fortunate enough to grow up on and about ships and boats and picked up the "lingo" as we went along. Even then, fluency is difficult to attain because the names change at different times and places. "Different ships, different long splices." as the saying goes. It's actually much easier if you have a conversational use for a language and can "learn by doing," rather than by trying to memorize words in a vacuum. That said, modelers who stay with the hobby any length of time inevitably build research and reference libraries that are essential to more advanced modeling. If you posted an inquiry in an appropriate section of the forum (don't ask me which one!) asking for suggestions on basic reference books one should require, I'm sure you'd get a lot of suggestions. Keep in mind that the subject spans several centuries, so one has to acquire reference works for each of the periods relevant to the models they are building. Le Soleil Royal was French and built in 1668 and launched in 1670. She was then placed in ordinary (laid up unused) until recommissioned twenty years or so later in 1690 and burned in battle by fireships in 1692. You should probably decide at which point you want to portray her. When she was just built and launched or during her short two-year "working life." That means you'll have to research what she looked like at that time. One would hope that a kit would have made that choice for you or at least given you options and relevant details, but in the case of this kit, I have no idea if the plans do. The years this ship was afloat are at the beginning of what might be considered the reliable recorded history of sailing ships when the drafting of plans came into practice, construction started becoming standardized (in warships, at least,) and designs started "getting scientific." So, in this case, you'd have to find reference works that cover early French ships of the line of the time you are modeling. I don't have any detailed experience with late Seventeenth Century French warships, but I'd expect reference books written in English may be somewhat hard to find. There are some very fine works on French warships which have been translated to English, but, as I recall, they address Eighteenth Century French warships. In contrast, English reference works are plentiful compared to the French and Spanish naval fleets of the period and the rigging details of the warships of different nations are quite similar, but a "knowledgeable eye" (which I don't have in this instance) will quickly notice the inconsistency of English rigging and construction details on models of foreign ships. As you probably know, and I just learned, there is a highly detailed near-1/4" to the foot model of Le Soleil Royal built in 1839 which is nearly contemporary to the vessel itself, or at least soon enough that there must have been those who knew her firsthand still living at the time. The Wikipedia entry for Le Soliel Royal has some pictures of this model in the French National Maritime Museum in Paris and this model is probably the best source of information available at this time. (Which is why the manufacturer of your kit picked this vessel as a subject and based the kit on this model.) You'd probably want to acquire any reference books that contain plans of the vessel or photographs of the model. There may be some available from the French National Maritime Museum.

 

The list of various ship modeling reference works is huge, but off the top of my head, if you haven't already, I would suggest you obtain copies of the following classic reference books. Fortunately for you, they have all now been reprinted in trade paperback format and are quite inexpensive. Prior to that, there was a time when they were scarce and expensive hardcover out-of-print "unicorns." 

 

The Rigging of Ships: in the Days of the Spritsail Topmast, 1600-1720 by R.C. Anderson (Dover Maritime Press - paperback reprint.) This one does cover both English and French ships of the line.  The Rigging of Ships: in the Days of the Spritsail Topmast, 1600-1720 (Dover Maritime): Anderson, R. C.: 9780486279602: Amazon.com: Books

 

The Art of Rigging by George Biddlecombe (Dover Maritime Press - paperback reprint.) Originally written in 1848, this book contains an excellent glossary of all the English terms and phrases used in rigging sailing ships of the line and is profusely illustrated. It also contains what Biddlecombe called "the progressive method of rigging ships" which is a logical sequence of rigging complex sailing rigs. This method is helpful for preventing you from "stringing yourself into a corner," as it were, by installing the various rigging elements in a logical specific order.  The Art of Rigging (Dover Maritime): Biddlecombe, George: 9780486263434: Amazon.com: Books

 

Rigging Period Ship Models: A Step-by-Step Guide to the Intricacies of Square Rig by Lennarth Petersson (Seaforth Publishing) Hardcover and paperback. This book is basically a collection of clear drawings of rigging details with a brief explanation. It has met with slight criticism regarding a few errors, but it is written for ship modelers for use in "looking up" what a particular rigging detail looks like and it is generally very well received by modelers using it for this purpose. The author has also written a companion volume addressing the rigging details of fore-and-aft rigged vessels. I consider it a "Field Guide to British and North American Sailing Ship Rigging."

 

The Oxford Companion to Ships and the Sea (The Oxford Reference Collection) 2nd Edition C.B. Dear and Peter Kemp, Editors. Published by that Oxford, the university, which famously publishes the Oxford Dictionary of the English Language ("The OED"), this is a very scholarly dictionary/encyclopedia of all nautical terms. First published in 1976, the second edition published in 2006 added a lot of content on oceanography, marine archaeology, and marine biology developments since the first edition's publishing. It's basically the nautical segment of the OED, the authoritative standard dictionary of the English language. It's got darn near everything you can think of in it. It is now available in both hardcover and paperback. If money is tight, a used copy of the first edition which I've been using since its first printing continues to prove entirely adequate for my  modeling and nautical technical writing purposes. Amazon.com: The Oxford Companion to Ships and the Sea (The Oxford Reference Collection): 9780198800507: Dear, I. C. B, Kemp, Peter: Books

 

Between these four books, you should be able to look up and find a written description of any rigging detail you might encounter in a period ship model along with a clear picture or diagram of it and the definition of any nautical term you might ever encounter. There are plenty of copies of all of these books on the used market, making them quite affordable. If you shop around by checking Amazon and eBay for used copies in good condition, you may be able to acquire all four for less than a Benjamin. 

 

The more you read, the more you'll learn! Like many of us, you may find doing the research as fascinating as building the models.

 

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by Bob Cleek

[Bob Cleek]

7 hours ago, Ferrus Manus said:

If you want to reef, you would want to reef the main. Having the fore open to the wind would, if i understand correctly, lead to better sailing characteristics. That's why clippers didn't have lower stuns'ls on the main or mizzen. 

Excellent point for newer modelers contemplating modeling sails to consider! It's not enough to just pick a few sails to attach flying because you like how they look. To achieve the desired illusion of reality in miniature the sails must be set and drawing as they woud have been if the ship were on a particular point of sail in a particular weather condition. Square rigged ships rarely, if ever, flew all their sails at the same time. Consulting photographs (not necessarily paintings or drawings, which can contain errors due to "artistic license") of similarly rigged ships under sail is an excellent resource. Google Images is your friend!

[Bill97]

Ian in this photo that I often refer to as being similar to what I want to achieve you can clearly see the bowlines and how they are rigged. It is interesting to me, and I just noticed it for the first time, that the builder has the foot ropes on the front side of the sail rather than on the back?

 

Bob you have certainly provided a very detailed amount of knowledge that I do find informative. I so much appreciate it. I am following the Heller instructions for the sail rigging. I have no doubt it is somewhat abbreviated from all the actual rigging that would have been present and employed. I expect the kit and instructions are geared more toward rendering a model suitable for display in the builders home and viewing by friends and family who are less than knowledgeable of nautical authenticity. That is where my modeling goal is. To build a model that presents a beautiful (piece of art maybe) that is a nice addition to my home decor.  Not one that is nautically authentic in everything way. Any rigging line I add I want it to be accurately placed and no line rigged that is completely incorrect. However every line that would have been on the ship may not be on my model. To make this very long conversation short I am wanting to display my sails as in the second photo below. Topsail and topgallant sail set. I have no questions about these sails nor the mizzenmast or bowsprit. I know that the yards should have been raked if the sails were set but they are not as previously discussed several pages back. I want the fore and main sail pulled up a bit as in the third photo. I want to do this to expose the details on the deck. Either just on one side or both. Pictures 4 and 5 have the sail pulled up to the front whereas picture 3 has it pulled up to it he back. Which is correct and which rigging line attached to the clew is used here?  

[Bill97]

Alright professors this is my morning pop quiz. Hope I at least get a B. In the attached photo the dotted lines (1130,1131, 1145 and 1146) are called buntlines and run to the front of the sail? The purple arrow points to leech lines (1117 and 1118) that connect to the leech of the sail and also run to the front of the sail?

[Ian_Grant]

Blue are your leech lines which gather in the leeches (sides) of the sails when furling. I'm having trouble deciding from the diagram what purple are. I think 1031 are the braces, in which case the purple seem to be the reef tackles hauling the leeches (edges) of the sail up via the blocks attached at the level of the reef band as discussed earlier; or possibly for the stuns'ls in which case I don't see where the reef tackle line goes. Hmmm.

 

The two dotted lines ending at the foot of the mainsail are the bunt lines. The upper sails seem to have no bunt lines probably because they are reduced by lowering their yards, not by being pulled up like the mainsail. I'm surprised the topsail has no reef tackle shown. Leads me to wonder if only the course sails had reefs???

 

According to Anderson, reef tackle were used on lower sails as an alternative to bonnets from the 13th century to early in the 16th century when they disappeared; reefs appeared in topsails in roughly 1655; topsail reef tackles are first documented in 1675; Anderson would hesitate to show topsail reef tackles before 1670.

 

I can't remember (again) which SR in which year consensus has placed the Heller model. Modeller's initiative on reefs I guess.

 

 

[Bill97]

Yes Ian 1031 are the braces. So looking at the diagram and your explanation, the leech lines and reef tackles do run in front of the sail while lines like 1121 and 1122 run behind the sail?  
 

Ian if at some point you want to say “Bill please find a different hobby, you are wearing me out with the questions.”  Please feel free to. 😊

[Ian_Grant]

Yes, 1121/1122 clew lines are definitely behind the sail. Leech lines run in front of the sail. Heller doesn't show where the course leech lines go; I would expect them to run through a block beneath the mast top and down to pin rails around the mast foot. Or does SR even have these?

 

I say again that I'm not sure 1117/1118 are the reef tackles; it worries me that I see no labelled line running to the blocks e.g. e147 and e148 used to haul up the heads of the stu'nsls. I would have expected reef tackles to pass through a block near the mast thence down to pin rails near the mast.

 

Then again I've made zero ships from this century.

[popeye2sea]

And...the proper coil to use when you are hanging your unused gaskets from the yard is a - wait for it - gasket coil!

 

Regards,

 

Henry

[popeye2sea]

According to the rigging plan lines 1117 and 1118 are the reef tackles

 

Regards,

 

Henry

[popeye2sea]

36 minutes ago, Ian_Grant said:

Yes, 1121/1122 clew lines are definitely behind the sail. Leech lines run in front of the sail. Heller doesn't show where the course leech lines go; I would expect them to run through a block beneath the mast top and down to pin rails around the mast foot. Or does SR even have these?

 

I say again that I'm not sure 1117/1118 are the reef tackles; it worries me that I see no labelled line running to the blocks e.g. e147 and e148 used to haul up the heads of the stu'nsls. I would have expected reef tackles to pass through a block near the mast thence down to pin rails near the mast.

 

Then again I've made zero ships from this century.

I agree, however I am not sure that the reef tackle would run in front of the sail.  The hauling end would as you mentioned probably run inboard under the yard to a leading block and then down to the deck.

Bunt lines also come down in front of the sail.

 

Also, the diagram does not show the studdingsail rigging which is covered under another page of the instructions.

 

Regards,

Henry

Edited December 16, 2023 by popeye2sea

[Hubac's Historian]

5 hours ago, Bill97 said:

Ian in this photo that I often refer to as being similar to what I want to achieve you can clearly see the bowlines and how they are rigged. It is interesting to me, and I just noticed it for the first time, that the builder has the foot ropes on the front side of the sail rather than on the back?

 

Bob you have certainly provided a very detailed amount of knowledge that I do find informative. I so much appreciate it. I am following the Heller instructions for the sail rigging. I have no doubt it is somewhat abbreviated from all the actual rigging that would have been present and employed. I expect the kit and instructions are geared more toward rendering a model suitable for display in the builders home and viewing by friends and family who are less than knowledgeable of nautical authenticity. That is where my modeling goal is. To build a model that presents a beautiful (piece of art maybe) that is a nice addition to my home decor.  Not one that is nautically authentic in everything way. Any rigging line I add I want it to be accurately placed and no line rigged that is completely incorrect. However every line that would have been on the ship may not be on my model. To make this very long conversation short I am wanting to display my sails as in the second photo below. Topsail and topgallant sail set. I have no questions about these sails nor the mizzenmast or bowsprit. I know that the yards should have been raked if the sails were set but they are not as previously discussed several pages back. I want the fore and main sail pulled up a bit as in the third photo. I want to do this to expose the details on the deck. Either just on one side or both. Pictures 4 and 5 have the sail pulled up to the front whereas picture 3 has it pulled up to it he back. Which is correct and which rigging line attached to the clew is used here?  

Foot-ropes should absolutely be behind the sails.  Whether they were even fully or partially present on French ships before the 1690s is a subject for debate.

[Ferrus Manus]

The model showing the footropes in front of the sail is incorrectly rigged. Do not do that on yours. Like Marc said, their presence on ships like the Soleil Royal is debatable. I would have excluded them entirely, but it's your model. I believe reef tackles, if they were even present on this kind of ship, would be behind the sail. I can tell that lines 1117/1118 are the reef tackles for the course. However, if i were rigging the ship, i would go with my gut and lead them inboard on the yard, behind the sail, and have them fall to the deck somewhere around the mast. 

Edited December 16, 2023 by Ferrus Manus

[Ferrus Manus]

4 hours ago, Bill97 said:

“Bill please find a different hobby, you are wearing me out with the questions.”

Answering your questions is a hobby in and of itself! Your questions are always welcome. 

[Bill97]

Thanks Ferrus. Oh I did not that on mine.  Have always rigged the foot ropes behind the sail. just noticed on this model that I have referred to several times there is this glaring inaccuracy. Can’t believe I had not noticed it before. 
 

Thanks Henry and Marc for your comments a confirmation of my questions as always. 

Edited December 17, 2023 by Bill97

[Bill97]

Henry I am not adding the stunsails so I will not be concerned with blocks e147 and e148 as well as similarly used blocks. 
 

Reading through the section on reef tackles in Longridge’s book he explains the route of the ropes. When he gets to describing buntlines he specifically states they run on the fore side of the sail. I am going to read into that that the the reef tackle does in fact run to the back side of the sail. Otherwise Longridge would have stated it was on the fore side as he did the buntlines. 

[Bill97]

Buntlines, bowlines, and clew lines on the fore topsail and topgallant. Please review (if you can make out the lines in the photos) and critique as you feel necessary before I add a touch of glue at the belay points. No rigging done yet on the fore sail. I will eventually pull it up a bit once I determine exactly how I want to portray it. 

[Ian_Grant]

Bill, don't know what Heller showed, but IMO the bowlines should be led to blocks further forward; don't forget they have to be pulling from ahead of whatever point the windward yardarm end reaches when close-hauled. See for example Longridge's drawing for victory Fig 182; fore topsail bowlines led out to bowsprit cap, fore topgallant bowlines out to flying jib boom.

 

SR has of course no jib booms; you could lead topsail bowlines to blocks at the back edge of the sprit top, and topgallant bowlines to ??? maybe the cap? or the top of the sprit-topmast ???

 

Here's a pic I dug up on google. Bowlines can just be made out indeed heading for the area of the sprit topmast. Now comparing the photos, maybe all you need to do is move your bowline blocks a bit further down the stays.

 

You might want to also let your spritsail sheets out a little.

Free Mouse Pad - Join the NRG with Digital & Print Journals - see offer in NRG news below

[Bill97]

Thanks Ian. If I understand I need to have a greater angle of the bowline coming off the sail and going down the stay?  I can certainly make those adjustments. This is a why it is a good thing to check with you guys early. I only have two sails rigged so far. Wont have to fix all of them 😊.

Edited December 18, 2023 by Bill97

[Bill97]

Ok Ian here is what I settled on. Comparing mine to the reference you attached above. I think my topgallant bowline is pretty close. My topsail bowline is a compromise of where I wish it was and where I was able to put it. I moved the blocks down the stay as far as I could with out interfering with the spritsail topmast braces. I think I have the crows feet for the spritsail topmast a bit future up the stay than your example. I don’t really want to change that. Took a good while to get it just right. Where it crosses the stay also presented limits on where I could move the bowline blocks to. I think it all works out OK. I also loosened the sheets for the spritsail as you recommended. This results in a conflict with my OCD type A personality. There is nothing that creates resistance against the sheets. As a result they hang loose and unnaturally. If there was a bit of wind in the sail as the billow I have molded reflects, the sheets should be somewhat taut, I would think. I am attempting the idea of coating the sheets with white glue and the weight of the clips while it dries to see if this adds some stiffness. We will see. No idea how the builder of the model in your photo achieved the taut sheets. 

Edited December 18, 2023 by Bill97

[popeye2sea]

Bill,

 

I thought about putting a small bit of lead weight in a pocket on the clews of the sprit sail in order to give it some weight and let it hang a bit more naturally.

 

Just looking ahead a bit.  If you intend to set a fore stay sail it is going to need a false stay.  In fact, I think all of the stay sails would need to be set on false stays.

A false stay runs just below the normal stay. It is seized to the normal stay quite high up and allows the stay sail hanks to slide up and down without fouling on the various braces and brace block pendants affixed to the normal stay.

 

Regards,

Henry

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  I'd avoid using lead, as tin solder is readily available (and far less toxic).

[Bill97]

Thanks Henry. I am not going to add the staysails. My attempt at using glue on the sheets was much minimally effective. My next idea is to use a piece of small gauge wire of some sort that has very little flex to it. See if I can maybe place it serve it the sheet. That may make the sheet look to our of scale and be a bad idea. 

[popeye2sea]

20 hours ago, Snug Harbor Johnny said:

  I'd avoid using lead, as tin solder is readily available (and far less toxic).

True. But tin solder has no weight to it.

 

Maybe a piece of uranium would do?  😜

 

Regards,

Henry