Soleil Royal by Heller - an Extensive Modification and Partial Scratch-Build by Hubac’s Historian

[Hubac’s Historian]

My apologies guys; I don't even receive status updates on my own build-log!

Christian - do you mean a threaded rope, along the centerline and between the treads of the beakhead bulkhead stair treads? More detailed models sometimes show this in the waist gangway.

Nigel - yes, I will make and install more conventional head seats in the near future; more like Michel Saunier's interpretation. In fact, I may do a brief update tomorrow discussing the headrail positioning and how it impacts a number of structural considerations. Some of those I can solve, and some of them are of lesser priority. You raise an interesting point about the missing treads, though, and to be honest that consideration had escaped me altogether. I'll have to take a closer look, there. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.

 

[Maarten]

Marc I think it was the correct decision to remove the phone box like Privys. I assume you are going to adopt the more regular heads in the grated section.

With the phone boxes out of the way, it may be a small but worthy addition to add the two full missing steps towards the base of the Beakhead bulkhead

Who will need phone boxes anyway in the time before Alexander Graham Bell.

 

[Hubac’s Historian]

There hasn’t been a whole lot of time to put into the ship this past week, as a dear friend from Sweden has been visiting. It has been an extremely social and active time for me.

I have managed to continue detailing the port headrails. This is very time consuming because all of these fine border mouldings have to be cut and fit by hand. I decided that the best course for the middle rail was to affix the top moulding and leave the bottom moulding off until I had fit and secured each section of the bellflower garland:



The forward end of the headrails gets an inside bevel so that I will have some glue surface to attach to the upper knee of the head, just behind the figurehead:



As it stands, I am modeling the bellflower garland. This is, naturally, time-consuming, but the effort is always worthwhile:



After that is complete, I will make the inside lamination for the horse carving from 1/16” styrene. Most of this figure, as you will see in a minute, rests above the f’ocsle sheer rail. As with the drift-rail serpent ornaments, I want a more 3-D appearance for this carving. It will make a tremendous difference, in the end.

So, at this point, I wanted to really suss-out what my exact headrail positioning will be. It is complicated by numerous considerations and hard realities of the kit. It is impossible to do this perfectly, and according to actual practice of the times. What I can do, however, is prioritize those aspects of the construction that I most want to improve upon.

To that end, I have already lowered the forward scroll below the level of the sprit-mast. Next in importance are the transverse support timbers for the headrails: I wanted to create enough open space for elegantly arching supports, instead of something that was more flatly aligned with the horizon. I think that this spacing provides for that:



The fundamental problem with the kit architecture is that the forward sheer of the lower main wales rises too dramatically. The whole knee structure of the head should, in fact, be a good bit lower. Consequently, I am having to choose to position the horse carving a little higher on the f’ocsle sheer rail than I would ideally like. I can live with this. There is another important implication concerning the run of the beakhead grating that I will discuss in a moment.

On the plus side, the lowest point of the headrails does not dip below the level of the middle main wales. I also really like the harmonic sweep of the knees and the headrails:




Really keen observers will note that the Berain/Vary drawings show the forward and aft headrail medallions in the same plane:



However, super-keen observers will note that both of these drawings mysteriously and completely ignore the presence of the f’ocsle deck, which would have raised the f’ocsle sheer a step. So, I don’t think I am wrong to represent the aft medallion as being in a higher plane.

Although, as discussed, I still find it necessary to incorporate some shape to these headrails, I do not find it to be terribly exaggerated or noticeable:




And, finally - the second complication of the abruptly rising sheer of the lower main wales; the beakhead grating on French ships of the period should run behind and follow the curve of the upper headrail. I, on the other hand, have chosen to prioritize the sweep of the headrail support timbers. Consequently, I will run the beakhead grating in-line with the middle headrail:



It isn’t exactly correct, but it will make it easy to tuck my new seats of ease between the beakhead deck and the headrails, as Michel Saunier did here:


Photo, courtesy of Marc Yeu

Next, I have to pierce the beakhead bulkhead for the cathead timbers, so that I can figure out the ideal placement for the cathead support carvings.

None of this is exactly right or perfect, but considered in its entirely it will be better and closer to the truth than what Heller has presented out-of-box. As always, thank you for stopping by. More to follow…

 

[Stevedownunder]

I don't really know what to add there Marc,
Except your meticulous attention to re-working this model is incredible in my opinion.

Cheers,
Stephen.

 

[Hubac’s Historian]

As always - thank you Stephen. I appreciate your continued interest.

 

[kirill4]

Good day Marc!
I see you project slowly but steady moves forward! )) Beautiful job!
Talking about railings ,I saw You mentioned "...Although, as discussed, I still find it necessary to incorporate some shape to these headrails, I do not find it to be terribly exaggerated or noticeable..."
In this respect I couldn't fully understand why they couldn't be pass "straight" when I look at their positions on your pictures ...?
But ok, I fully agree with Your choice for your model...
I'm still thinking about these head-rails (in respect of assembling my SR model somewhere in future)...
May be there could be some sense to give upper scroll and railings some more thickness(approx. x 2 times thicker than they are now) , in such case it will allow to move them a little bit away from the forecastle planking, to keep their plane shape and to minimize visible gaps between planking and railings in their parts where they adjusting to each other?
Corner of the forecastle could be slightly cutted in to upper scroll-work (when it will be thicker), to minimise a gap as well...?
But all these just my idle thoughts , looking at Your brilliant work! ))
There are a few pictures of Louis Quinze 1720 which is very close/have many similarities to discussed model ...
It looks like that problems with placing ease seats would be much less if beak-head bulkhead was made more vertical but not curved... ))
Or there is some general mistakes were made in Heller's SR hull lines ...
Obviously they made too full fwrd part and too light aft part and as consequences geometry of many elements of the hull construction went in wrong way ... some we could see when compare beak-head arrangements of Heller's SR model and this, LQ model and specially underwater part of the hull, which is looks well proportioned in LQ but ugly in case of SR ... but I think it was already discussed many times in the past ))

 

[Hubac’s Historian]

The issue, Kirill, has to do with the way the headrails tuck-in behind the winged figure; the entry, there, is very tight. Adding to the difficulty is that my widening of the bow made an already broad beakhead bulkhead even broader. If I had realized it was going to be an issue, earlier, I might have removed the wings and outstretched leg of the figurehead and re-positioned them after the headrails were in place. Even then, though, you are going to have to induce a bend at the aft medallion, in order to get around the reverse tumblehome of the forecastle; even a double thickness of material would not be sufficient to “bury” these trounlesome corners.

 

[Hubac’s Historian]

One truly fascinating SR project is currently in process by the brilliant ship-modeling artist Victor Yankovitch. He has married the kit superstructure to a realistic under-hull form in the most inventive way. The results are pretty astonishing:

Soleil Royal by yancovitch

though not a build log as such, i thought i'd share something i've imagined for many many years, at which time, i partly put together a heller soleil royal........i disliked the hull so much, i gave it away....i really don't know if i can do this but i'm sure gonna have fun trying.....will probab...

modelshipworld.com

 

[NMBROOK]

Excellent work on those Garlands Marc.

Vic's hybrid creation looks awesome

Kind Regards

Nigel

 

[Hubac’s Historian]

Well, after much careful modeling of the garland, and carving the in-board half of the horse, and fitting of the glue blocks, and fitting of the cathead support to the cathead itself - the port headrails are finally complete:



The difference in proportion is striking.





I modified the cathead support, slightly. The stock figure has angel’s wings on it’s back, but that is not how Berain drew this figure, and I just didn’t like the wings, anyway. I also deepened the lines of the acanthus and bell-flower carvings, and filled the cavity in the back with 1/8” styrene so that I would have a more substantial bond with the glue blocks on the top and bottom headrails. It was useful to leave these glue blocks a little proud so that I could adjust the fit to the tumblehome curvature of the headrails.




Cutting into the model is always a little daunting, but this eventually cleaned to a nice trim opening:




I gave the cathead timbers a solid detail upgrading. The bands are made from strips of a manilla file folder; they’re more plyable than styrene strip and once saturated with CA - they essentially become plastic:




I had two small fleurs remaining on my extra bulwarks, so I shaved them off and applied them to the cathead timbers, as they were perfectly scaled:



All of my modifications sometimes change the geometry of how these parts fit together. That was certainly the case with the cathead supporting knee. My solution is simply to add a bit of styrene and carefully file the new bevel to fit:



I’ve spent the past week refinishing my kitchen table, which is also my work-surface. The water-base poly-varnish I am using yields a very durable surface, but it is damn difficult to brush a nice level coat. I came so close to a relatively blemish-free coat on coat #5. Perfect or not, coat #6 has to be the end of that project. I need my work surface back.

In the meantime, I have started the whole process all over again on the starboard side. As always, thank you for your interest!

 

[dockattner]

You are quite simply the best of the best within this genre. If you don't mind me asking - when did this build start? Will this be your capstone or is there something to follow?

 

[Hubac’s Historian]

You know I love a good compliment, Paul, and I really appreciate that you hold this project in such high regard. Truly - thank you!

The idea for the project came right around Thanksgiving 2017. The model had been sitting in my parents basement for the prior 20 years. I tried to make a comprehensive plan drawing using GIMP open-share software, but the drawing, with all of it’s data points, quickly overwhelmed my (by then) ancient MAC.

Once I started modifying and fabricating, I quickly realized the folly of thinking that my drawing was going to be nearly close enough to reality to use as a direct take-off for dimensions. I got the basic frieze layout pretty close, but that took a lot of tweaking to get it all to fit. From 2019, on, I make drawings as I arrive at a construction phase where I have concrete measurements to take-off from the model. This has proven to be a more efficient way of tackling this kind of project, although continuity sometimes suffers a little - the alignment of the stern windows from one level to the next could be a little better, IMO. That said, I am thrilled with the way that it has come together.

Following this, I will probably build a few small wooden models that are fully framed. I’ll be looking at kits where the frames are laser cut, but still require some fitting and fairing. This will be a good introduction to wooden modeling for me.

Beyond that, I plan to make La Belle my first fully scratch-built model - this, of course, assuming that I have been able to carve out a little shop space, wherever I may be living. My inspiration will be the peerless work of Olivier Gatine:

La Belle 1684 - Modélisme d'arsenal - Olivier Gatine

Beyond that is my true magnum opus: a project so grandiose and lacking for concrete primary source information that most observers will scratch their heads and wonder at the sheer audacity and foolishness of the endeavor. I will take a stab at the most all-encompassing educated guess in ship-modeling history: Soleil Royal, 1670 in 1:48. I already have a pretty good idea what that might have looked like, but I haven’t taken any time, yet, to sketch out ideas.

For this project, I will draft a complete plan set and attempt to find a publisher for a monograph. As this will be a good distance into my future, I will have time to learn whatever the best drafting software might be for this kind of project. I’m certainly taking suggestions, on that point.

I’m sure there are better ways to spend one’s time, but this is the idea that appeals to me most.

 

[WojtasS]

For this project, I will draft a complete plan set and attempt to find a publisher for a monograph. As this will be a good distance into my future, I will have time to learn whatever the best drafting software might be for this kind of project. I’m certainly taking suggestions, on that point.

I think we can already bet what publisher it will be
And not making such plans would be a crime for future generations.

 

[Hubac’s Historian]

Actually, Woj, I would be very surprised if Ancre published such a title. The academic community does not support conjectural ship portraits; they stick with what is more concretely understood and factual, ergo most monographs are from the 18th C, moving forward.

Perhaps my notion of a “forensic re-construction” that draws inferences from Laurent Hubac’s better documented ships may gain some traction by then. I am not overly optimistic, though.

For the SP monograph, Lemineur had at least a basic sheer draft for this class of ship, ornamental sets, and an original draft of Foudroyant 1693’s lower framing. That is substantially more than what I have, at the moment.

 

[WojtasS]

Even if you don't get publisher your Soleil Royal is one out of a thousand and definitely deserves some special place in model making history.
Maybe Heller could release special edition(extended,platinium etc.) based on your model. That would be something great(Yeah I know it's only dream but one that would be worth to see)

PS My name is Wojciech. Wojtas is a nick name

 

[Hubac’s Historian]

Thank you Wojtas! If Heller wanted to do such a limited edition, I certainly wouldn’t say no.

 

[dockattner]

You know I love a good compliment, Paul, and I really appreciate that you hold this project in such high regard. Truly - thank you!

The idea for the project came right around Thanksgiving 2017. The model had been sitting in my parents basement for the prior 20 years. I tried to make a comprehensive plan drawing using GIMP open-share software, but the drawing, with all of it’s data points, quickly overwhelmed my (by then) ancient MAC.

Once I started modifying and fabricating, I quickly realized the folly of thinking that my drawing was going to be nearly close enough to reality to use as a direct take-off for dimensions. I got the basic frieze layout pretty close, but that took a lot of tweaking to get it all to fit. From 2019, on, I make drawings as I arrive at a construction phase where I have concrete measurements to take-off from the model. This has proven to be a more efficient way of tackling this kind of project, although continuity sometimes suffers a little - the alignment of the stern windows from one level to the next could be a little better, IMO. That said, I am thrilled with the way that it has come together.

Following this, I will probably build a few small wooden models that are fully framed. I’ll be looking at kits where the frames are laser cut, but still require some fitting and fairing. This will be a good introduction to wooden modeling for me.

Beyond that, I plan to make La Belle my first fully scratch-built model - this, of course, assuming that I have been able to carve out a little shop space, wherever I may be living. My inspiration will be the peerless work of Olivier Gatine:

La Belle 1684 - Modélisme d'arsenal - Olivier Gatine

Beyond that is my true magnum opus: a project so grandiose and lacking for concrete primary source information that most observers will scratch their heads and wonder at the sheer audacity and foolishness of the endeavor. I will take a stab at the most all-encompassing educated guess in ship-modeling history: Soleil Royal, 1670 in 1:48. I already have a pretty good idea what that might have looked like, but I haven’t taken any time, yet, to sketch out ideas.

For this project, I will draft a complete plan set and attempt to find a publisher for a monograph. As this will be a good distance into my future, I will have time to learn whatever the best drafting software might be for this kind of project. I’m certainly taking suggestions, on that point.

I’m sure there are better ways to spend one’s time, but this is the idea that appeals to me most.

A logical progression with a majestic end point. Most play music composed by others - a few make their own music. It is a privilege watching you create music.

Prediction: you will only make one small fully framed ship before you take on La Belle. I see some traits in you that I see in myself. Namely, once something has been 'mastered' there is little point in mastering it twice. Only a new goal will satisfy.

 

[RDN1954]

Namely, once something has been 'mastered' there is little point in mastering it twice. Only a new goal will satisfy.

This is so totally true.

 

[Hubac’s Historian]

This morning, the idea occurred to me to do a reverse-image search for any number of images that I was hoping to find better resolution for.

I tried a few different image checkers, but the one that loaded results for the greatest number of search engines was DupliChecker:

https://www.duplichecker.com/reverse-image-search.php

In particular, the Yandex search engine seemed to pull the broadest range of related images. Now, while I didn’t hit upon my “Gilded Ghost” portrait nor my Battle of Barfleur VDV portrait, I did have one fascinating hit. Here is the original fuzzy image I found years ago on some corner of the internet:

And then, via Duplichecker/Yandex:

A fuzzy enlargement of the ship:

A sharper resolution enlargement:

, now that is really interesting! I still can’t tell whether this is the Royal Louis or Soleil Royal (both pierced for 16, initially, and poop guns are visible, here), but I can at least get a clearer sense for the ornamental tableaux and the structure of the quarter galleries. I can say this, though, the deadworks are not painted white, as was the case for the RL, according to Hyatt in 1677.

What is of particular interest to me are a series of figures that appear to be seated on the main deck-level, gallery and balcony rails. The foremost figure on the quarter gallery has no corollary on the Vienna portraits of the Monarque.


The aft seated figures, at the turn to the stern balcony, do not resemble the Neptune and Thetis figures that are associated with both the RL and the Monarque. In fact, the starboard figure appears to have an up-stretched arm that is reminiscent of the “seeking” posture of the Africa figure of Soleil Royal.

While that is nothing to draw any firm conclusions from, it must also be noted that the overall structure of the stern and arrangement of statuary has much in common with that of the RL, including what seems to be a swagged-garland ornament beneath the stern chase ports:




My hunch, more-so than before, is that these two portraits are directly related:


On a separate note, I churned a pair of low-res VDV drawings from 1672 through the DPI enhancement app. Although it is very hard to see much appreciable difference, the DPI supposedly increased from 92 to 5000.

Before:

After:

Before:


After:

The second, clearer VdV sketch is nearly identical in identifiable details to the much less clear portrait, above. Perhaps the second is simply a more finished portrait of the same subject.

‘Nothing earth-shattering, here; just playing with tools at my disposal.

Work on the model continues at a moderate pace. Progress update to follow in the not too distant future.

All the best,

Marc

 

[shota70]

well done This morning, the idea occurred to me to do a reverse-image search for any number of images that I was hoping to find better resolution for.

I tried a few different image checkers, but the one that loaded results for the greatest number of search engines was DupliChecker:

https://www.duplichecker.com/reverse-image-search.php

In particular, the Yandex search engine seemed to pull the broadest range of related images. Now, while I didn’t hit upon my “Gilded Ghost” portrait nor my Battle of Barfleur VDV portrait, I did have one fascinating hit. Here is the original fuzzy image I found years ago on some corner of the internet:
View attachment 322595
And then, via Duplichecker/Yandex:
View attachment 322592
A fuzzy enlargement of the ship:
View attachment 322596
A sharper resolution enlargement:
View attachment 322593
, now that is really interesting! I still can’t tell whether this is the Royal Louis or Soleil Royal (both pierced for 16, initially, and poop guns are visible, here), but I can at least get a clearer sense for the ornamental tableaux and the structure of the quarter galleries. I can say this, though, the deadworks are not painted white, as was the case for the RL, according to Hyatt in 1677.

What is of particular interest to me are a series of figures that appear to be seated on the main deck-level, gallery and balcony rails. The foremost figure on the quarter gallery has no corollary on the Vienna portraits of the Monarque.
View attachment 322606
View attachment 322605
The aft seated figures, at the turn to the stern balcony, do not resemble the Neptune and Thetis figures that are associated with both the RL and the Monarque. In fact, the starboard figure appears to have an up-stretched arm that is reminiscent of the “seeking” posture of the Africa figure of Soleil Royal.

While that is nothing to draw any firm conclusions from, it must also be noted that the overall structure of the stern and arrangement of statuary has much in common with that of the RL, including what seems to be a swagged-garland ornament beneath the stern chase ports:

View attachment 322601
View attachment 322602
View attachment 322603
My hunch, more-so than before, is that these two portraits are directly related:
View attachment 322593
View attachment 322604
On a separate note, I churned a pair of low-res VDV drawings from 1672 through the DPI enhancement app. Although it is very hard to see much appreciable difference, the DPI supposedly increased from 92 to 5000.

Before:
View attachment 322597
After:
View attachment 322599
Before:

View attachment 322598
After:
View attachment 322600
The second, clearer VdV sketch is nearly identical in identifiable details to the much less clear portrait, above. Perhaps the second is simply a more finished portrait of the same subject.

‘Nothing earth-shattering, here; just playing with tools at my disposal.

Work on the model continues at a moderate pace. Progress update to follow in the not too distant future.

All the best,

Marc

Dear Marc
you are doing outstanding research