Minor work-in-progress update image;
Sovereign of the Seas - Sergal 1:78 (with hopefully many added details)
Yes, I have a slot car collection in 1/32 scale. The detail is very impressive! So they are working models…lol. I have embellishments on most of them, as I like to add detail. They are categorized by type of race car. I have vintage F1, Trans Am, LeMans, CanAm, Endurance, etc.
Hi all,
Here are some updated images of work on the quarter deck bulkhead. A lot of “artistic” license here – Purists will be annoyed lol…
Historical images do indicate most likely four forward mounted cannons – yup, I get that. Note last 4 images FYI….
I chose to allow for two, per an early drawing intended to only illustrate proposed decorations – and those two cannons won’t be mounted either at the forecastle (when it’s time to add carriages properly rigged to all the upper decks.
The visual intentions are for the side carriages to be rotated between the two openings (forward and sides) that are very near to each other on each side (see instruction guide image??? – much too crowded) I did add the recoil ropes purposefully.
I could have, instead, just added two central cannon openings, then installed railings on each side of bulkhead, but I was determined to find a good location for the SotS crest that came from Amati bits, and I like how this sort of matches the look of the centrally mounted bell at the forecastle.
Now onto the next area – I very much appreciate your visits, likes, and such kind comments – thanks indeed.
Here are some updated images of work on the quarter deck bulkhead. A lot of “artistic” license here – Purists will be annoyed lol…
Historical images do indicate most likely four forward mounted cannons – yup, I get that. Note last 4 images FYI….
I chose to allow for two, per an early drawing intended to only illustrate proposed decorations – and those two cannons won’t be mounted either at the forecastle (when it’s time to add carriages properly rigged to all the upper decks.
The visual intentions are for the side carriages to be rotated between the two openings (forward and sides) that are very near to each other on each side (see instruction guide image??? – much too crowded) I did add the recoil ropes purposefully.
I could have, instead, just added two central cannon openings, then installed railings on each side of bulkhead, but I was determined to find a good location for the SotS crest that came from Amati bits, and I like how this sort of matches the look of the centrally mounted bell at the forecastle.
Now onto the next area – I very much appreciate your visits, likes, and such kind comments – thanks indeed.
Last edited:
If there were the six canon locations on the upper decks, it would seem to shower the midship area with canon residue when fired across and over the bulwarks.
It doesn't make sense?
It doesn't make sense?
Love it John. I'm particularly fond of the crest. But just so I can be annoying - how about the lion gets painted yellow/gold? I think that would make a favorably pairing with the painted horse???
If you were building the later version of the vessel, the Royal Sovereign, that wonderful coat of arms would be high on the stern. As for the guns facing the waist, those are there to prevent boarding. Not all the gun ports would necessarily have guns, since several would be empty most of the time to keep the weight down that high in the vessel. There are at most 102 (usually about 96) guns on the Sovereign at different times in her career, and 118 gun ports. These make perfect sense for this type of ship - the floating fortress. Guns that were present on the castles would be maneuvered to whichever port was necessary to aim down at the waist at boarding parties. Bear in mind, boarding a ship was more common a tactic at this time than pounding a vessel into surrendering. The ship is a floating castle in the 1630's, not so much a long range artillery platform, which would become the favored French tactic a hundred years later. I assume these guns would be loaded with grape shot, never ball during a boarding action. When aimed outboard, their contribution to the firepower of the broadside was limited due to their smaller weight and caliber. They worked more like house defense shotguns do. The visible deterrent is secondary. Later, when guns made of iron became longer in range and more powerful, anti-boarding cannon quickly disappeared, leaving only swivel guns to cover that roll. This ship is representative of the tactics of the time.
Last edited:
Kurt: your depth of knowledge and elocution are always so appreciated. Thanks, as always, for taking the time to respond with very sage knowledge… As you know the Sergal kit includes a large coat of arms for the stern. I intend to install and paint that as well.
After having found a painted example below (Google image no reference to this brilliant builder’s name) painting the coat of arms seems more historically accurate, I think?? Noted that the Heck painting has the entire stern in gold.
For this project the stern, galleries, balconies and such – will be from scratch; adding as much detail as I can think manage - the five lanterns will also be detail upgraded – including adding clear lenses.
I know that much of this upcoming work will be historically very inaccurate. Nonetheless – this ship, in general, is an “eye catcher” indeed – out of the box or otherwise bashed….
Paul: I was tempted to leave those old Corel Vasa lions bright plated - will revisit your suggestion. Interesting that you would make that notation – Are you suggesting that I leave the heads in gold and just add some paint to the outer edges of the mains? thanks..
Daniel: Indeed Kurt cleared that up lol..
Dean: thanks
Parenthetically I also realize that the forecastle belfry is questionable. That said not attaching the kit provided wood bits was, for me, a no brainer. I had some other ideas in mind from other builders (Janos & Doris Obručová’s brilliant work) and worked around their elocutions.
I have totally forsaken any obsessive notion of historical accuracy with this build given that empirical data are very sketchy. I will emulate from other builder’s work details in attempts to improve my skills..along with some reference books, and notations in other builder's logs
Oh Paul those Vasa treenails of yours still cause me some compulsion when I look at my pearwood hull and think of your amazing work --- hahaha…..
Images are generic just filling-in some spaces regarding the last posts…The full view is from Seppings
Cheers,
After having found a painted example below (Google image no reference to this brilliant builder’s name) painting the coat of arms seems more historically accurate, I think?? Noted that the Heck painting has the entire stern in gold.
For this project the stern, galleries, balconies and such – will be from scratch; adding as much detail as I can think manage - the five lanterns will also be detail upgraded – including adding clear lenses.
I know that much of this upcoming work will be historically very inaccurate. Nonetheless – this ship, in general, is an “eye catcher” indeed – out of the box or otherwise bashed….
Paul: I was tempted to leave those old Corel Vasa lions bright plated - will revisit your suggestion. Interesting that you would make that notation – Are you suggesting that I leave the heads in gold and just add some paint to the outer edges of the mains? thanks..
Daniel: Indeed Kurt cleared that up lol..
Dean: thanks
Parenthetically I also realize that the forecastle belfry is questionable. That said not attaching the kit provided wood bits was, for me, a no brainer. I had some other ideas in mind from other builders (Janos & Doris Obručová’s brilliant work) and worked around their elocutions.
I have totally forsaken any obsessive notion of historical accuracy with this build given that empirical data are very sketchy. I will emulate from other builder’s work details in attempts to improve my skills..along with some reference books, and notations in other builder's logs
Oh Paul those Vasa treenails of yours still cause me some compulsion when I look at my pearwood hull and think of your amazing work --- hahaha…..
Images are generic just filling-in some spaces regarding the last posts…The full view is from Seppings
Cheers,
Oldflyer, I have not found any illustration which shows any color on the stern of HMS Royal Sovereign other than gold. That it not to say that color was not used, only that the few paintings of the Sovereign made after the ship's rebuild of around 1680 show the ship in the distance, with less detail, and no hint of color other than gold. Note that the HMS Prince Royal of 1610 shown below , the precursor to the Sovereign, did use color for coats of arms. As for the Sovereign, King Charles I specifically ordered that no colors be used other than black and gold. Many have strayed from this fact and added color to their models of the Sovereign, such as the red stripe above the waterline, but the ship as originally built was purely black and gold. The red on the railings at the top of the bulwarks you see on later paintings was probably added after the first or second rebuild, when the ship was known as HMS Royal Sovereign. Perhaps they painted the coats of arms after the refit, but I have not seen any evidence of that yet, but then again there is a lot of info out there I have not seen.Kurt: your depth of knowledge and elocution are always so appreciated. Thanks, as always, for taking the time to respond with very sage knowledge… As you know the Sergal kit includes a large coat of arms for the stern. I intend to install and paint that as well.
After having found a painted example below (Google image no reference to this brilliant builder’s name) painting the coat of arms seems more historically accurate, I think?? Noted that the Heck painting has the entire stern in gold.
For this project the stern, galleries, balconies and such – will be from scratch; adding as much detail as I can think manage - the five lanterns will also be detail upgraded – including adding clear lenses.
I know that much of this upcoming work will be historically very inaccurate. Nonetheless – this ship, in general, is an “eye catcher” indeed – out of the box or otherwise bashed….
Paul: I was tempted to leave those old Corel Vasa lions bright plated - will revisit your suggestion. Interesting that you would make that notation – Are you suggesting that I leave the heads in gold and just add some paint to the outer edges of the mains? thanks..
Daniel: Indeed Kurt cleared that up lol..
Dean: thanks
Parenthetically I also realize that the forecastle belfry is questionable. That said not attaching the kit provided wood bits was, for me, a no brainer. I had some other ideas in mind from other builders (Janos & Doris Obručová’s brilliant work) and worked around their elocutions.
I have totally forsaken any obsessive notion of historical accuracy with this build given that empirical data are very sketchy. I will emulate from other builder’s work details in attempts to improve my skills..along with some reference books, and notations in other builder's logs
Oh Paul those Vasa treenails of yours still cause me some compulsion when I look at my pearwood hull and think of your amazing work --- hahaha…..
Images are generic just filling-in some spaces regarding the last posts…The full view is from Seppings
Cheers,
View attachment 274798View attachment 274799View attachment 274800View attachment 274801View attachment 274802View attachment 274803
"Council of War onboard the Royal Sovereign, before the Battle of Schooneveld" by Jacob Knijff 1673
Modern painting of the HMS Royal Sovereign by Bernard Finnigan Gribble 1872-1962
Last edited:
I was just taking a cue from the image you posted:
If you look closely the lion is darker than the filigree and leaves (which I interpret to be gilded). That must mean the lion has been painted like the horse??? It's a minor point so whatever you do will look great - but you do have a reputation for being a stickler for details
. Don't forget what I told you when I sorted out your nom de plume... "whenever I play ship model builder with my friends I always ask to be you..." 
Slight variations in color may appear on the paintings I mentioned above to be all gold. It seems logical that this is the sort of coloration you would see on a coat of arms.I was just taking a cue from the image you posted:
View attachment 274806
If you look closely the lion is darker than the filigree and leaves (which I interpret to be gilded). That must mean the lion has been painted like the horse??? It's a minor point so whatever you do will look great - but you do have a reputation for being a stickler for details
Thanks Kurt - stern issue TBD - As I've noted this project will totally fade by comparison to your current build's attention to historical accuracy. Your sage comments are always appreciated.....
Happy New Year everyone!! Glad to say that I will be home for for a couple of weeks - will spend quality time in shipyard as well as catching up with other logs (I've had a very busy Nov. and December).
Big thanks for all of your great support for this current project
Regards,
Happy New Year everyone!! Glad to say that I will be home for for a couple of weeks - will spend quality time in shipyard as well as catching up with other logs (I've had a very busy Nov. and December).
Big thanks for all of your great support for this current project
Regards,
Hi all,
With the best laid plans of mice and men -- have not done much with the SotS --hmmm -
though I did add to my signature my last completed build of the Santisima de Trinidad - first effort adding lanterns as well. If you are interested please check it out.
Need to catch up here today....
Oh Kurt - it does appear as if the stern was indeed later painted - the painting you referred to seems to slightly indicate some colors?? tinges of red on the right half? PS: Amazing painting - his work is awesome thanks for the discovery lol
Regards,
With the best laid plans of mice and men -- have not done much with the SotS --hmmm -
though I did add to my signature my last completed build of the Santisima de Trinidad - first effort adding lanterns as well. If you are interested please check it out.
Need to catch up here today....
Oh Kurt - it does appear as if the stern was indeed later painted - the painting you referred to seems to slightly indicate some colors?? tinges of red on the right half? PS: Amazing painting - his work is awesome thanks for the discovery lol
Regards,
It's hard to say. All the ships have a red tinge on that same side, which may be the result of a setting sun? I have not seen any other source showing the Sovereign all painted. Paint was also an added expense.
Hi all,
As always small bit-by-bit updates. Quarterdeck bulkhead and railings.
As always thanks for your posts, likes, and interest with this log.
Notations within images help to minimize text....
Cheers,
As always small bit-by-bit updates. Quarterdeck bulkhead and railings.
As always thanks for your posts, likes, and interest with this log.
Notations within images help to minimize text....
Cheers,
Last edited:
She's coming along quite spectacularly John!
I agree with Daniel - she's quite the show pony.
Compared to the Vasa less is known about the SoS - are you enjoying the 'freedom' of building a ship without absolutes - or is it more frustrating/difficult?
Compared to the Vasa less is known about the SoS - are you enjoying the 'freedom' of building a ship without absolutes - or is it more frustrating/difficult?
Beautiful John
Daniel20 As always thanks
Grant: Thanks, as well your visits are much appreciated.
Paul: Yes, Vasa requires strict attention to its example in Stockholm. That in-and-of-itself makes that ship a great example for adding much more accurate details for builders – several of whom are currently building superb examples here at SOS.
My Vasa was also an attempt to emulate the 1:1 as best as I could – using the least accurate kit available at the time – purchased with little knowledge of this hobby.Your comment regarding the SotS is interesting. Given that so little empirical data are available, as well as very few contemporary images allow model kit builders much wider “creative” parameters (Sergal being the only product available).
To your question I find that both a relief as well as allowing for some frustration. I enjoy being historically accurate as possible. My Vasa, and Santisima cross-section were attempts in that direction.
That said, I do enjoy the creative liberty of adding details that I find pleasing to my eye (however historically wrong) hopefully improving my building skills as “new” is thought about.
Of the scratch-built examples (SotS) some of which are beyond brilliant (Janos quickly comes to mind, along with a masterful builder on a German site) If it weren’t for this kit, would have never attempted this ship. Especially trying to carve some 450 decorative bits, then leafing them with gold foil Yikes (;-)).
Parenthetically - HMS Victory kits are, as the Vasa, much easier to delve in reproducing accuracy. There is a new Victory kit that has yet to hit the market – but from images that I have seen it will be THE most incredible example available for kit builders. This kit’s in box bits, lumber, fittings are “over-the-top superlative.
So onwards from here – couple of added images as well.
Regards,
Grant: Thanks, as well your visits are much appreciated.
Paul: Yes, Vasa requires strict attention to its example in Stockholm. That in-and-of-itself makes that ship a great example for adding much more accurate details for builders – several of whom are currently building superb examples here at SOS.
My Vasa was also an attempt to emulate the 1:1 as best as I could – using the least accurate kit available at the time – purchased with little knowledge of this hobby.Your comment regarding the SotS is interesting. Given that so little empirical data are available, as well as very few contemporary images allow model kit builders much wider “creative” parameters (Sergal being the only product available).
To your question I find that both a relief as well as allowing for some frustration. I enjoy being historically accurate as possible. My Vasa, and Santisima cross-section were attempts in that direction.
That said, I do enjoy the creative liberty of adding details that I find pleasing to my eye (however historically wrong) hopefully improving my building skills as “new” is thought about.
Of the scratch-built examples (SotS) some of which are beyond brilliant (Janos quickly comes to mind, along with a masterful builder on a German site) If it weren’t for this kit, would have never attempted this ship. Especially trying to carve some 450 decorative bits, then leafing them with gold foil Yikes (;-)).
Parenthetically - HMS Victory kits are, as the Vasa, much easier to delve in reproducing accuracy. There is a new Victory kit that has yet to hit the market – but from images that I have seen it will be THE most incredible example available for kit builders. This kit’s in box bits, lumber, fittings are “over-the-top superlative.
So onwards from here – couple of added images as well.
Regards,