Sovereign of the Seas - Sergal 1:78 (with hopefully many added details)

Vfordyce said:
Lots of detail on this one. Remind me, what scale?
Click to expand...
Sergal claims that its a 1/78th scale.
Images are a 1:1 comparison with my previous Coral 1/75th Vasa.

The vintage Sergal kit included larger 1:1 sheets so profile view good contrast size wise.
It's a very large model. Where it will live when completed has not been resolved. That said, I am very tempted to
make this one only a hull model....

Regards,


IMG_1359.jpegIMG_1361.jpeg
 
oldflyer said:
Sergal claims that its a 1/78th scale.
Images are a 1:1 comparison with my previous Coral 1/75th Vasa.

The vintage Sergal kit included larger 1:1 sheets so profile view good contrast size wise.
It's a very large model. Where it will live when completed has not been resolved. That said, I am very tempted to
make this one only a hull model....

Regards,


View attachment 440399View attachment 440400
Click to expand...
Very pretty. I actually enjoyed the rigging on my Soleil Royal at that scale. Looking forward to your progress.
 
Hi Mates,
Yet another very minor update, But for me arguably a big one. Finally starting to actually finish the last bits of work needed
with main deck carriages.
I do, very much, appreciate members, guests still interested in dropping by for a look :) thanks...

Last image - need to think about as well TBD - hmmm.

Cheers,

1.jpeg2.jpeg3.jpeg4.jpeg
 
Hello members, and guests,

Last update for this log – I’ve more or less completed the deck canon rigging work. So, some last images are being posted, and a few more as well.

I just discovered, scrolling to the bottom of my log page, that there are zero interested members following, nor interested in this particular log. So rather than take up digital space here at Ships of Scale, I will just put this log to sleep.

With very kind regards,


1.JPG2.jpeg3.jpeg3b.JPG4.jpeg5.jpeg6.JPG7.JPG8.JPG
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't concern myself with the thing at the bottom. That box is not what it used to be. You still have 59 'followers' who love your work and your report of it. The "Who read this thread" at the bottom of the screen is a sad distraction that represents some sort of rolling count. It is more a reflection of current activity (how frequently you post) than it is of actual interest in your work.

For example, my Vasa thread once had 150 followers but if you look at the box at the bottom today it says no one has 'read this thread.' That build report had over 330,000 views when it was active...
 
Last edited:
Hi John

Agree with Paul, looking at the title of your thread on this page, underneath it says you have 59 followers, myself included. For whatever reason recently other "stats" seem skewed and should be treated with a pinch of salt.

Very nice work as always, please keep posting.

I know I haven't been round much of late as my mojo is battered due to my recent employment upheaval. Currently focusing on bigger things and modelling is somewhat at the back of my mind for now.

Kind Regards

Nigel
 
Paul,

Thanks so much for your very reassuring post. I will no longer feel like The Lone Ranger here at Ships of Scale. Relief indeed from your very succinct and informative explanation. Your Vasa log was so deservedly a top of the pyramid log - now I understand.

PS: your current log is not doing too badly either - your skill set is way up there..

Noted, that my log is such a part-time effort, hence your well detailed explanation of the ghosts at the bottom current last pages.
I also found it odd knowing that some members and guests do stop by after my - not so often posts.

Nigel,

Thanks as well for your very kind confirmation. Assumptions are sometimes just that “assumptions”, pinch of salt and all.
I hope that all turns out ok with your employment situation - so modeling does lose over other priorities…..Your build skills are also superlative…

Again, I thank both of you for helping me resolve what I thought was an incorrect and false assumption.
Either way I had intended to continue following logs that I so much admire – including both of yours of course…

OH – thanks so much to members, who follow or just drop by this log for a look – so appreciated!!


Cheers,
 
Hi John,

I certainly agree with Nigel and Paul.
How the stats are calculated I don t know. But certainly 59 members are looking into your blog. Keep in mind the majority of visitors to your blog are non members and these are certainly not registered.
This being a very popular kit around the world I am certain that you inspire a lot of people around the globe with your work and hope you continue doing that.
I certainly enjoy your blog.
 
oldflyer said:
Hello members, and guests,

Last update for this log – I’ve more or less completed the deck canon rigging work. So, some last images are being posted, and a few more as well.

I just discovered, scrolling to the bottom of my log page, that there are zero interested members following, nor interested in this particular log. So rather than take up digital space here at Ships of Scale, I will just put this log to sleep.

With very kind regards,


View attachment 447321View attachment 447322View attachment 447323View attachment 447324View attachment 447325View attachment 447326View attachment 447327View attachment 447328View attachment 447329
Click to expand...
Good morning John. The continuation of this log is mandatory. ;)...please. I always enjoy following your work which is an inspiration for me. I also think activity on any forum such as this has its ebbs and flows. Paul explained it perfectly....as he does. Cheers Grant
 
This counting of "Who read this thread" is counting only over a short and last period - like Paul mentioned correctly
correct are the "views" you have - here you can see really how many members opened your log

f.e. my "Today in Naval history" has actual only 28 "Who read this thread" readers, but much more views
 
Hi all,

Again, thanks for all of your kind supportive posts.

Maarten, Grant you are both overly gracious- thanks as well..

Uwe – I should have just gone to you in the first place with just a simple question. And interesting point that you made.…

In retrospect my concerned post was certainly too self-centered of me, and it was an “over the top” reaction.
Apologies for taking all of your time with this..Yikes…

Well, now just water under this blog’s bridge. I further promise to only post SotS updates.

Regards,
 
oldflyer said:
Hello members, and guests,

Last update for this log – I’ve more or less completed the deck canon rigging work. So, some last images are being posted, and a few more as well.

I just discovered, scrolling to the bottom of my log page, that there are zero interested members following, nor interested in this particular log. So rather than take up digital space here at Ships of Scale, I will just put this log to sleep.

With very kind regards,


View attachment 447321View attachment 447322View attachment 447323View attachment 447324View attachment 447325View attachment 447326View attachment 447327View attachment 447328View attachment 447329
Click to expand...
I think that your work is exquisite! Yes, I am definitely following along!

Bill
 
Bill,

Welcome aboard - thanks for your very very nice comment

Experimenting with this idea – after looking at Victory – I became interested in thinking of possibly adding those gun cap details to the upper and lower-gun deck cannon barrels.

Arguably not historically period accurate, but then nothing about this build (or kit) is very correct. It is however a stunning ship - Glad that Sergal has this product. I do like the idea of these caps – possibly for just some of the guns -- TBD.


hms-victory-first-rate-ship-of-the-line-guns-cannons-AH7DD7.jpg1.jpeg2.jpeg3.jpeg4.jpeg5.jpeg


Also, a work in progress, are the two boarding platforms. steps are also on the list of "to do"

7.jpeg8.jpeg9.jpeg

Cheers
 
oldflyer said:
Bill,

Welcome aboard - thanks for your very very nice comment

Experimenting with this idea – after looking at Victory – I became interested in thinking of possibly adding those gun cap details to the upper and lower-gun deck cannon barrels.

Arguably not historically period accurate, but then nothing about this build (or kit) is very correct. It is however a stunning ship - Glad that Sergal has this product. I do like the idea of these caps – possibly for just some of the guns -- TBD.


View attachment 447698View attachment 447699View attachment 447703View attachment 447704View attachment 447705View attachment 447706


Also, a work in progress, are the two boarding platforms. steps are also on the list of "to do"

View attachment 447707View attachment 447708View attachment 447709

Cheers
Click to expand...
Good morning John. The gun caps are a worthwhile addition to all that detail. You are correct - certainly not historically accurate, however I see very few ship models which are ever exact replicas. With so much brass “bling “ on this ship the cannon seams will get lost in translation Thumbsup. Beautiful work. Cheers Grant
 
Hello,

Grant, thanks for the always encouraging posts :) She's getting there.....but it's been way too long already yikes :rolleyes:

I promise that this will be the last update in this area of the build. I've already posted too many images about these cannons and carriage.

But lastly, needed to revisit my first attempt at making Quions - did a bit of adjusting to the first generation. Now look better scale wise.
I will add the second set of rear tackle rings a bit later on – Just want to move away from this area of the build.

Thanks for your visits and kind comments.

1.jpeg2.jpegIMG_0009.JPG
 
AllenKP69 – Thanks for your very informative link. I’ve saved the doc., and also added it to my cannons folder. Those sidebar links are also very informative.
Sergal’s SotS’ guns are certainly incorrect. Even more so are the smaller guns that occupy its forecastle and quarter deck.

This issue has been brought up earlier in the log by Kurt (@DARIVIS ARCHITECTVS), and others as well. Also, of note – as we all know – kit manufacturers include mostly all the same generic parts bin cannons into their products.

That said, after-market offerings are a good source for period and country correct examples. Of course, at a significantly added cost, and possibly impossible to source in the correct scales.

Kurt – To your point yes, the SotS is a truly beautiful model – hence its great popularity within this hobby. But if it weren’t for its 650+ bright metal bits, this kit would not be as interesting IMO. The catalysts are its 650+ decorative bits.

To this particular product’s detriment Sergal/Mantua have replaced all of the original solid bronze bits and 100+ cannons from its vintage kit with cheaper and much less detailed white metal then plated parts in today’s product.

– I have ranted about this earlier in this log – along with images that compare the vintage metal bits with its current product (parenthetically) with no drop in average retail pricing with a few retailers even asking $1,300.00 USD .

Of note Nigel @NMBROOK was the one who informed me of this issue after I had decided to buy this kit – I was luckily able to source a vintage kit from the secondary market. That one had all original issue solid bronze decorations. In deference to the current product there are many other added features that are very good improvements.

FYI - Couple of comparative images below - but in the aggregate this kit does make for a beautiful model even if built right-out-of-the-box..


Regards,


IMG_1845 copy.jpgIMG_1847 copy.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top