Heller Soleil Royal (WIP)

In the spirit of a lively discussion, statements like that puzzle me, Rob. I could never consider this a museum quality model because I really can't imagine the museum it would fit into.

The museum of overpriced pipe dreams?

No matter how capable the builder, this is still a very bad ship model in the box. I think there's a very good chance that David could have built a good wooden ship model from Bluejacket or Model Shipways with less effort, better accuracy and a more pleasing product than to have tasked himself with mud wrestling this thing.

Dave, I would love to see you take on the MS Sultana or Rattlesnake, or the Fair American.

It's beginning to seem like a bit of the old "there must be a pony in here somewhere".

Apart from all the opinons and evaluations...it remains true that no one has personally seen the ship..felts its timbers....drooled over its ornatness first hand.  thus...making us all true *guessers*of its fine detail.  One fine reason I have refrained in recent years from taking up the mantle of building such a vessel.  IMV any representation leans heavy on personal interpretation and not so much on historical representation.  ANOTHER fine reason I keep my standards low and generally only build American clippers(with an occasional British one thrown in, for good measure).  And too do so, generally means I have to build them from scratch...since there are no large scale (1/96) versions produced.

Dave has(In his own masterful way) elevated and encouraged out a museum quality model from what could have been(In lesser hands) an average model with little to no value to the acute discriminating moderer.

Rob(friend and admirer from afar)

David,

Thank you.  I believe that my list of revisions is towards the end of the thread.

Bill Morrison

Thanks for your input, John.  I think nobody would argue that the SR kit is overly expensive for what it delivers.  I was lucky enough to get mine for cheap, so I don't mind chucking all those blocks and deadeyes! :)

Warshipguy, let me apologize if my previous comments rubbed you the wrong way.  I didn't mean to say that the Ult Bldg guide thread had "only rants against the SR kit"....I was speaking in generalities, and how I perceived the basic tone of that thread.  My point wasn't that the thread was all anti-SR, but mnore that it was primarily a vehicle for discussing the errors of authenicity of the kit, and the rights-and-wrongs of it, and how to fix it.  That's not ALL it was, but that still seems to be the general tone. I just went through an re-read the first few pages of it, and a few random pages toward the end of it.  Even the first paragraph sets the question of whether or not it can be made into a "reasonable representation of a model ship".

All I was saying is that my hope when I encountered that thread was that it would be a reference for general *building* and construction hints, but it was not.  It was more about mods and error corrections.

I hope to avoid turning this WIP into a back and forth, spirited debate, but I did want to clarify my point for you. 

Dave

I object to the suggestion that the "Ultimate Building Guide" contained only rants against the SR kit.  In fact, I defended the kit and compiled a list of specific ways to improve upon the detail.  I also concluded that, looking at the paintings by Berain and others, that the model depicts the second ship of that name.  In fact, I cited sources showing that the lower hull might be consistent with building techniques at the time, showing the shallow underwater lines of contemporary Dutch-built ships; the French were very influenced by Dutch designs.

So, I recommend checking out The Ultimate Building Guide again; what you see is not ranting by a few but rather a spirited debate on the strengths and weaknesses of the SR kit, and how to improve upon the weaknesses.

Bill Morrison

I have no intention of beating a dead horse again; I said my piece in the "Ultimate Guide" thread. But as the most loud-mouthed member of the "Anti-SR" faction, I feel like I should say something here.

First, I agree with everything that's been said recently in this thread. Modeling needs to be an inclusive hobby. It offers all sorts of options, and the modeler certainly has the right to pick his/her favorite. I love ships. I spend a lot of time reading about them, making drawings of them, visiting them....I'm fascinated by how they're built, how they work, how they were designed, and what they've done. My interest in them goes back almost sixty years. I think a classic sailing ship is one of the most sublime combinations of technology and aesthetics that the human race has ever produced. And when I build a model of one of them, I want that model to reproduce the beauty of the original accurately. Lots of modelers take the same approach I do. (Everybody who follows the "Ships" section of this Forum should take a look at a copy of the Nautical Research Journal. Some of its article contributors are far more fanatical about accuracy than I am.)

But there are other ways to approach it - not only in ship modeling, but in just about every phase of modeling. I've drawn a parallel between the Heller SR kit and Lionel electric trains. Lionel has given pleasure to thousands - maybe millions - of people over the decades. I think any adult realizes that Lionel track, locomotives, and rolling stock don't really look much like the real things, but to those folks that doesn't matter much. On the other hand, there are thousands of HO model railroaders who are at least as obsessed with historical accuracy as I am.

I have no criticism of anybody who tackles the SR kit. I do object to the fact that Heller promoted it as a scale model, which, by my definition (and those of plenty of other ship modelers) it isn't. And I'm seriously bothered by the fact that such an expensive kit contains so many parts that almost demand to be thrown in the trash. (The kit supposedly has about 2300 parts. Hundreds of them are unusable "blocks" and "deadeyes" that demand to be replaced. I don't think a consumer who pays $200 for a plastic kit ought to have to spend several hundred more bucks on aftermarket parts to replace inadequate kit pieces.

I also regret deeply that Heller got out of the sailing ship market when it did. The company made a quantum leap forward from the Soleil Royal when it released its 1/100 Victory. If Heller had continued to improve, and had issued three or four more big 1/100 sailing ships, I suspect nobody would buy the SR.

That said, I think Dave's model is beautiful - far better in every way than the one I built all those years ago. I think the work he did to correct the really gross errors in the stern is first-rate. And his skills at painting and weathering deserve the envy of every ship modeler.

To each his/her own. Just don't conclude, please, that those who take different approaches to their hobbies are necessarily wrong, or are just curmudgeonly freaks.

What's not to like, it's stunning, truly.

I really love your build's dave .,I have done the ship before , and have never been really happy with my build . I will do it again , but I will wait to you have finished your's so I can really study ,where I can do a lot better effort , funny though it's my wife's favourite ship of mine , go figure !!

Gorgeous work, David.

Artisan?  I like the sound of that! :)

Thank you guys for the compliments!

I agree with what you said about Heller's kits. I've only built this one, but many consider their Victory to be one of the finest model ships ever designed, so they definitely have what it takes to make great kits.  I really wish they would design some more large-scale model ships.  Using modern technology, Heller could blow us away with something super-duper!  It's unlikely, though....the market is so small for sailing ship kits, it's a big investment and a low-return risk...bean-counters will probably not go for it.  :(

Anyways, I was going over some past posts on this thread, and realized I forgot to include some pics I took while working on the galleries...so let's take a step back in time, and I'll add a couple here:

First, I traced the outline of a gallery onto some Evergreen (.020" I think) flat sheet

Cut it out to match the profile

Then I attached some sheet at a right angle to act as the gallery floor, and cut out some notches around the gunport and also some small divots that were in the way of the wale/gallery mating surface so I could achieve a close fit to the hull

After some test fitting and fine tuning of the shape, I also made some small rectangular strips to fill in the corners between the gallery and the stern (did this for both sides)

Final test fit, and it looked pretty good.

I then glued on the previously-removed panels from the galleries to the new false-wall of the hull, painted everything, and voila!  Here's another picture (that I've already posted here once) that shows the gallery in place....you can see that the foremost panels from the gallery windows are not installed on the hull behind it....the reason for this is that they were from a curved surface (those fore windows were curved), and after I flattened them down, they didn't look right.  The outline of them was not even close to being square/rectangular, and they looked out of place.  So I left them off.  Now, however, I feel like that fore section would look better if I'd put something (anything) there, because it looks pretty empty behind the first windows...oh, well...not the end of the world.

Thanks for looking, I hope this adds something useful to the thread.

" alt="" />" alt="" />

David_K

Well, I'm going to try my best to not get defensive of the Heller SR kit, but "laughable"?

That's one of the things that perturbs me about a certain mindset of certain modelers.

I, too, read the so-called Ultimate Build Guide thread on here, hoping to learn a lot about construction techniques, pitfalls in sequencing, and general tips.  Instead, I found that thread a descent into bashing the shortcomings of the kit, with so many people showing off their knowledge of *real ships* by highlighting the errors made by Heller in the design of the kit.

Following that build guide (please, there's no offense intended to the creator or participants of that thread) will only lead readers into a pretty much neverending labyrinth of scratchbuilding, modification, and headache.  I turned away from it and never looked back.

Instead, I follow a different set of tenets for modelbuilding:

My reasons for building models (of whatever subject) are so that I can have a fun challenge, something to keep my mind and hands busy during free time, and so that I can produce something that is visually pleasing (to me) when it's finished.  I like to learn and improve my skills during the journey, and hopefully feel pretty proud of the final outcome.

I won't go into the list of things people would like to change about the SR kit, but I've changed the things that matter to me (it's a short list) and I have zero problem with the way my "model" ship is turning out.

Please, I beg you, don't be discouraged by the naysaying.  kpnuts, maybe you're not ready to build the SR yet, and maybe you will never want to build it (I waited until I had several model ships under my belt to attempt it)....but if you ever do want to tackle it, I would implore you to ignore anyone but yourself when making a decision.

On the other hand, if authenticity and accurate detail are of paramount importance to you, then you have the information you need.

Sorry for the rant.  I do tend to be defensive.  I've been fortunate enough that those-who-find-the-kit-lacking have been supportive of my endeavor without bringing up that negativity so far...and I appreciate it.

It takes all kinds to make a world.

Dave

 

 

 

Well said David,

First, I want to say, some of us are model builders, and then there are artisans, you are the latter.  Very beautiful piece of work. I really like your style.   In regards to your post, the Heller kits can turn out to be wonderful works of art and for me, have been and enjoyment because they have such deep detial that allows for depth and expression when it comes to painting. 

Folks are entitled to their opinions. I'd only get upset if someone challenged mine in a rude way, but it's entirely fair to disagree.

Where I would criticize that kit, and I've certainly never built it, would be if someone were to buy it, become frustrated and throw it at the wall, and never try another ship. That seems irresponsible for Heller. The ideal approach is as you've done, to maintain a loose attitude and work your way through some better and more manageable kits first.

Also Dave, you are naturally gifted at this, able to overcome some pretty poor kits.

I too looked at that so called guide and soon realised there was no help there at all it just turned into a slag off of what in my humble opinion is a stunningly beautiful ship, I have been doing a bit of digging tonight too and it is apparently not beyond the bounds od possibilty that the heller hull is not far out as there were other ships of a similar size with similar proportions. 

I always remember I used to live near cystal palace in london and (dont know if its still ther but there used to be an island in the middle of the lake with lifesize models of som dinosaurs on it built as the so called experts said they would have been, one of thos dino's(cant remember the name, I think it was an Iguanodon) was depicted with sharp horns sticking up from its paws\claws whatever you want to call them, in 1970 they discovered a whole skeleton and those horns wer on its nose. so what do experts know really. maybe just maybe, watch out in the future maybe there will be another build log and maybe I will be pestering you for info. 

Well, I'm going to try my best to not get defensive of the Heller SR kit, but "laughable"?

That's one of the things that perturbs me about a certain mindset of certain modelers.

I, too, read the so-called Ultimate Build Guide thread on here, hoping to learn a lot about construction techniques, pitfalls in sequencing, and general tips.  Instead, I found that thread a descent into bashing the shortcomings of the kit, with so many people showing off their knowledge of *real ships* by highlighting the errors made by Heller in the design of the kit.

Following that build guide (please, there's no offense intended to the creator or participants of that thread) will only lead readers into a pretty much neverending labyrinth of scratchbuilding, modification, and headache.  I turned away from it and never looked back.

Instead, I follow a different set of tenets for modelbuilding:

My reasons for building models (of whatever subject) are so that I can have a fun challenge, something to keep my mind and hands busy during free time, and so that I can produce something that is visually pleasing (to me) when it's finished.  I like to learn and improve my skills during the journey, and hopefully feel pretty proud of the final outcome.

I won't go into the list of things people would like to change about the SR kit, but I've changed the things that matter to me (it's a short list) and I have zero problem with the way my "model" ship is turning out.

Please, I beg you, don't be discouraged by the naysaying.  kpnuts, maybe you're not ready to build the SR yet, and maybe you will never want to build it (I waited until I had several model ships under my belt to attempt it)....but if you ever do want to tackle it, I would implore you to ignore anyone but yourself when making a decision.

On the other hand, if authenticity and accurate detail are of paramount importance to you, then you have the information you need.

Sorry for the rant.  I do tend to be defensive.  I've been fortunate enough that those-who-find-the-kit-lacking have been supportive of my endeavor without bringing up that negativity so far...and I appreciate it.

It takes all kinds to make a world.

Dave

Well I just checked out the ultimate build guide on here and I have to say decision made if I had built it, it would be mostly ootb as my scratch building and knowledge of ships is very limited, but why would I spend 2 yrs building a model that is considered "laughable " as a representation of a scale model. 

Much as I love this ship (or at least Hellers depiction of it) I don't have the skills to build it ootb let alone correct the errors, as for the rigging i have no chance of attempting that,look at the mess I made of the La Reale or the SOTS. I take my hat off to you 

Hi kpnuts-

Thanks for kind words!

I've seen your builds on here, and I was particularly impressed with what you did with your La Reale de France...

Honestly, the Soleil Royal isn't a super-difficult kit to build...it is definitely a commitment, and one that requires the builder to look ahead and not be too anxious to reach completion.  I think some people consider it to be a 10-year project, and some people could finish it in 6 months....all depends on the level of additional work somebody might wish to put in (extra parts, scratchbuilding, error corrections), as well as available time to spend with hobbying.  For me, I'm addressing *some* kit errors, adding *some* extra stuff, and I allow myself a decent amount of time each week for hobbying (except during Summer, when there's too many other things to do!)...I generally give myself a couple hours a day, a couple times a week for shipbuilding, and I expect to have this kit finished within a two-year total construction time (one year for hull construction [almost done with that, on schedule] and one year for masting and rigging)...

Anyway, it does have its problems...mostly part fit and messy instructions, but it's a very fun project.  Even OOB it's a good kit.  You could build it.  Tell you what:  It would be a great test of your gold leafing skills!  So much gold on this kit...

Dave

Sir I have just read this wip from start to here, what a build, I was eyeing this but I know for a fact I don't have the skills to build it ( I would have to build oob and then would struggle ) at least you have shown me that, an incredible build so far.

Thanks, John.

Yes, I have Anderson's book...at first, I thought it was lacking in clear, definite terms of rigging instruction.  I guess I was expecting it to be more like Petersson's book, full of detailed diagrams.  BUT,pretty soon I realized that it really is a concise and thorough reference for the subject matter.  Pictures are small, but they really aren't even necessary, except for showing any unusual or elaborate runs (like some of the insane crowsfeet, or the complex tackles)....basically the book is broken down into chapters by rigging section, and it's pretty easy to leaf through it to find whatever specific line I'm looking for, and voila!  I can instantly know where the line starts, where it goes, and where it ends. 

Anytime the SR instructions call for a block or a rigging line (I haven't actually run any lines yet, save for the Gammoning on the bow, but I have been attaching blocks to parts for later), I can reference the location in Anderson's book, and easily find out if it's a legitimate part of the rigging, and proceed accordingly.  So far, some of the rigging that I've cross-referenced is correct, while some is at least partially wrong.

The Rigging of Ships in the Days of the Spritsail Topmast, R.C. Anderson.

Anyone building the SR will need this book.

I'm excited to be falling back into a modeling *groove*...didn't get much done on it this summer (though I guess getting the quarter galleries and stern finished is pretty good progress)...but I expect the coming months to be productive and exciting.

One thing in the current progress queue....the main lantern.  If anyone here has built this kit and remembers what the deal is with the lantern assembly, I would appreciate some context.  It looks like "flowery" part of the lantern base is supposed be pushed up and "folded" around the "glass"?  I'm not sure if I'm reading the plans wrong....anybody remember how they assembled the lanterns?  Never mind the fact that the clear plastic is supposed to be painted with super-tiny lines of gold around each pane...that's gonna be fun!
Thanks again!  It's good to back among the active members of the forum!

Dave

Actually, if a full-size version of the Heller kit actually had existed, I think it might well have capsized. Comparing the photos of Dave's superb work on the stern with the contemporary stern views (which have been posted several times in the Forum), it's pretty obvious that the stern - like the rest of the hull - is too tall for its breadth. Combine that with the fact that Heller made the topmasts too tall, and we have a recipe for another Wasa disaster.

Dave, your plan for the rigging makes sense. If you go that route, you'll have plenty of rigging to look impressive, without driving yourself crazy. (I rigged mine with furled sails and all the rigging I could, but it didn't drive me crazy. That happened several years earlier.) You've got a copy of Dr. Anderson's The Rigging of Ships in the Days of the Spritsail Topmast - right? Use the book as your instruction manual for rigging, and throw out the Heller rigging diagrams. And remember to mount the yards in their lowered positions.

So far it looks utterly exquisite. On the basis of your earlier models, I think it's only going to get better. Good luck.

Thanks, guys!  I think the stern is pretty much done, except for the lanterns, which I'll leave off until masts and rigging are closer to being done....lanterns are magnets for snap-offery.

Next steps include some more bow work (more of the goldwork!), and then I believe it's about time to start installing chainplates, then masts and rigging will follow.  I started this kit January first of this year, and I figure I'll have the main hull assembly done within a couple months.  Since I'm planning on installing *simplified rigging* (standing rigging + lifts, braces, halyards, and clewlines) it shouldn't be more than a year before she's done. 

But only time will tell!

Thanks again for tuning in...I'll post another update once I get the bow assembly finished.

Dave

Fantastic work.  It is amazing to think those vessels didn't just capsize as soon as they hit the water.

Great job.....bro.

Rob

That is some stunning artwork my Friend.....Cheers mark

beautiful as ever dave., really loving this build.,alway's said I would do this ship again , now I have something to aspire too

Dave,

Pretty dang gorgeous! I am sure glad that SuperGlue came to the rescue....

Steve

David,

That's amazing paint work! It looks absolutely grand!

Mike

Phew!  I was a little worried that the pics might not come through, since I haven't done anything since the new site update...glad to find that things are pretty much the same in that area. :)

Hey All-

As the Summer has suddenly become Autumn, I find myself spending a few more hours here and there attending to my model of the Soleil Royal.

Today I got a lot of the stern work finished, so I figure this is a good time to share a few pics.

I have to say, there was much trouble with part-fit.  Lots of little pieces just plain don't fit the way they should (and the way pretty much EVERY Imai kit does)...

Anyway, my good friends Super Glue and Rubber Band have been a big hlep so far, and I'm sure I can count on them for more supprot in the future!  lol

Please have a look at the following:

" alt="" />

Gentlemen,

I'll begin with the Aurora kit.  As you would expect of most sailing ship kits in the early days of manufacturing plastic models, the sails are the heavy, solid plastic sails and are molded directly onto the yards. All sails and yards for each mast come as a single piece.  There are no planking detail on the hull. All decks are of a single piece.  The shrouds and ratlines are all the heavy, solid plastic typically found throughout that era.  The cannons are simple dummy barrels, and  the gun port lids are molded directly onto the hull.  The gold decorations are well molded onto the hull, and the lines look reasonably accurate.

The Pyro/Lindbergh kit is larger than the Aurora kit but smaller than that of Airfix.  It does have hull planking detail, unlike the Airfix or Aurora kits.  All gun ports are opened but the cannons are simple dummy barrels molded directly onto strips of plastic, all cannons for each level of gun deck are molded on a single port and starboard strip with the barrels placed to project from the open ports.  It would be relatively simple to scratch build decks and find replacement cannons from the spare parts box or from other kits of similar scale.  All deck levels are separate pieces. However, Pyro/Lindbergh provides the same solid sails/yardarm configuration of the Aurora kit.

I believe that the Pyro/Lindbergh kit is better in some ways than the Airfix kit.  The hull is beautiful with its wood planking the detail of the gold work, multi-piece decks, and the open gun ports. It is inferior to the Airfix kit in the sails, separate yards, the sails, and overall size.  Therefore, it is a toss up.

All three look like their hull lines are accurate.

Bill

I learned sometime last year about the fire from Ages of Sail.  I noted that, when I was exploring their website, there was no heading for Mamoli. I called and asked about the reason since I was so surprised.  Anyway, I am glad that they won't be polluting the ship model industry, at least for awhile.  John, I will get back to you soon about the Pyro/Lindbergh and the Aurora kits. I have them all.

Bill