HMS Victory and Le Redoutable at Trafalgar (1/300)

[JIM BAUMANN]

Ahoi Marijn ( and by default Dafi ! )

I have had an e-mail from a model chum of mine who is a long-term ( wood) builder of Victory models and is not that ' internetty-
hence I am merely the messenger BTW He has been admiring your progress and raised a query ( he had raised it before--but yesterday after I sent him images of your Battle damage --which is very impressive-- and he was impressed.- he e-mailed me again! )

He is is concerned about your/ the raised bulwarks on the foredeck....
interesting thoughts--and as he says-room for debate.


anyhow-- I post below his e-mail
====================================================================================

FANTASTIC modelling from your chum.
Makes me want to go and burn my Victory......
will send pics soon but only if you promise not to laugh and stand back and squint.

Still not sure about the raised bulwarks at the bow on the Victory that both expert modellers have done.
My reasoning is as follows:

When the Redoutable locked with her at Trafalgar Captain Lucas sought to board her.
Victory turned one of her Carronades and cleared Redoutables deck with one blast.
How could Victory have done that with such a bulwark structure restricting the arc of fire ?

In further support of my Bulwark theory...
-the Historians at the Royal Navy Dockyard have been making every effort to return the 1:1 Victory to her appearance as at Trafalgar and the Bulwarks are not featured.

I�ve read that when Temeraire came to Victory�s rescue and placed herself on the Port side of Redoutable she halved the amount of gunpowder in her charge so as the shot wouldn�t go straight through and hit Victory!

But of course one of the functions of modelling is to create debate leading to a better understanding of History.

Best wishes

Simon

[dafi]

Hello Simon and Jim,

thank you for the input, very appreciated. At my humble opinion the Victory had those raised bulwarks at Trafalgar.

Main reason is, that they are shown quite clearly at the Turner drawings that were done in December 1805 after Victory�s return. Also the time of the great repair was the time, that most new builds got this feature too.

I have a quite interesting discussion with Gary Morgan from MSW, who like me thinks, that many features shown today at P. are not the way they were in 1803-1805, still going beyond what Marijn already incorporated.

Gary brought it to a good term, the ship on display is basically a hybrid in-between the original planes and the great repair of 1803. Reason is that many sources in 1920 - when the ship was restored to "Trafalgar-condition" - were not available then and also some features were simplified by budget restrictions. Apparently the raised bulwark was also to be in discussion in those days, but for budget reasons the already restored timberheads were left the way they were ...

Also I think that I recall that the forecastle and other visible decks were quite cleared of Victory�s crew by the french sharp shooters and the marines had to wait underneath the poop deck for the French to come. And also I recall that it was the carronades from the HMS Temeraire that did the onslaught among Redoutables crew, thus saving Victory in Captain Lucas eyes.

All the best, DAniel

[Martocticvs]

It seems unlikely that Victory, being firmly alongisde Redoutable, could have cleared anything more than a small portion of her decks of men with a single carronade discharge, bulwark or no bulwark. The extreme proximity means that the arc of the grapeshot discharge would cover only a small area, and being alongside, it would not have been possible to turn the carronade to the extreme angle required to produce something like raking fire in any situation.

If her decks were effectively cleared with one blast, it must have come from a raking position, and so Temeraire is the most likely source, as she was manoeuvring round to Redoutable's unengaged side.

[marijn van gils]

Thanks Dan!

Jim, please thank your model chum for his interest and for his input! Always very interesting to discuss the history behind a project!

But in this case, I think Dafi and Martocticvs are correct:
- Both the accounts of Lucas and of the T�m�raire state that it was T�m�raire's fire that swept the decks of the Redoutable. Victory's weather decks were virtually empty at that moment.
- Victory's restauration is probably made with the best efforts and a lot of research, but it is a work in progress and depends on funding. There are several examples of clear mistakes that will need to be corrected in the future (for a true Trafalgar appearance at least) and many that are unclear because of insufficient data. Dafi goes much further than me in incorporating the latest ideas of how she might have looked like (because the goals of our model projects are of course different, and because I'm lazier dan him ), but I do agree that the Turner sketches are pretty clear about the forecastle bulwarks.

Furthermore, even without bulwarks the forecastle timberheads restrict the fire of the carronade in a similar way, especially when the gun is depressed which it needed to be in order to reach the crew on Redoutable which was one deck lower. I don't think the bulwarks make much difference to the carronade's arc of fire.

The clearing with one blast may be a hyperbole, or it may refer to one salvo of multiple guns. I doubt it could refer to the blast of one single gun, even if it was a big one...

But please keep the input coming! The next observation may be something I would be really happy to correct before the diorama is finished...

[dafi]

Here still is the excerpt from Goodwin�s "Ships of Trafalgar" that correlates with the other sources that I know.

XXXDAn

[marijn van gils]

Thanks dafi!

And from captain Lucas' report:
At the same time Midshipman Yon and four seamen sprang on board the Victory by means of her anchor, and we then knew that there was nobody left in the batteries. At that moment, when my brave fellows were hastening to follow, the three-decker Temeraire, which had seen that the Victory fought no longer and must without fail be taken (allait infailliblement entre pris), came down, full sail, on our starboard side. We were immediately under the full fire of her artillery, discharged almost with muzzles touching. It is impossible to describe the carnage produced by the murderous broadside of this ship. More than two hundred of our brave men were killed or wounded by it. I was wounded also at the same time, but not so seriously as to make me abandon my post.


Warning: artistic licence coming!
I will anyway stray from the strictest historical accuracy and the letter of these reports: I will combine two moments in time, in order to show different aspects of the battle, and hopefully to result in the most dramatic image possible:
1.) The moment just after Nelson is hit, showing him on the quarterdack with some men trying to support him. There is still plenty of Victory's crew on the weather decks, resisting the musketry from Redoutable's tops and decks, and any boarding attempt. Redoutable's crew is shooting from her tops, shrouds and decks and throwing grenades.
2.) The moment just before T�m�raire joins the fight, when 5 of Redoutable's men are climbing over an anchor to Victory and more men are lining up to do the same.

To connect these moments, I will show some resistance from Victory's crew to the boarders. This is not historically accurate, but I believe it will be important to make it instantly clear to the less knowledgeable viewer that there is actually hostile boarding being attempted. This will also form a visual focal point connecting both ships.

Even more, I will show still a couple of other moments in time in the same diorama:
3.) In the sea in the foreground: wreckage of other ships floating by and men saved by boats. This would likely only happen a little after above events. I may even show the naked Jeanette being rescued which happend only hours later ( http://bidefordbuzz.org.uk/history/trafalgar-women/ )
4.) Men of Victory cutting rigging of her fallen mizzen mast on the poop deck. I'm not sure about this, but this may have happened as soon as the mast fell, before reaching the enemy line.

So these are not exactly correct either, but I feel it would be quite a missed opportunity not to show these aspects of the battle (and typical for battles in the age of sail). I consider it making the best use of the one and only still image a diorama offers...

Anyway, all of these are of course personal choices... Nobody needs to agree!
But I only want to stray from historical accuracy if it makes a real difference to the storytelling. Ignorance is not a good reason, so please keep the info and discussions coming!

[dafi]

You are in good company: William Turner did the same for his epic painting

XXXDAn

[marijn van gils]

You are in good company: William Turner did the same for his epic painting

XXXDAn

As long as I don't go as far as some movies (cough - Pearl Harbour -cough)...

[Guest]

You are in good company: William Turner did the same for his epic painting

XXXDAn

As long as I don't go as far as some movies (cough - Pearl Harbour -cough)...

DON'T YOU DARE Marijn
LOL

Rui

[marijn van gils]

DON'T YOU DARE Marijn
LOL

Rui

Redoutable�s Hull received the same treatment (a little delayed by some work in the house and garden). Her port side, facing Victory, is the most heavily damaged:











Because there is no primer to flake on this model and everything is just white styrene, it doesn�t look as obvious (or good�) yet as with Victory. But in fact, after painting Redoutable�s port side should look even a bit more shot up than Victory�s starboard side.



Her starboard side is much less damaged. As she didn�t face any enemy ships yet on that side (T�m�raire hasn�t arrived yet), I limited it to some shots that went through and through the entire hull. It is almost invisible on this general view.


But a close-up shows it better. It will of course be more obvious once painted.


I added more damage to her stern than to Victory�s, but still only a little:


And this time, I added some round shot damage to the decks. Her rigging will be less damaged than Victory�s (at this point in time), so there will be a bit less rubble covering the decks.






I could probably take this much further. But there will still be a lot of guns, figures and rubble to cover the rest of the surfaces, so I have to reserve some space for that too�

[Maarten Sch�nfeld]

Good grief!! WHAT A MESS!!!

I'm really starting to imagine what will come next: the painting you will manage, I'm sure. I've seen what you did to Lexington an the Amagi.

But all those people... fighting, wounded ... dead... loose limbs... And what about all that rigging.. torn up? Sails torn and draped in very strange positions...

I think the challenge to model all that is gigantic...

I'm feeling more and more humbled, my friend...

[wefalck]

Very imaginative work !

How do you know, how a strafing shot behaves on a deck ? Somehow, I would have expected the shot to bounce (ricochett) off the deck, rather than to plough in as you would see in soil. Ricochetting shots were rather desirable from the point of view, who fired it, because it would cause more damage, parcticularly to people.

[dafi]

Great work

I have seen this traces of shot already on contemporary sources and I think on some photographs of the US civil war. But Eberhard is right imho, the shot should not lodge in on the end, it should be rolling around or going overboard through the bulwarks.

XXXDAn

[marijn van gils]

Thanks guys!

But all those people... fighting, wounded ... dead... loose limbs... And what about all that rigging.. torn up? Sails torn and draped in very strange positions...

I think the challenge to model all that is gigantic...

Thanks Maarten! I think you are right...
I have done some pretty ambitious projects before, but this one is by far the most ambitious one I ever did.
While two ships of the line slogging it out is a pretty obvious diorama subject, there is a very good reason why it hasn't been modelled more, and this is the reason indeed. It is a lot of work, with a lot of challenges. Getting the technical details right (or at least close) already is quite an undertaking, but it pales in comparison to getting the 'feel' right.

The rigging and sails will be heavily torn up indeed and hang everywhere: over the other rigging, yards, sides of the ship, into the water, ... Smaller pieces of rope, spars, blocks, sail, etc. will litter the decks everywhere. Some guns will be dismounted and one will have burst.
And the crews will be fighting indeed: manning the guns, shooting muskets, throwing grenades from the tops, trying to board or repel boarders, shouting orders, cutting away fallen rigging,... Others will be clinging to wreckage in the sea, with others in boats rescuing them.
There will have to be wounded (amongst which Nelson) and dead too. But if I make it as bloody as it really was, I'm afraid the result may not be appealing to look at anymore. So I will have to use some sensitivity here...

A lot of challenges indeed. But I'm actually really looking forward to them! These are what will bring life and drama to the scene, and they should be a lot of fun to do.

How do you know, how a strafing shot behaves on a deck ? Somehow, I would have expected the shot to bounce (ricochett) off the deck, rather than to plough in as you would see in soil. Ricochetting shots were rather desirable from the point of view, who fired it, because it would cause more damage, parcticularly to people.

Thanks Wefalck!

Honestly, I don't know!
In a French account (of another battle) I have read 'The decks, ploughed by cannonballs, ...'. And I have seen it like this in a couple of modern reconstruction drawings. But the latter are of course not to be trusted; the drawer might have as much fantasy as me!

Shot ricochetting on the decks must have been common indeed. But these might not have left a lot of damage to the decks; at least in 1/300 almost invisible especially between all the rubble and debris. Certainly I'll be adding all kinds of scuffs to the decks with paint later on! (and also burn marks to Victory's decks, as one account describes these as the result of small fires started by hand grenades)
But maybe sometimes, with the right angle, they did plough through the decks too?

I have seen this traces of shot already on contemporary sources and I think on some photographs of the US civil war. But Eberhard is right imho, the shot should not lodge in on the end, it should be rolling around or going overboard through the bulwarks.

Thanks Dafi!
I think you're correct about this, it seems more logical indeed. I'll remove the little balls from the decks!

[Maarten Sch�nfeld]

Thanks Dafi!
I think you're correct about this, it seems more logical indeed. I'll remove the little balls from the decks!

I think you should leve one or two of them there, then we keep something to talk about... Just like the naked Jeannette you mentioned earlier!

From the song 'de monniken' by Jaap Fischer:
"... dat meisje moet terug, anders hebben we niets hier beneden om over te praten!"

Sorry guys, translating would spoil the fun, if you want you can use Google translate... and then look up the song otherwise you'll miss the context.

[dafi]

I did not find the pictures I wanted to show, the only one from ww1



XXXDAn

[maxim]

WW2 Brooklyn class?

[Maarten Sch�nfeld]

WW2 Brooklyn class?

Mmm-mmm

[bwross11]

It is indeed a Brooklyn Class CL. To be more specific its the USS Boise CL-47. The picture is showing the damage to the face plate of Turret No. 3 from a hit received during battle at Guadalcanal.

Great work on the model; I am completely blown away by the precision of the build.

[marijn van gils]

Thanks Bruce!

I think you should leve one or two of them there, then we keep something to talk about...

Haha, I like that idea! I think I will do that indeed!
Anyway, the balls are so small (0,4mm diameter) they'll be near invisible on the finished model...

Many thanks for that photograph Dafi!