The Ship Model Forum

Oh wow (in Owen Wilson voice). I am now totally into sailing ships and will do my 1/700 Victory next.

This thread is like already worth its weight in pixels, and ships arent even finished. Wish this forum had a subscribe feature.

The stern of Victory was most apparently closed in the great repair 1800 to 1803. But real evidence is missing. Turners drawings suggest much more a closed stern than an open one.

Temeraire was part of the Neptune-class, which shows the development of the stern nicely.
Neptune 1797 still had two open galleries, Temeraire 1798 just one and Dreadnought 1801 had none

I go with Marjin�s guess that Lucas never saw the stern and therefor the "standard" was taken

XXXDAn

Many thanks guys!

kurusu wrote:And by the way. Temeraire has a curious paint pattern on her hull.

Yes indeed!
This goes against the British eyewithness accounts that they were repainting their ships before the battle according to the style Nelson liked, 'as if trying to please him by doing so'. But maybe T�m�raire did not?

Anyway, I'm affraid we cannot trust these artworks too much on the exact appearance of the English ships. They were made in France without access to the British ships, or the means of research we are used to nowadays. Information about things like paint schemes could only come from eyewithness accounts, and those might have been absent for this kind of 'details', or if they were available they could also have been mistaken. During such a battle, I can imagine the senses of the crew being overladed, and their mind focussed on other priorities...

I would think the details of the Redoutable may be more trustworthy, as Lucas would have known his ship and was able to point out big mistakes to the artist. But also here we have to be careful, because we do not know the interaction between Lucas and the artist...

Cheers,

Marijn

Cr�pin, the artist. had been a sailor, he was supposed to know is stuff.

And... I do wonder when is Victory represented in Pocock's painting "Nelson's Ships" made in 1807. Before Trafalgar for sure. But how much before? After 1803 at least if it's to be Nelson's Victory.

The painting is a complete anachronism.

First all teh ships did not exist at the same time. Second the Victory is a mixture of different timings. Open galleries and position of the chainwhales and other details. Pocock always was portraying the vic with open galleries. He eventually possibly never really saw the ship and used the plans that today can be found at the NMM. It is not like today to open the internet and find an actual picture, taken two days earlier

XXXDAn

dafi wrote:The painting is a complete anachronism.

First all teh ships did not exist at the same time. Second the Victory is a mixture of different timings. Open galleries and position of the chainwhales and other details. Pocock always was portraying the vic with open galleries. He eventually possibly never really saw the ship and used the plans that today can be found at the NMM. It is not like today to open the internet and find an actual picture, taken two days earlier

XXXDAn

I think Pocock saw the ship and probably for a number of years. He had been to sea himself(he was born in Bristol). And as a painter was aboard HMS Pegasus during the "Glorious First of June" battle in 1794 it's true that Victory wasn't part of that event, but the point is Pocock was no landlubber. I trust his Victory more than Turner's.

Well, he and Cr�pin would get the technical details right for sure (set of sails, rigging, general proportions, etc.), certainly much better than Turner. But they could only know the specific details of specific ships at specific times (like paint schemes, decoration, etc. ) if they had good information about it.
And that was not so easy to obtain in those days...
Well, even nowadays that is often not so easy as we all know!

Turner might make many mistakes regarding the technical details because he didn't understand them, but at least he got to see and sketch (and sketching is a great observational tool!) the ships himself shortly after Trafalgar.

But we also should not forget that the objectives of an artist are and were much more than portraying a subject as accurately as possible, sometimes causing accuracy to simply not being a priority at all.
And I have no problem with that. We can't blame these artists for photography not yet existing in their time!

Yes kurusu, Pocock is a great artist with plenty of knowledge. He possibly saw Victory earlier on, but the chance that he did not see the changes after the great repair was big. Victory left the dockyard immediately after being finished in 1803 and came back just for very short periods of repair and revictualing. So he showed her the way he knew her.

Turner on the other hand was sketching the ship from a small boat just being beside the ship that was just coming from Trafalgar. Those sketches are really only mere sketches and need plenty of interpretation. But if oneconcentrates onto the shown details, it gives some information, the most important the missing side entry. Also one has to be careful as plenty of damage was still to be seen and some emergency repair was done too.

https://www.segelschiffsmodellbau.com/t ... #msg155180

Or... Maybe like me, Pocock just thought Victory with the open galleries looked much better. And simply ignored reality.

Yes, she was a beauty before 1788!

XXXDAn

I agree! The open galleries looked much better, as did the earlier decoration and paint scheme... IMHO of course!

But I admit I do have a liking for older style ships of the line. I have this book on the way now, just because I love the look of those ships from the 2nd half of the 17th century: https://www.pen-and-sword.co.uk/Pepyss- ... ck/p/12167

If you like ships of the 17th century, I would recommend:

The Master Shipwright's Secrets by Richard Endsor
https://ospreypublishing.com/the-warship-tyger
http://www.modellmarine.de/index.php/li ... ts-secrets

He wrote also The Warship Anne: An Illustrated History and The Restoration Warship.

Henry Turner makes some 1/600 hulls of such ships:
https://www.facebook.com/HenryTurnerModels/
https://www.wargaming3d.com/vendor/henryturner/

interesting looking model of Victory here; some of the sails have the look of pulling hard

https://modelshipworld.com/gallery/albu ... 9b3BnBtCyw

took a short 40 odd years to build....

1 / 57 scale ...

maxim wrote:If you like ships of the 17th century, I would recommend:

The Master Shipwright's Secrets by Richard Endsor
https://ospreypublishing.com/the-warship-tyger
http://www.modellmarine.de/index.php/li ... ts-secrets

He wrote also The Warship Anne: An Illustrated History and The Restoration Warship.

Henry Turner makes some 1/600 hulls of such ships:
https://www.facebook.com/HenryTurnerModels/
https://www.wargaming3d.com/vendor/henryturner/

Many thanks Maxim! I'll be checking those books out.

Those hulls look very nice! I had no idea these were being made.
But unfortunately they won't fir my purposes. In order to be cast/printed in once piece (good idea for wargaming purposes of course), many details have been simplified or cast integrally with the hull. They will be very hard to modify and superdetail that way... I also see a lot of printing lines and casting defects. Also, for this type of ships I prefer 1/300 - 1/350, which allows a lot of extra detail and most importantly a hollow hull with open gunports and stern windows.
But of course not everyone has the same preferences as me, so it is great that they are around. The subject matter is certainly fantastic, also with Dutch and other nationalities...

There is of course this one:


But that one is a bit big for me... and will require a ton of work too!
It may be better to scratchbuild and end up with something completely unique...
But one can hope for a new and great kit, no?

JIM BAUMANN wrote:interesting looking model of Victory here; some of the sails have the look of pulling hard

https://modelshipworld.com/gallery/albu ... 9b3BnBtCyw

took a short 40 odd years to build....

1 / 57 scale ...

Wow!!! Fantastic! Many thanks Jim!

What does one do after finishing a project like that?

dafi wrote: Turner on the other hand was sketching the ship from a small boat just being beside the ship that was just coming from Trafalgar. Those sketches are really only mere sketches and need plenty of interpretation. But if one concentrates onto the shown details, it gives some information, the most important the missing side entry. Also one has to be careful as plenty of damage was still to be seen and some emergency repair was done too.

https://www.segelschiffsmodellbau.com/t ... #msg155180

I'm sorry to appear to be stubborn(Yes, it's more than appearance I know ), but.

In this Turner sketch the top two galleries appear to be open. So I agree, plenty of interpretation.


By the way, Pocock's Victory has no side entrance either.

And. I do believe Turner to be an amazing painter. A fore runner of impressionism. And this is perhaps my favorite from him.

A great sourve is the 1807 "THE DEATH OF LORD NELSON" by W Beatty TRAFALGAR H M S VICTORY

"It was well known to His
Lordship, that all the Enemy's ships had
the iron hoops on their masts painted
black ; whereas the British ships, with the
exception of the Bellisle and Polyphemus,
had theirs painted yellow : and as he considered
that this would serve for a very
good mark of distinction in the heat of
battle, he made known this circumstance
to the Fleet, and accordingly ordered the
Bellisle and Polyphemus to paint their
hoops yellow; but the evening being far
advanced when the signal was made to
them for this purpose. His Lordship
fearing that it might not be distinctly understood,
sent the Entreprenante cutter to
them to communicate the order."

"The Victory had no musketry in her tops: as His Lordship had a strong aversion to small arms being placed there, from the danger of their setting fire to the sails ; which indeed was illustrated on this occasion by the destruction of the French ship Achille, which took fire in the fore-top early in this battle. It is a species of warfare by which individuals may suffer, and now and then a Commander be picked off: but it can hardly ever decide the fate of a general engagement ;"

Basically all reports about the last hours of Nelson can be found in this book as the original source.

XXXDAn

Many thanks Daniel! That is much clearer now, and from an eyewitness source indeed!

It was good to reread it again. This states clearly, that the hoops of the Victory were already painted a while before the battle, as just two ships had to do it then.

XXXDAn

Hello everybody,

Meanwhile, I scratchbuilt 4 anchors for Victory:



The difference with the kit items:





That may not be too huge a difference, but I hope my version looks less clunky.
Which I think is important, if you realize how big these things are in reality:



Now 4 more for Redoutable...

the devil is in the detail -- and making things thinner an finer is always the right thing to do!

BRAVO--
a worthy improvement!