popeye2sea

You can make the wooldings and secure them without glue in the folowing manner: Lay a bight of the line you are using along the mast. Make it a bit longer than the final width of the woolding. Make sure to leave a good length of the end to be able to grab on to later. Start taking turns of the woolding around the mast working towards the bight in the line. When you have the desired width for your woolding pass the working end through the bight. Now grab the end of the line you left long earlier and pull. This will draw the working end down behind the woolding and tighten the whole thing up. Trim the ends close to the top and bottom of the woolding. Done! Regards, Henry

I have never read anything that gives a size for serving line. Regards, Henry

In Steel's Art of Rigging there are tables of rigging sizes given for ships of various tonnages and rig. In it the larger standing rigging allows seizings of up to 1-3/4 inch circ. with the smallest seizings being listed as just marline with no size given. Regards, Henry

I'm not entirely sure what you refer to as serving. Serving is sort of an outer covering applied to rope to keep the wet out of the strands. It is part of a system of coverings; worming, parceling, and serving. Seizings, on the other hand, are what is used to join two ropes, or two parts of a rope together side by side as in forming the eye at the top of the shroud pairs. I don't know what scale you are working in, but seizings were traditionally made using marline or other small stuff, so you will want to use the smallest line you can find. On my 1:100 scale model I am using fly tying monofilament. A typical round seizing was 7 or 9 turns followed by one less riding turns over them and then two crossing turns around the whole and between the two parts of the rope. The end of the seizing line was secured with a knot or hitch around the crossing turns. When putting the seizings on the masthead eyes for each shroud pair, the seizings should be put on so that the seizings do not overlap the one below. The idea was to prevent the seizings working (friction) against each other. The first seizing will come just below the bolster. The bolster is a piece of quarter round moulding on top of the trestle tree to ease the bending of the shroud eye over the top. To seize in a dead eye on the lower shroud there are three seizings. The first is called the throat seizing and it lays horizontally and holds the parts of the shroud together over the top of the deadeye. No crossing turns are used for a throat seizing. The second seizing is called the middle seizing and it is a round seizing clapped on midway between the deadeye and the end of the shroud. The last seizing is called the end seizing and is clapped on just below the end of the shroud. There is also a whipping put on the end of the shroud to keep it from unlaying. Sometimes the end of the shroud is leathered (capped). Regards, Henry

The only line I used the 2mm rope on was the main stay for my 1:100 Le Soleil Royal. Regards, Henry

The answer to this really depends on how accurate and to scale you want your rigging to be. There are a few spreadsheets on the site that will guide you on what sizes of rope were used where. Generally speaking the size ranges of the lines used run from the largest for the lower masts and yards to the smallest on the upper spars. You could end up using 5 or more rope sizes from 2.0mm to 0.25mm diameter. Personally, I am not a fan of using the Revell blocks. Regards, Henry

The bulk of the sail is pulled up in front of the yard by the hands. Each "grab" is accordion pleated on top of the yard. The bundled sail is then inserted into the last fold to form a sort of tight skin over all. The clews of the sail never actually go into the bundle and hang down beneath. Regards, Henry

Mark and Allan, both points are correct. The line goes around the sheave , not under. And there would be an eye or other attachment point in the strop of the block. You do not want to have to re-strop the block every time you remove it from a line in order to re-purpose it somewhere else. Regards, Henry

The yard you are asking about is the topgallant. The topsail is set on it's yard. The topgallant yard will have a halliard, lifts, and braces. That is what holds the yard up there. If there is no sail bent on to the yard sometimes the sheet and clew were toggled or seized together. Unless I am mistaken, there does appear to be a sail furled on the topgallant yard. You can see the additional bulk on top of the yard and the clews of the sail hanging down towards the topsail yard. For later square riggers there was sometimes rigged a downhaul that connected the upper and lower topsail yards, but that would not be the case here. I know of no other lines that would run between the two yards. Regards, Henry

Oh, I agree the masts could be made up with lashings, just not like it is in that diagram. Yards were often made up with lashings also. But, there would have been plenty of overlap and more than one lashing. Regards, Henry

The name given for the use of a rope in that manner is a "lashing", but I agree with Allen, that is not the way the two mast sections would be joined. A single point lashing like that would topple in a strong breeze. Regards, Henry

The other function of these floating palaces was to show the power, influence, and wealth of the monarch. Of course they had to be repaired right after a battle. How dare the Navy give a tarnished reputation of the crown. Regards, Henry

I put the eyebolts right in to the knee. Regards, Henry

According to Underhill, the tops for the mizzen, or other fore and aft rigged masts, were constructed the same as the Fore and Main tops. They are essentially platforms nailed on top of the usual trestle trees and cross trees. On the Fore and Main there were fitted additional spreaders to take the backstays, but the mizzen often did not have spreaders fitted. Sometimes, the platform itself was omitted from the mizzen top leaving only the cross trees to lead the futtock plates through. Regards, Henry

Here is the painting I mentioned.

I found some pictures at the State Library of South Australia of the Harriet McGregor. The photos are not very good but a couple of them seem to show mizzen topmast shrouds. And if they had shrouds there would have to be futtock shrouds to carry the force back in to the mast. Also, I found a photo of a painting of the ship that shows mizzen topmast shrouds. I know that a painting is not necessarily a definitive source, but it is out there. Harold Underhill, in Masting and Rigging the Clipper Ship and Ocean Carrier, has shrouds and futtocks for barque and barquentine fore and aft masts. Personally, I feel that there has to be something there to counter the sideways forces from the sail. Regards, Henry

Still, the question remains. A spreader for what? There would be no reason to install a spreader there if it has no purpose. Regards, Henry

The only reason to have a top there at all is to spread the base of the topmast shrouds. There must be an omission on your rigging plan. Regards, Henry

Bill, Please consider how thick the line is that will belay there. I do not recall which line this kevel belongs too, but the kevels are used for the larger running rigging and you will need to put at least two turns of rope around each ear of the kevel. Regards, Henry

Really nice job on the casting! Regards, Henry

This "stepladder arrangement" never made any sense to me and I doubt that it was ever done. Can you imagine two sailors coming up from opposite sides? Collision!! Or, what if you mis-step at the top? You would tumble right over just from momentum. A more likely set up is that the ladders start offset to the side of each other and cross halfway up. Regards, Henry

Most models I have seen do not show coamings that are realistically tall enough. Regards, Henry

Tongue in cheek, but the other ancient name for Bitumen of Judea was Asphaltum. So, next time you see the crew repairing the cracks in the road with liquid asphalt, have them give you a bit and dilute it with some mineral spirits. 😲😏 I'll crawl back into my hole now. Regards, Henry

Bill, I did raise mine a bit by putting a filler piece of strip styrene on the ledges the gratings rest on. It gives the appearance of a hatch coaming. BTW, it is the hatch coaming, which is built up from the deck, that actually raises the height of the grating that sits inside the top edge of it. 4 inches is, from what I have seen on actual ships, an extremely short coaming. The main hatch on Constitution has a coaming that is around 16 inches. Regards, Henry

What evidence does the above present that refutes what I said about 24-pounders from Furnace Hope in Pennsylvania. Your reference seems to be for a furnace in Rhode Island? There was a Hope furnace in Granville Township, PA in 1797. The information from the paragraph that I posted comes from A Most Fortunate Ship, by Tyrone Martin and I assume although his footnotes are not keyed to particular paragraphs, that his bibliography entry for a Letter from Furnace Hope to Timothy Pickering, 23 Nov. 1795 is his source. The same information is found in an article written by the M. Desy. of the Naval History and Heritage Command entitled The Armament of USS Constitution, 18th - 20th Century, updated January 2017. Regards, Henry