Windships

Worked Great!

lovely Maury!

Yup, that's the McCalip article I had in mind.

Hello Mates - Happy Fourth of July!! A few thoughts on your post Greg (some of this may be a repeat from earlier posts...) If you haven't read my study (2020-2021) on Hannah, you can get it from the NRG web site if you are a member (it's on the Extended... pages). If you're not a member, and would like to read it (about 270 pages, printed out) I can send it to you in PDF as email attachments. Highly illustrated. I didn't provide a masting and rigging plan, but did provide guidance that I would use, were I to build the model to my drawings as Mike is doing. Dana McCalip was a student of the schooner rig for that period, but I don't recall him speaking to Hannah, only about Sultana (?). The masting and rigging Chapelle did for Model Shipways' SULTANA is about as close as we'll get I think, with allowances for the differences in size of the two schooners. Re: the Hahn model you mention. The "Navy" helped me a lot with my research. In fact, they mentioned his model was on indefinite loan, and they thought it should be returned to the Hahn family after he passed. Because I was in touch with Chris Hahn, I passed his contact info along, but have no idea whether Chris asked that it be returned. If you read my study, you will learn that Harold's interpretation (as are every other one we found in prominent institutions) is in error in several ways. How and why we got to Harold's version is quite fascinating, and an intriguing detective story if I may say so: Hannah was 45 tons burthen, not 78. The lines Hahn used were based on a "Banks fishing schooner" of some years later than Hannah, the plan for which by Chapelle, was given to Victor Grimwood for his book. Chap never intended this to represent Hannah. He told me so, himself. The c. 1970 model in The Smithsonian was based on Merritt A. Edson, Jr.'s interpretation from the draught called "Marble . Head" from which Sir Edward Hawke and Earl of Egmont came. Those two were built in New York for British Navy service on the Jamaica Station. The model in the Peabody Essex Museum has the same basis, and hence the same faults. My report speaks to other details (armament, bulwarks - I do not believe Hannah had raised bulwarks, boats, pumps, windlass, and other minor things). I do not claim my interpretation to be exact as to her appearance. No thoughtful person would. But I will stand by my claim that it is based on the best primary source material available. I encouraged readers to come to their own conclusions from that evidence, and if they would, produce their own drawings and descriptions. Regrettably, very few people found their way to the report on the NRG web site, and so the incorrect models, paintings and other narratives about Hannah persist, no matter my efforts. This seems to be true for the Navy, and even displays in the towns of Marblehead and Beverly. Tradition dies hard, even when presented with new evidence. Thanks for indulging my comments. Happy to help anyone who has an interest. Later KEEP GOING MIKE!!

Just follow Ashley for attaching sails to mast hoops

Mike just now saw this more soon i am humbled by what you have done my Friend randy

Re Pacific Marine Research Society you mentioned records of the group are still preserved. Can you share where they are please this is a significant topic of interest for me looking for a Roster of the members thanks

Very Happy for You Eric!! Truly an inspiration! What's' next? Randy

Mike, Sorry for the delayed response. The interior is authentic based on all we know about the small vessels of this period, and your superb craftsmanship has presented it beautifully. Yes that quarterdeck margin plank is a challenge, as I learned on my 1:64 model based on the 1768 Chaleur draught. Excellent, clean work on those quarterdeck scuppers and those on the main deck. Uniformity is very difficult to achieve but you nailed it. I need to get out of my "rocking chair" and back to my bench. Thanks for the inspiration. But, it's 104 outside at 8:00pm and 86 in my shop! So, I've been inside--doing research and writing on other subjects/vessels. Catch up with you soon. Randy

Your model really is lovely Mike! Mike has used many innovative approaches toward building this design in the POB fashion. Every new post is inspiring to us all. Thank You Mike!

Maury I know nothing about using a mill, but suggest you make a slight (in depth) vertical mortise in which to set each cleat. Otherwise they might turn on the axis of the reinforcing wire, even though you also glue the cleats to the mast. BIDDLE

MORE ON HANNAH from the early NRJ 5 One Richard Orr, whom I do not know, built a series of models, and writes about them in this piece. Here's what he has to say about Hannah. “HANNAH – Thence to the Marblehead heel tapper HANNAH of 1760 – one of our earlier fisherman. Lines from a drawing by Chapelle. However you have it, it would be a reconstruction and I chose Chapelle’s because of the faithfulness to type in lines. My model on the panel (a display) is representative of the type and period. I named the model HANNAH for want of a better name. It is reported that the first vessel commissioned by authority of Continental Congress was a heel tapper which was commissioned by General Washington. According to “American Ship Models” by Grimwood, the heel tapper prevailed with the slight modifications as the favorite type when in about 1850 it was replaced by schooners on the lines of pilot boats.” __________________________________ I applaud Mr. Orr's candor. The comments contain numerous factual errors, but let's be fair, he had very little to go on when making his model. If you read the Hannah monograph you will see how Grimwood and Chapelle figured in Harold Hahn coming to the erroneous depiction of Hannah which persisted as the choice for model builders for decades. A few days ago, in The American Neptune, I found a rather scathing review of Grimwood's book. Oddly, there was no mention of Chapelle's contribution or endorsement of that work. BIDDLE

Friends, Very glad Mike has chosen to rig the model. A few other comments/recommendations. The Drawings were never intended to be as complete as what we may have come to expect in a very good kit, or practicum. As explained in the 270-page Hannah monograph, I thought it would be presumptuous to provide that level of detail because no one knows exactly what this vessel looked like--at any point in her life--nor will anyone ever know that. But, I believed there was enough data to put forward a new interpretation based on that data, and with the caveat that it was an "informed speculation". I'd have to check, but I recall encouraging readers to come to their own interpretation based on the research we did, and to add their own informed opinions and reliable sources. I was very hopeful that the article would stimulate lively discussion. For a variety of reasons, that hasn't happened...or if it has, no one has shared those exchanges with me. If anyone chooses this Hannah as their next project, then I strongly encourage they read the entire monograph. If you are not a member of the Nautical Research Guild, then make the small investment to get access. Within the article I have provided sources and suggestions about her color scheme, armament, boat complement, sail plan and rig. There are two variants available to you. West Indies trader and lightly armed schooner. There is plenty of latitude for you to create your own depiction. My hope is that whatever you do, it has a sound basis in research. IF I were to model her, like Mike suggested, I would choose a larger scale, and I would build her POF. The framing arrangement I provided is fully supported in the nautical archaeology record for vessels of her time, size and purpose. My second choice is lift-style. I never cared for POB, just a personal preference. As to a lighter rig for a 45-ton vessel, sure. Her masts (heights and diameters) and spars (diameters and lengths) would be in proportion to her size. If you have access to the Model Shipways drawings of Sultana, that is a good basis for beginning. Merritt A Edson Jr studied 18th-century vessel rigging extensively and his influence is seen in those drawings and for Earl of Egmont and Sir Edward Hawke. Just keep in mind, those were much sharper vessels with more drag in the keel, and so the rake of the masts is greater. If you read the monograph, it will be abundantly clear why this Hannah should not be called an example of a "Marblehead (fishing) schooner" (except as to where she was owned) and certainly not a "Heeltapper". Have fun, and thanks again Mike for bringing this little schooner back to life. BIDDLE JUST NOW - I was reviewing early editions of the Nautical Research Journal available on CD. Coincidentally, in NRJ 5, Chapelle introduces his new plans for John Shedd and Model Shipways new kit of SULTANA. As above, still a good point of departure for developing a rig for HANNAH, and...another reason to become a NRG member. Just sayin' BIDDLE

My Dear Friend Mike, I am both elated and truly humbled to see these images of your beautiful transformation of the drawings into a living creation. As you know, from the beginning, I was more than a little anxious that there would be significant issues (unfair lines for example) which wouldn't reveal until you had invested precious time and materials. But alas, the Good Lord favored us both, and thanks for that. She really is lovely--in an honest, earn your keep kind of way, and to see her in three dimensions evokes thoughts of what it might have been like to build her, work her, and ultimately to fight her against the British in 1775. I don't recall whether you intend to mast and rig the model, but of course now we're all excited to see how that will look too. You are a superb craftsman, and I can't think of anyone I would have preferred to make this voyage with. HUZZAH!! RANDY

Didn’t hold my interest either but I made a couple screenshots for research and sent them a link to the Far West model at Mystic and the build log link for Arabia no worries