Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Morgan

  • Birthday 10/03/1961

Contact Methods

  • MSN

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,787 profile views
  1. That is an elegant solution, otherwise where do you stack the spare grating on such crowded decks, so makes sense. Gary
  2. A little more digging has yielded some further information. In an article in The Mariner’s Mirror in November 1952 by JD Moody he has the following to say: “In the late eighteenth century ‘horns’ were added to the front edge of the brackets [cheeks] to butt against the port sill when the gun was run out. The first I have seen are those on the Royal George carriage, where they are nailed on. Later they appear as an integral part of the lower planks of the brackets. (These were made of two planks dowelled and bolted together.). They are referred to in 1810 as showing t
  3. I agree, although the depictions and photos I’ve seen have various size eyes, but whatever they won’t carry the main breaching rope. The only way that I could see this would work relative to the breach rope would be if they were to accommodate lashings to constrain the breaching rope, possibly to help control the gun jumping when fired as the breach would rise as it pivoted on the trunnions. Gary
  4. Allan, The same carriage is to be found at p129 of Lavery’s ‘The Arming and Fitting of English Ships of War; 1600 - 1815’ (copy below), he dates it to c1815. It could be that these were the carriages in place when the painting was undertaken many years later, we know Victory had later pattern saluting guns by then, presumably the carriages would also have been of a later pattern. This wasn’t an uncommon problem, many Victorian painters did not allow for the fact the sharp had been transformed since 1805. This would also explain the double block anomaly, the painting is supposed
  5. Your wife and yourself come first Mark, the wood isn’t going anywhere, take your time we will still be here. Gary
  6. Those eye bolts don’t exist on the 1800 pattern carriage drawing held by the NMM ref ZAZ7009, or in the Victory’s gunners notebook - William Rivers, I’ve attached both below. They may be era specific, but I also recall seeing somewhere that these were used on French carriages as these were for the side training tackle rather than in the cheeks as the English did, I’ll try to recall where I saw this. Gary
  7. Some of Bugler’s assertions about the number of existing Trafalgar guns have been proven wrong, there are for example only 3Nr. 32-Pounders and 1Nr. alleged 24-Pounder, not the number he claimed, I say alleged because Victory had the 24-Pounders removed in 1808 and replaced with 18-Pounders and in the 1820’s she was reduced to 21 guns, the 24-Pounders are also of the wrong design. So it is not clear where the current 24-Pounder ‘Trafalgar’ cannon comes from. The cannon are identifiable from their individual cast and makers marks stamped on the trunnions, these can be traced from on
  8. If I may say based on the latest exchanges, these emphasise the need for further research, and there is a way to go, the excellent drawings are a good starting point. That said caution needs to be exercised in respect of researching the true appearance and fit-out of Victory during the Trafalgar campaign. One of the chief distractions is the ship herself, when ‘restored’ during the 1920’s many compromises were made for a variety of reasons, such as cost, operational needs, and available research, the gun carriages may well be a victim of such compromises. Certainly the advisory committee h
  9. I live only a mile from the Trincomalee, walk past her every day and go on board several times a year. I can confirm that these are not capstan bars, they are hand spikes for training the guns. The guns are all fibre glass, most, but not all are fully rigged, you can see the breech ropes and training tackle on the above screen shot. The tail ropes to the rear of the guns are available but not fully rigged as they would be a trip hazard and interfere with touring the ship. There is also a full compliment of equipment. The un-rigged guns are generally for educational display.
  10. Just for information the drawings in McGowan were also provided by McKay, the book really being a collaboration, differences in size between the two publications may simply be down to printing.
  11. Welcome aboard Tim. Panart do a 1:16 Victory longboat, not sure how accurate it is, but looks nice enough. Cornwall Model Boats are stockists, there is also some nice boat kits by Model Shipways of the scale you are looking for, although not of the Victory, CMB also stock these. Gary
  12. You could try contacting Occre to get a replacement, but you should be able to straighten it anyway, just give it a chance to settle to its new normal before incorporating it so it doesn’t pull the whole model out of shape. Gary
  13. Don’t underestimate how much that spine wants to ‘spring-back’, I have the same kit partially built, and have the exact same problem. I used heat to straighten it and held it clamped straight whilst adding the bulkheads, I also inserted filler blockers on both sides between each bulkhead, which should have locked it sufficiently, a week later a small curvature was evident, and this was with some planking that was put in place whilst all clamped up. I’d suggest giving it a few days after straightening to allow it to re-acclimatise to its internal tensions so you can see what residu
  14. You are right in that the notional length of 9’ 6” refers to length ‘A’, from the muzzle to the reinforcement ring on the breech, to which you add length ‘B’, this is why guns of differing weights of notionally the same length actually vary in length. The drawing you show is for an Armstrong pattern gun, an earlier version to what Victory currently mounts which are all the later Blomefield pattern - the main distinction is that the Blomefield’s have the thimble or loop for the breaching rope cast in to them. The Board of Ordnance records held in the National Archives at
  15. Just in time for my Trincomalee upper deck! Are the 9 and short 18 pounder cannon Blomefield or Armstrong pattern? Gary
  • Create New...