alpayed

Hi Trevor, sorry you felt you needed to defend yourself. It was not intending to offend just adding to the discussion. Hi Bill. Trevor may be right. there could be 2 fish davits, 1 each side. Harland states that the earlier type is manhandled side to side and then talks about the shorter one. (easily confused) The stowage of the smaller latter type is a grey area. given that is secured to the deck in an iron "shoe" (Harland) as Karl depicts. Maybe it was stood vertically and secured using the topping lift, (probable) or maybe over the side permanently. (unlikely) Or the shoe could be a loose fit and they were removed and stowed elsewhere. My guess is as good as another's unless some evidence turns up later. Harland also details where the anchors were stowed. Flinders records dropping 2,3 and sometimes 4 anchors at various places on his circumnavigation. These must have been ready to drop quickly at these times. This is the details of Investigators anchors: Anchor stowage (A) Best Bower. starboard, secured with shank painters to the timber heads with the fluke on gunwale. and to the cat heads with stoppers. (B) Small bower. port similar to best bower (C) spare anchor, carried port and fixed to the fore part of the fore channel. (F) Sheet anchor. starboard and fixed to the fore part of the fore channel. (H) Kedge starboard and fixed to the aft part of the fore channel. (D,E,G,I ) Stored in hold Stream and Kedge anchors The spare stream and kedge anchors were stowed below. The sheet anchor (starboard) and spare anchor (port) were stowed at the after ends of the fore channels with the stream and kedge anchors on the spare anchor or down below. Regards Allan

Hi guys. On a collier like Endeavour the anchors were carried as shown here. Best bower and second bower were catted and stowed as shown. I have not shown the shank painter or the securing of the sheet and kedge anchors stored on the fore channels. She would have carried spare anchors in the hold. The fish davit was moved from place to place and probably stored in the channels when not used.

This may helpanchor stowage_1.pdfanchor stowage_1.pdfanchor stowage_2.pdfanchor stowage_4-1.pdf

In Mathew Flinders diary he states "carpenters making arches fo the ports". I interpret that as being arched gutters to direct water to the sides. (HMS Investigator) Others have interpreted it differently. Has anyone heard of rigols being referred to as arches? Regards Allan.

That's an interesting question. I guess the purpose of the model is to display all of the details of the ship in question. Mission accomplished. To show actual function you would need to build a dioarma. They are an entirely different type of model. You have produced a model featuring all of the details of the Endeavour and done really good job of it. It's time to sit back and enjoy the feeling of achievement. Well done. Kind regards Allan.

The word lift can be a bit misleading. The halyards did the lifting. The lifts were there to hold the yard level when sailing. one side would not usually have tension on it. The side with tension would normally be the side of the yard rotated forward. (close hauled) In this case it would then be clear of the shroud. the other side being slack. They were mainly to take the weight of the yard when lowered. Harland notes that the lee lift (the one pointing backwards) rubbed on the foremost shroud and caused chaffing. This is probably why a few years later the lifts were shifted to eye bolts on the fore part of the cap. Although Lees states after 1805 I think the practice of using eye bolts in the cap probably occurred on some ships long before it became common practice. On a ship like Endeavour there would not have been lifts on the topgallant yards. The sail was often bent to the yard on deck before sending aloft. Regards Allan

Hi Guys. It was vary rare to have a sail bent to the crossjack yard so it was never raised or lowered. The crossjack yard did not carry Jeers. Only slings. It would appear that the Crossjack yard used a Jeer block for the slings. It simply took the weight of the yard. The Endeavour was right in the time of changes to the slings. AOTS book is correct for that time. Just after this period the sling was similar to the fore and main slings without the block. In this period there was a change in the lifts also. (Lees says 1805) Instead of having a span around the cap it was attached to eye bolts closer to the fore part of the cap. Endeavour probably had a span around the cap. Keep in mind that the weight of the yard was taken mostly by the sling. The lifts were used to trim either end of the yard up. When close hauled the end needing to be lifted (because it is being pulled downwards by the brace, weather leech and tack) and is forward and the lift pendent would clear the shrouds. The other end (touching the shroud) would be slack. Hope this helps. Regards Allan

In future I shall not try to help when someone asks a question. Regards Allan.

Hi Bill. The crows feet are to prevent the topsail catching under the top. The serve no other purpose. As such the carry very little load. Steel states that the Fore preventer stay is sometimes carried above the Fore stay. This means that the crows feet attach to the preventer. So the did not always attach to the larger stay. Mizen masts rarely carried preventers. It is most probable that the crows feet were attached to the mizen stayail stay. Steel states Bends to the mizen-staysail-stay with hanks and seizings. THE STAY clinches round the head of the mizen-mast, then reeves through a thimble seized in a collar lashed round the main-mast, and sets up with a laniard through a thimble turned into the stay, and an eye-bolt in the deck abaft the mast. In small ships, the mizen-staysail bends to the mizen-stay. Keep in mind that a lot of these finer details are conjecture and a matter of interpretation. The conjecture here is what is the definition of a small ship. Well Steel also gives us a clue as to what his definition is. Steel states (first paragraph of the section "mast making") Experience has therefore proved, that, in large vessels, three masts and a bowsprit, in smaller vessels, two masts and a bowsprit, and in the smallest, one mast and a bowsprit, are the most advantageous numbers for nautical purposes. So Endeavour was not classified as small in his work. However he does not show a staysail stay on his etchings of a 20 gun ship. Karl shows the staysail bent to the miz staysail stay. You would not be incorrect to omit the Staysail Stay and bend the sail to the Mizen stay. I think he missed the interference issue with the crows feet. This can easily happen when "standing and running rigging are drawn on separate sheets. This is my interpretation of the said stay on Investigator. However it possible that there was no staysail stay. regards Allan

Here is the high res copy.

1790 off Lord Howe Island.

The masts are indicated on the admiralty draught by ticks or crosses. Here also is George Rapers watercolour of Supply. This is a very interesting painting. Note the boomkins on the stern. This painting is the best representation of HMAT Supply I know of. I have a high resolution copy at home. I will post it here when I am able. Regards Allan.

Hi Guys. I just purchased this. Well done great work Yuri. Page 88 Fore and Main number of shrouds should be 6 pairs I think. (Not 7) See attached extracts. Whilst reconstructing Investigator I have found errors in Steel's work. For example the proportions of the heel of the fore topmast does not fit between the fore trestle trees. Anyhow I am not trying to be critical, after all, every great work was penned by a human. (not sure about the future though) Regards Allan

Hi Photog. I use a rope walk which I made years ago. I like to use rayon to make ropes as it does not make ropes with fuzz on them.

Hi Jerry. I just downloaded it again and no problems. I am not sure what the problem is. Maybe someone else has an answer. Regards Allan