BANYAN

Research I do not intend to post copies online of the plans I have developed of this ship as there are some unscrupulous people out there whom turn them around for their own profits (as has been evidenced recently). However, I will provide a background discussion on the research effort that has gone into this ship. I think I have tracked down almost all known drawings, lithographs, plans, photos etc of HMCSS Victoria and it is a great pity the Government, Navy or other Australian authority have not kept any significant records etc. It is almost like they washed their hands of the Victorian Colonial Navy L The above image is an out of copyright lithograph of a painting of the Victoria by J Taylor c1860. The image was obtained from (held by) the State Library of Victoria Identifier: H6503 There is only one painting that I am aware of that I do not have a copy of. I have managed to purchase copies of all known photographs, wood cut etching (London Illustrated News) and lithographs etc. The owner of the only known surviving/existing plan of the ship, a single sheet drawn by Oliver W Lang (ships designer) which includes the side profile, sheer and waterlines. There is also a separate drawing of the ship's boilers, both of which have been kindly provided by the owner to let us take a copy in return for permanently displaying the model in his Museum (HMAS Castlemaine) when it is completed. The only other known set of plans have disappeared from the Victorian Records Office (and no, the set discussed earlier are not those). I have also assembled every newspaper article, journal articles, magazine articles I can find, including a copy of the Geoffrey Ingleton collection of related documents. The services of a researcher in the UK were also engaged, whom has tracked down and provided copies of a lot of the correspondence between the various parties, authorities and family members etc (including Lang, the ship's agent, ship-build overseer (Commander Lockyer, RN), the Colonial Office and the Victorian Parliamentary Records office). The rest of the supporting information has been derived from searching through contemporary articles, journals, records, reports, publications etc to get the details of the listed equipment and fittings stated in the Contract. I have also had some very useful help from a historian and author whom has done a lot of research on the history of the ship, but not the ship itself. See: http://users.vic.chariot.net.au/~ianmac/vicship.htm All of the information collected will be donated to interested not-for-profit parties on completion, probably either the Australian War Memorial or Navy Heritage Centre, but as the Naval heritage/history people do not seem to rate this ship it will probably be the earlier.

Background HMCSS Victoria was the first major defence vessel ordered and built by the Victorian Government, with her order placed in 1854. The ship was ordered to provide defence for the Colony during the ‘gold rush’ era as there was a perceived threat and fear that the riches of the Colony may prove very inviting to foreign interests; especially Russia. The ship was designed by Oliver William Lang, naval architect and then the master-shipwright of Pembroke Dockyard, as a one-off design. He designed the ship for no cost to Victoria on the proviso that he be given a free-hand in her design. The ship was built by Young, Son and Magnay at Limehouse Docks, on the Thames in London in six months in the latter part of 1855. HMCSS Victoria was delivered in January 1856 and arrived in Victoria 31 May 1856. The ship had classic lines and was often remarked in the Press and by the public as a beautiful ship. She was fitted out lavishly in mahogany with fittings the equivalent of a luxury yacht. The main engines, boilers and marine engineering equipment were built by George Rennie and Co. at the adjacent Blackfriars Engineering; and, the innovative feathering screw designed and supplied by Maudsley. According to her Build Certificate (27 July 1855) she is described as: ‘…round stern, carvel built steam-vessel 'Victoria' – that the said vessel has a half woman figure head, is flush decked and has a lower deck before and abaft the engine room , with platforms below the same – that the length from the fore-part of the stern aloft to the after part of the stern post is one hundred and sixty six feet – the broadest part above or below the main-wales is twenty seven feet, the depth of the engine room from the upper side of the floor to the upper side of the beam is fourteen feet nine inches; and the burthen is five hundred and eighty tons (OM).’ For further background on this ship, see the following site: http://www.cerberus.com.au/hmcs_victoria.html The following link provides a summary of the life of her Captain, William Henry NORMAN, who commanded her throughout her service life. http://www.cerberus.com.au/muster_dadabik/index.php?table_name=crew&function=details&where_field=ID&where_value=90

Hi folks, the new project. I am not the sole builder of this model which is a club project for the Ship Modelling Society of Victoria. I am coordinating the build, doing the research, drawing the plans and assisting in the build process. I am providing this log as she is an interesting ship and I thought members may be interested. While designed as a warship along the lines of the contemporary Arrow and Vigilant Classes of Gun Dispatch vessels, she was operated in various roles, with only a very short period of active duty as a commissioned ship during the Maori Wars in New Zealand. Her Majesty’s Colonial Screw Sloop (HMCSS) Victoria was built for the defence of the Colony of Victoria during the gold rush era. The above image is a copy of a purchased image from The Illustrated London News which shows her during her Builders Trials. Additionally, as much of the hull construction has already been completed, I will provide a summary of this part of the build only.

Nice work Elijah, she is looking great. I like the slipway you have mounted he on. cheers Pat

Coming along very nicely Sjors - I can't get over how much ornamentation these ships had. cheers Pat

Thanks for looking in and congratulatory comments Russ, BE and John. Russ - thanks, it was your early support in ther battle station build that got me into 'bashing' the kit so much. BE - thanks for your help with the pennants also mate. John - I really appreciate your assistance in the detail photos of the replica rigging you took for me . ...and, yep, I would much rather scratch the case cheers Pat

Part 3 Final Installment

Part 2

Well folks, "enough is enough" - I still have two boats to make (in very slow time) but they will be added to the display case as separate items and not onboard the model. So, although there are a few more items I would like to add, and a few fixes i would still like to make, I think I will call it quits and declare this one finished The following photos show her in her final fit; but, I must apologise for the quality of the one in her case. I will take better shots of her in her home when I can control the reflections a little better The photos will be in three posts. cheers Pat

Greg, paravanes are large and bulky, and depending on where stowed could be difficult to manoeuvre around the ship unless there was a nearby derrick / crane that had a long enough reach to lift the paravanes and put them outboard (for lowering into the sea). I would have expected these to be closer to the quarterdeck or bow? Paravanes were mainly used for mine sweeping, or in a secondary role as a splash target for gunnery practice, depending on how they were configured. The configuration would make them either tow directly astern or swing out onto the quarters astern (minsweeping etc). See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paravane_(weapon) This article talks of them being towed from the bow, but in my time I only saw them used from aft - the bow m,akes sense for minesweeping purposes though. The magazines may have been for ready use ammo for the smaller guns? cheers Pat

Hi Greg, unusaual for paravanes to be stored inside a turret? Some nice detail there. cheers Pat

She's looking mighty fine Russ, can't wait to see her with her sails. cheers Pat

Thanks you so much John and Mark; appreciate your comments. John - next job is to complete the HMCSS Victoria which I have been researching and assisting the build. Its' back in my hands now for final fit-out with hull and coppering completed. I will start a dedicated log soon. i will also be making a start on my HMAS Vampire (3D printed project) early next year. Mark - final photos this week I hope cheers Pat

Looks good Ulises - taffrail? cheers Pat

Hi Alex, That deck treatment is a relatively new one (late 70's/early 80s (at least in the RAN - may have been a tad earlier in USN/RN) and is a specialised coating that not only serves as a metal deck preservative but also a non-slip surface for the deck. Back in the early 70s the RAN was still using deck-tread (sandpaper strips/patches glued to a painted deck surface) but in the late 70s started using a new treatment which had sand mixed into it; this then developed into this treatment which in the RAN was called DEVRON (a brand name I think) - I don't know where it was initially developed or by which company. It is applied direct onto a specially prepared deck, and if not abused will last several years. It is a fairly thick coating and very hard on the knees/skin. Some ships have this applied to cover the whole deck surface while other ships had it covering the majority of the deck but the last few inches near screens/bulkheads and the side were normal paint. I am not well versed in paint application techniques for models, but I would think that applying a slightly thicker paint and then using a dry brush in a random pattern may provide that look? That said, it would also depend on the scale as down at say 1:350 or so, the scale would not show this? You might also have to research the ship and see if you can find photos that show the paint pattern (full coverage or with paint verges) for the ship in the period you are modelling? I am quite interested in this as I am building a 1:350 of HMAS Vampire circa 1973/76 and this is the period this paint started appearing. In Vampire at this time, the main deck was DEVRON (with verges) while the superstructure decks were still painted and used deck tread. She did not get fullly covered DEVRON decks until the very late 70s. I hope this helps? cheers Pat

Thanks Wayne, some interesting references there; that will keep me busy for awhile Good luck with the publication of your research results. cheers Pat

As I have found out Per - a big scratch already which I will try to polish out with "Brasso" but at least it is on the back (nearest the wall) side of the case. cheers Pat

Where did you get such a small model/figurine of Anja and the other visitors? cheers Pat

Thanks for the feedback USS Frolic. It would be interesting to see if there are any references to/instructions for this practice (Wayne?); and also be great to see that model or read its description on the NMM site at least (any links available?). WRT ready use ammunition, I relate back to my own experience. In the modern navy (RAN) for some weapons, it was normally stowed in the appropriate stowage unless in refit or the like; and it was brought to the ready-use state as determined by the readiness state of the ship. I would assume that even back then, whether at war or not, the provision of the ready use ammunition would have been driven by the readiness state of the ship and that, even in peace, there was sometimes the threat of privateers etc (depending on op area), then there is also the daily (in some ships), or frequent exercising of the guns, and the morning/evening "stand-to" at dawn/dusk which would probably necessitate the use of shot-racks to store an appropriate amount of ready-use ammo? I think then that shot-racks would have been fitted (of some type), the presence or not of the shot is the remaining part of the discussion? This discussion has been interesting, and I for one, would like to see some further clarification on this latter point? cheers Pat

Les, I think all you need is already posted on several of the Endeavour logs. Certainly my log shows all of my deck furniture with my preferred design and colour. I must stress though these are my interpretation of what I think may have been the fit. The fit generally conforms to the AOTS with one or two exceptions where I have used the 'replica' as my source of information. One area that I think I do not comply with either though is the use of boat crutches on the gallows. The more typical, and perhaps more correct would have been to stow the boats on the spare spars. However, to my mind the spacing of the spars to accommodate the boat hulls, and their length overall, would have had the ends of the spars overhanging the midships pumps making them almost impossible to operate, and also possibly interfering with the working of the windlass. My solution was to use crutches and stows the spars between the crutches so that they are aligned longitudinally with the centre line and the ends then between the pumps. I have not fitted the spare longer spars in my model yet, only the shorter upper spars and mast poles. You might note that I also fitted a rudder post housing as well as the rudder post sock (on the transom). There are one or two comments in the log or journal that seem to justify the presence of the rudder post housing. There are several other discussions on the position of the wheel (not the overall wheel with standards, but whether fore or aft of the drum), the length of the jib, height of the mizzen etc in other logs you will find helpful - BUT - in the end you will need to decide what you wish to do based on your interpretation of the various bits and pieces of evidence, discussion points and what you 'feel' is right or wrong. cheers Pat

Wayne, thanks for posting this. WRT guns, I think Endeavour sailed with 10 guns, six (stowed in the hold) of which [edit: 6] were intended for use in fortifications of the observation site/camp while in Tahiti. In her log there is mention of various numbers of guns on deck at times (4, 6 or none). Certainly stowing/unstowing these would have been a pain, but I think (I would need to reread the log) there was a period when Cook believed they were in benign (enemy wise) waters and had some of the guns (not the swivels though) stowed. Also, as per my comment earlier, I have read in a couple of references that in extreme weather the ready use shot would be stowed away, but the guns would be weather lashed on deck. Those "instructions" you posted bear this out and sure did make stowing the guns an evolution to be avoided; but, with the use of the mast and other tackle, quite achievable in Endeavour via the midship hatches - BUT you would want to do it in harbour . The locations of the guns is also hard to determine and why in some models you see 4 guns on the Quarterdeck, and in other 6 guns in the waist. thanks again Pat

Yep same stuff Popeye - weighs less, won't shatter and more importantly, at least when I bought my acrylic sheet, cheaper than glass. Not now though as it seems glass is the cheaper option these days. cheers pat

Hi Les, 1. Sorry I have to disagree with USS Frolic in that, to the best of my knowledge, the ready-use shot in shot racks were not netted. The purpose and the design of the racks was to hold them securely - the idea was mainly to keep them topgether and stop them rolling; their weight was sufficient to stop them 'jumping out' and in very severe weather they would have been stowed as the guns could not have been used anyway. I would be very interested in any reference that shows they were netted so as to satisfy my curiosity now that it hase been piqued . 2. The binnacle was fitted just in front of the wheel where the helmsman and the Officer of the Watch could see it. Depending on the source you are using as your main reference, this could have been a double cabinet that spanned the skylight, or a single cabinet style moved from side to side as required. These were lashed to ring bolts in the deck. No one really knows exactly the style used in Endeavour, but rather use one typical for the period. I would recommend you invest in a copy of the AOTS or another source data reference especially for the rigging etc as that will answer many (most) of your questions. To answer some of the rigging questions we always need to refer back to a source and copying them here runs the risk of breaching copyright. It is much easier to answer if we simply point you to a page in the reference to clarify or answer the question and we do not then breach copyright. looking through the various build logs woill also give you a good idea of the deck arrangements, and some of the logs have good discussions about various items. cheers Pat

Hi Les, not sure if you meant a few more pics of the shot rack options or of the ship? WRT boats, she sailed with 5 boats in 1768 but the carpenter's punt was lost early on in the voyage (before even getting past Europe ). She was provided with a Longboat, Pinnace, Yawl and then there was Mr. Bank's private skiff. The AOTS provides good detail on these. However, there has never been consensus on exactly how (or even where) they were stowed, or on their type of construction. For example Ray Parkin and Karl Marquardt, in their respective books, suggest two slight differing designs for the longboat - one a slightly longer and narrow design and the other a wider but shorter design. The longer one being to be stowed on the gallows with the other boats nested, the other design under the gallows but no nesting. There is also debate as to whether they were of clinker or carvel construction. You can see which way I went I still have two boats to construct but they will not be on the ship. they will be displayed as under sail and mounted on clear acrylic rod at waterline level near to the model. cheers Pat

Hi again Les - hare are some more pics from another thread on one of the MSW forums which show some of the alternatives in real life: http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/10099-cannon-shot-storage-on-deck/#entry300291 cheers Pat