Mark Paulhus

Phil/Johnny Thanks for the responses. My stereotype of the British Navy (at least in the age of sail) has been one of rigid control and commonality, which is why the rigging issues seem so odd to me. I am starting to accept that there was really more control by the Captain and crew than by the shipyard or Admiralty. In the books I have, there does seem to be more general consensus on certain rigging practices (although not in line with provided model plans) and I do think I will lay out my plans to match general practice - similar to Phil's comments above. My plans are still to create a complete plan if I can before doing the rigging, but I'm sure I will run into plenty of issues that will need adjustments once lines start crossing. I am a Naval Architect by trade, now retired, and it is hard to break from the rigid engineering style of planning for things like this. Relative to my particular question in the original post, I think Phil's comments about attaching the forward block the the boom jaws seems to be a better approach as it would put less strain on the rigging when the boom rotates. This also seems more in line with what one finds in the books. I did have one more question. My plans have a sheave at the very end of the gaff boom, just like in the lower driver boom. I don't see any rigging going through this and I don't see anything similar in the rigging books I have either. Since the gaff sail is fully attached to the gaff boom there would be no outhauls/inhauls, so no legitimate purpose here. I am thinking that this is really just an error in the plans. Unfortunately, I have already installed this in the model. *I understand that the flag halyard was typically attached to an eye at the end of the mast, but was thinking that I would run it through here instead. Does that make sense? * Also, was the flag halyard typically just tied off around the lower boom in some fashion? I don't see anything that shows cleats for this. Thanks again Mark

Thanks very much for the response. I do have that book and numerous others and reference them frequently. I am trying to avoid mistakes, so before starting the final rigging I am making (to the best of my ability) a full rigging plan with all belay points and identification of the run of all lines (blocks, attachment points, etc). This has really led to a lot of questions and obvious issues with provided rigging plans. I actually have mapped the belay points for each line as provided in the Artesania plans, McKay's "Anatomy of the Bounty" book, the Occre bounty plans, and my books (such as Petersson, Lee...). Honestly, it was shocking to me, but I suppose experienced model makers would shake their heads and laugh at the Newbie, but there is almost zero commonality. I have been working on it way too long. Anyway. your answer got me thinking about my assumptions on this issues. I did think about this as you described, but initially dismissed the thought for two reasons: 1) The blocks on the mast and boom are both fixed, so the tackle really does nothing (it is still 1:1 on the lines) 2) There is no mention of an "inhaul" on the gaff sail aft/bottom end in any of the plans But, after reading your post, I was thinking that there is a solution that works in support of your thoughts 1) The blocks attached to the boom must actually not be attached. The need to act like normal tackle in conjunction with the blocks on the mast 2) There must actually be an "inhaul" to pull in the bottom end of the sail. This makes sense to me as the brails are quite high in the plans and there would still be a lot of canvas still loose when this sail is brailed up. If this is all true, then I would imagine the rigging would/could look like below. Looking forward to hearing any comments on whether this makes any sense.

Greetings I am currently building the Artesania Latina Bounty and I am stuck on one element of rigging the spanker boom. Specifically the rigging of item shown below as #805. This is listed in the plans as the Gaffsail Halyard. I do not think the arrows shown on this diagram properly represent the rigging intent. It appears to me from other plans (also not very clear) that the line starts by attachment to block on the boom feeds through double block on the mast, back through the block on the boom, and finally through double block on mast again and then perhaps belays to the deck. So it seems the intent here is only to pull the boom towards the mizzen mast. What is confusing me is that I cannot find anything like this in any of the books I have on rigging. I have also looked at as many photos of models and real ships as I can find, and I also have not seen this in any of the photos. I have specifically looked at photos of A.L. Bounty models and have seen this missing on everything I can find. So, I am wondering if anyone can tell me whether this rigging is legitimate for a vessel of the late 1700s and if my understanding of the specific function and rigging approach would be correct. Thanks very much Mark Paulhus