jud

Pinched from dashicat post # 97;
From the entry for Saturday 27th January from the book, 'First Voyage Around the World: Captain Cook's Journal During his First Voyage, Page 272, Cook writes:
 "Saturday, 27th. Fresh gales, Westerly. This day we got the Tiller properly secured, which hath been the Employment of the Armourers and part of the Carpenters since we Anchor'd at this place; the former in repairing and making new Iron work, and the Latter in fixing a Transom,* for the want of which the Tiller has often been in danger of being broke; the Iron braces that supply'd the want of a Transom have broke every time they have been repair'd."
 
*The reference at the bottom of page 272 states: * A transom is a curved piece of wood which supports the end of the tiller.
 
https://books.google...transom&f=false
 
I would expect that all who have read Cooks words would agree that he is speaking about the tiller, that term defined today is as it was in Cooks day. Transoms as the term is commonly used today, have nothing to do with steering except in a few cases, nor is it common for ships to have their steering gear attached to a transom. Transoms are used today as attachment points for outboard motors, sometimes a steering oar can be used with the transom. Rudders also get attached to small boats by anchoring them to the transom, if there is no stern post.
 
Why is there so much resistance to the tiller supporting arc being added by Cook to prevent future problems with his steering gear? Since that is not logical, it makes me wonder.
 
We know he was having problems with his tiller, it was breaking reinforcing bands, the only place where there was iron reinforcing was at the rudder post head,  the attaching point between the tiller and the rudder post, serious stuff when you are traveling around the world looking into inlets, negotiating island and reef clusters not to mention heavy seas. The Endeaver used the stern post as the attachment point for her rudder, not a transom, the rudder post did pass through the transom area but just as in other ships, it passed through, not attached. Cook did need to do some structural repairs to his hull, he beached his ship to do it, no mention of structural repairs was made to the hull in the stern area. The most logical solution of a design flaw  would be to put in place something that would relieve the destructive forces that were causing the problem. When faced with a problem, you repair it and do what you can to prevent it from happening again. Cook did that by putting in place, an arc shaped support for his tiller, it worked. The best proof of that, would be that Cooks fix showing up on drawings for her refit after the voyage.  I'm sticking with the arc and also the voyage was mostly in tropical waters, the chimney was probably removed and Cook kept his chickens in the stove so the eggs weren't stolen.
jud 

Pinched from dashicat post # 97;
From the entry for Saturday 27th January from the book, 'First Voyage Around the World: Captain Cook's Journal During his First Voyage, Page 272, Cook writes:
 "Saturday, 27th. Fresh gales, Westerly. This day we got the Tiller properly secured, which hath been the Employment of the Armourers and part of the Carpenters since we Anchor'd at this place; the former in repairing and making new Iron work, and the Latter in fixing a Transom,* for the want of which the Tiller has often been in danger of being broke; the Iron braces that supply'd the want of a Transom have broke every time they have been repair'd."
 
*The reference at the bottom of page 272 states: * A transom is a curved piece of wood which supports the end of the tiller.
 
https://books.google...transom&f=false
 
I would expect that all who have read Cooks words would agree that he is speaking about the tiller, that term defined today is as it was in Cooks day. Transoms as the term is commonly used today, have nothing to do with steering except in a few cases, nor is it common for ships to have their steering gear attached to a transom. Transoms are used today as attachment points for outboard motors, sometimes a steering oar can be used with the transom. Rudders also get attached to small boats by anchoring them to the transom, if there is no stern post.
 
Why is there so much resistance to the tiller supporting arc being added by Cook to prevent future problems with his steering gear? Since that is not logical, it makes me wonder.
 
We know he was having problems with his tiller, it was breaking reinforcing bands, the only place where there was iron reinforcing was at the rudder post head,  the attaching point between the tiller and the rudder post, serious stuff when you are traveling around the world looking into inlets, negotiating island and reef clusters not to mention heavy seas. The Endeaver used the stern post as the attachment point for her rudder, not a transom, the rudder post did pass through the transom area but just as in other ships, it passed through, not attached. Cook did need to do some structural repairs to his hull, he beached his ship to do it, no mention of structural repairs was made to the hull in the stern area. The most logical solution of a design flaw  would be to put in place something that would relieve the destructive forces that were causing the problem. When faced with a problem, you repair it and do what you can to prevent it from happening again. Cook did that by putting in place, an arc shaped support for his tiller, it worked. The best proof of that, would be that Cooks fix showing up on drawings for her refit after the voyage.  I'm sticking with the arc and also the voyage was mostly in tropical waters, the chimney was probably removed and Cook kept his chickens in the stove so the eggs weren't stolen.
jud 

So...moving along on the gun deck bow area and the manger. I fashioned what I think is called a "king" or "deck hook" (I am really not sure if these are the correct terms either) as seen on the 1920's refit. After this I will make the manger bulkheads and then the messenger rigging. The messenger will be the last line joined before closing in the deck later.
 

 

Actually, i think there is some logic to the addition of a support given the odd geometry and the length of the tiller.  I was just supporting an earlier post concerning the use of the word transom.  None of the period treatisers on shipbuilding chose to use that word to describe anything other than the stern timbers.

Pinched from dashicat post # 97;
From the entry for Saturday 27th January from the book, 'First Voyage Around the World: Captain Cook's Journal During his First Voyage, Page 272, Cook writes:
 "Saturday, 27th. Fresh gales, Westerly. This day we got the Tiller properly secured, which hath been the Employment of the Armourers and part of the Carpenters since we Anchor'd at this place; the former in repairing and making new Iron work, and the Latter in fixing a Transom,* for the want of which the Tiller has often been in danger of being broke; the Iron braces that supply'd the want of a Transom have broke every time they have been repair'd."
 
*The reference at the bottom of page 272 states: * A transom is a curved piece of wood which supports the end of the tiller.
 
https://books.google...transom&f=false
 
I would expect that all who have read Cooks words would agree that he is speaking about the tiller, that term defined today is as it was in Cooks day. Transoms as the term is commonly used today, have nothing to do with steering except in a few cases, nor is it common for ships to have their steering gear attached to a transom. Transoms are used today as attachment points for outboard motors, sometimes a steering oar can be used with the transom. Rudders also get attached to small boats by anchoring them to the transom, if there is no stern post.
 
Why is there so much resistance to the tiller supporting arc being added by Cook to prevent future problems with his steering gear? Since that is not logical, it makes me wonder.
 
We know he was having problems with his tiller, it was breaking reinforcing bands, the only place where there was iron reinforcing was at the rudder post head,  the attaching point between the tiller and the rudder post, serious stuff when you are traveling around the world looking into inlets, negotiating island and reef clusters not to mention heavy seas. The Endeaver used the stern post as the attachment point for her rudder, not a transom, the rudder post did pass through the transom area but just as in other ships, it passed through, not attached. Cook did need to do some structural repairs to his hull, he beached his ship to do it, no mention of structural repairs was made to the hull in the stern area. The most logical solution of a design flaw  would be to put in place something that would relieve the destructive forces that were causing the problem. When faced with a problem, you repair it and do what you can to prevent it from happening again. Cook did that by putting in place, an arc shaped support for his tiller, it worked. The best proof of that, would be that Cooks fix showing up on drawings for her refit after the voyage.  I'm sticking with the arc and also the voyage was mostly in tropical waters, the chimney was probably removed and Cook kept his chickens in the stove so the eggs weren't stolen.
jud 

Jud is this correct: If I take an 18 foot beam and support it at a fulcrum point 'c' of 1 foot from end 'a' and apply 250 pounds at the other end 'b' then would it produce 1.9 tons of force at end 'a'? 
Assuming I've understood the physics, then the 8" square oak tiller would need to be able to withstand a load of 1.9 tons at the fulcrum where it enters the rudderhead. Whilst the rudder head would need to be able to withstand an upward load of 1.9 tons @ 1 foot past the tiller fulcrum while at rest. If this is correct then we need to know two things. What is the breaking point of an 8x8" oak beam and the steel strapping required to lift 1.9 tons. If the breaking point of the oak tiller is less than 1.9 tons then it needs to be braced with a support along it's length. If it can withstand a breaking point of 1.9 tons plus extra for tolerences then the rudderhead needs to be strong enough to hold past an upward load of more than 1.9 tons.
 
Of course please correct me if I've got the physics wrong.
 
Bottom line is regardless of the conventional interpretation of history and what we might choose to believe, as Jud has rightly stated, "everything still needs to obey the laws of physics", which is what we are trying to research and answer here with out bias.

Welcome aboard. Cook is talking about the Tiller being in danger of breaking, so it is in this context that I think his use of the word 'Transom' is taken to mean a 'Transverse Supporting Timber'. I don't think he is talking about the rudder or rudder head. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/tiller 
looking at the tiller length and weight, and to compare apples with apples so to speak, then I think there are examples of tiller supporting quadrants where the length and weight of the tiller require support. The Arming and Fitting of English Ships of War 1600-1815 by Brian Lavery, Chapter 2 Tiller and Whipstaff and Chapter 3 The Steering Wheel.
 
Looking at the Bounty it's tiller appears considerably shorter compared to Endeavour which does highlight that Endeavour appears to have an exceptionally long tiller for the size of vessel and therefore as the physics suggest would have required support possibly by use of a sweep, which have been in use for supporting larger tillers since at least the use of the wipstaff in the 17th century. Where the tiller is below deck then the sweep is fixed to the overhead beams and the tiller hangs from it via what some call a gooseneck. However the term gooseneck is also used for the iron fitting attached to the end of tillers that fitted into the whipstaff. Lavery gives a description and drawing of the use of a sweep above decks in smaller vessels, ( 1771 draught of Endeavour), where the tiller requires supporting. (page 23) The Arming and Fitting of English Ships of War 1600-1815 by Brian Lavery, Chapter 2 Tiller and Whipstaff and Chapter 3 The Steering Wheel.
 
Hope this helps answer some of your questions.
 
Cheers Dashi

The defininition of transom dosn't just refer to the aft timbers of a ship or boat, but any transverse supporting timber http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transom .
 
I have only referenced one source which agrees with all other sources I have cross referenced for this log entry. So here is another source http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks/e00043.html#ch6
 
In this context I think Cook is refering to the tiller and not the stern or stern post as opposed to the transoms you are referring. But I need more evidence.
 
A broken stern transom would be a major structural failure resulting in extensive repair work. Granted they were anchored a while with their forge set up on shore for repairs.
 
The note which appears in other sources of the log entry is refering to the end of the tiller.
 
What about the physics?
 
 
 
Thanks Frankie for sharing your point of view.

Those look like catheads to me.   Maybe that's what they are?

Hi Dashi. Another interpretation of that wording "for the want of which the Tiller..." could also imply that a transom had not been formally fitted to Endeavour in the 1768 refit and that he was now fitting one (running improvement so to speak) as a result of the constant tiller issues; and this improvement was then formally amended into the plans of 1771?
 
cheers
 
Pat

Glad you found some documentation for tiller support. In spite of the physic of an unsupported tiller being subject to failure, the supporting arc was a hard sell to most.
good job! :)
jud

Glad you found some documentation for tiller support. In spite of the physic of an unsupported tiller being subject to failure, the supporting arc was a hard sell to most.
good job! :)
jud

From the entry for Saturday 27th January from the book, 'First Voyage Around the World: Captain Cook's Journal During his First Voyage, Page 272, Cook writes:
 
"Saturday, 27th. Fresh gales, Westerly. This day we got the Tiller properly secured, which hath been the Employment of the Armourers and part of the Carpenters since we Anchor'd at this place; the former in repairing and making new Iron work, and the Latter in fixing a Transom,* for the want of which the Tiller has often been in danger of being broke; the Iron braces that supply'd the want of a Transom have broke every time they have been repair'd."
 
*The reference at the bottom of page 272 is indicating in this context Cook is saying: * A transom is a curved piece of wood which supports the end of the tiller.
 
Note: As has been pointed out later in this discussion this is not the generally accepted use of the word 'transom', which leaves this entry open to interpretation. It is my understanding that in earlier vessels such as carracks where the tiller passed out a hole in the stern, that the transom which passed under the tiller was reffered to as a tiller transom.https://books.google.co.nz/books?id=QU40AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA244&lpg=PA244&dq=tiller+transom+definition&source=bl&ots=qs6UGheA-I&sig=u-x5Oq0-HxISibbwwICUKXlkS18&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwirnaKZz6DNAhWHspQKHTNTAZUQ6AEIJzAG#v=onepage&q=tiller%20transom%20definition&f=false
My opinion based on the evidence to hand is that in this context the anotation is using the term 'transom' to mean a transverse timber support which passes under the tiller to support it's weight along it's sweep to replace the job of the iron tiller braces that kept breaking. But not having the carpenters log then this is just my best guess and we may never know for sure. I hope we can agree that Cook wouldn't have sailed with out ensuring the 'fix' to the tiller support 'defect' that took place over 12 days in Queen Charlotte's Sound New Zealand among other running maintenance repairs and de-fouling was up to the job and going to last the long voyage through uncharted waters that was still ahead.
 
https://books.google.co.nz/books?id=WT4zDAAAQBAJ&lpg=PA272&dq=endeavour%20tiller%20transom&pg=PA272#v=onepage&q=endeavour%20tiller%20transom&f=false
 
Cheers

Many of you know that there is a magnetic building jig with magnets and a small flat steel tray to hold the magnets you can purchase for about $30.00...  If you want inexpensive or larger consider an older discarded PC. Many have a flat steel removable side access panels that would be about 14" X 14" +/- and a lot less expensive than you can buy online. You can pick up magnets for about $11
 
If you haven't used magnets to hold things in place they are very handy and well worth the money.

Stern facia:
 
Thought it would be easier to do the facia with the hull upside down so decided I needed to get this done before those bulwark cappings. I'm putting them off for as long as possible to give my brain a chance to work out the best approach for the retro-fit which I think I might now have.
 
Although a friend and I really liked the all blue facia, I must confess to a moment of dread after I first painted it all blue. Plus I'd glued the upper window ledge along the wrong side of my pencil marks making it too tight for the lids, so after seeing that water colour by Sydney Parkinson with the blue taffrail with what looks to be natural beneath and going by the only draught of the stern I have found which does not have the upper window ledge I decided a slight retro-makeover was needed.
 
Holding my breath I dived in and after a couple of days had removed the upper ledge and sanded off the paint. I then applied my pigmented stain and am happy with the result. One rooky mistake I made was to fit the windows before drilling the holes for the window lid hinges because some of the fine sawdust stuck itself to the inside of the glass, not that it's too noticeable.The window lids were also stained with the same pigmented stain and are dry fitted so can be put aside until much later.

Thanks everyone for the replies, and information provided. I've gotten some rope and been practicing different knots so helpful to learn what I need to start with and then to learn about later.

That photo inside the hull looks a lot like the inside of the hull of the Star of India the first time I was allowed in there, collision bulkhead was in place and the rest empty except for the Iron fresh water tank hanging from the overhead. The Star had a lot more rust and trash in there then, which was later cleaned out. My experience being in compartmentalized ships at that time, the open hull seemed huge as did the inner hull of a lumber schooner I was aboard in San Francisco. I like to see these of vessels restored, those with first hand memory's of the old folks talking about these ships are now gone, the only thing left of an era are the bones and some items like the old cheese safe we have in the family that arrived on the West coast aboard a Bark that had went around the Horn, it still smells of cheese.
jud

Update: Thanks for looking in on my build and the likes.
 
The beading I'm adding according to Sydney Parkinson's sketch has been pre-painted and glued after scraping the paint away along the hull in the area for it so the white glue will hold. I then had to trim the main channel brackets and remove a small curve for the quarter badge for these to fit under it.
 
Then standing back I reassessed the stern timber work and decided I needed to bash that into line as much as I could from the as fitted 1768 draught and the stern view by Sydney Parkinson. Doing this was a little fiddly but on this build I've learnt that a little filler and paint can cover a multitude of sins once I've got the timber work as good as I can get it. I haven't quite got the stern side vertical edge quite parallel because I'd previously shaped to fit the figurine which hides this. I also had to fill out the forward outer side of the taff rail with some 1x4mm walnut so the taff rail is the same thickenss. Another reason for refitting the stern timbers is the kit has the lower counter decoration under the counter where as Parkinson's sketch clearly shows it around on the hull as does the replica which is where I will be fitting it. 
 
Next is the bulwark capping which will need a lot of altering to move the rail stanchion positions from their kit positions to the positions drawn on the 1768 proposed refit NMM zaz6588 and the 'as fitted' draught NMM zaz7844. It looks like the rail stanchions replace the timber heads as belay points where there is a rail, so will need to be well attached.

JerseyCityFrankie is covering this here also:  http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/11248-full-rigged-ship-wavertree/   He's involved iwth her as a volunteer.

thanks for sharing that information Bob,
 
i do hope that the workers will do a splended job on Wavertree`s restoration on that old iron hulled cargo sail ship.
Also I`m very pleased that the Peking will be brought home to Hamburg instead of being scrapped, she also will be restorated and moored at the new  planed Hamburg Harbour Museum...
 
Nils

Need to get over the habit of chewing on that work board, when doing that kind of fabrication, looks like you have chewed about 80 mm off already and will need a replacement board soon.
You have made some very nice Dead Eyes Nenad, few who started where you did with this project would have had the patience and fortitude to develop the skills and knowledge gain from research now shown in your work.
jud

That photo inside the hull looks a lot like the inside of the hull of the Star of India the first time I was allowed in there, collision bulkhead was in place and the rest empty except for the Iron fresh water tank hanging from the overhead. The Star had a lot more rust and trash in there then, which was later cleaned out. My experience being in compartmentalized ships at that time, the open hull seemed huge as did the inner hull of a lumber schooner I was aboard in San Francisco. I like to see these of vessels restored, those with first hand memory's of the old folks talking about these ships are now gone, the only thing left of an era are the bones and some items like the old cheese safe we have in the family that arrived on the West coast aboard a Bark that had went around the Horn, it still smells of cheese.
jud

Lines are not normally belayed to a ring.  If a line does terminate at a ring bolt it is normally the standing (not hauled on) end of the line.  In this case the line is put through the ring, a half hitch is taken and then the end is seized to itself.  You see this on sheets and tacks where the standing end is hitched to ring bolts on the hull exterior.  Also in the channels for the halyard tyes.
 
A lot of rigging plans do have sparse belaying plans, but most lines would belay either near the base of the mast on pin rails, at knight heads on the deck, or at cleats, kevels and pin racks at the ships sides.  Sometimes lines, particularly on older vessels, would belay directly to a rail.
 
Regards,

As I described it, it would if uniform tension was kept on the tension side of the line, for insurance just form another loop and put inside the first loop formed on the half hitch and snug it all down, but you loose some the quick release advantage, especially if it gets jammed. Regardless, what I describe would only for a temporary hold fast, poor choice for any rigging intended for extended unattended use. For use in securing an object, it would be fine to use, Rings are used to hook other devices to, not normally lines. Look up quick release knot. Old saying, a half hitch will hold anything, double it and you can hold the world, found that statement not to be so outlandish, but if slack develops, Katie, bar the door.
jud

Could it be that it is not common practice to belay to a ring? Think you have the term belay defined, now you need to take a look at the devices noted in the description you have, compared to a closed ring. If I needed to secure a line to a ring, I would double the line, poke the loop thru the ring and then make a half hitch using the double. That way, if I needed to let go quickly, I would use the free side to pull the hitch apart and have the line clear of the ring. There are several methods people use when a quick emergency release is needed, all require doubling the line before forming the hitch.
jud
need to add, when you make the half hitch, use the loop and lay it in like a shoe lace, then like the shoe lace, a tug will let it fall apart.