Bob Cleek

Bob....my own experiences mimic yours in but a smaller degree.  I too spent many youthful days at the docks and yards talking to and getting information from old salts.  My own travels abroad lent itself to gathering much on the subject.
 
Thank you for being so clear and depictive.  Personally, I have never rigged any vessel I have ever built with anything less then black lanyards......I used the time traveler analogy...because there are very few modelers who actually are aware factually of what you so accurately pointed out.  The point is the truth could be readily identified by going back in time and seeing it for our selves.
One other note....most of the time a ship being driven hard in heavy seas will keep her in bound deadeyes and their lanyards submerged...if they were not preserved they would not last.  One good long voyage around the Horn could leave a vessel looking as if it had been sand blasted and painted with rust and decay.  No wonder captains drove their crews to paint and tar the ships fittings, rigging prior to entering their destinations harbor.  it was all about appearance.....to say, *look at how smart we look after sucha hard voyage*, and to impress the owners with the skill and prowess of the ship and her master. 
 
Rob

The image does show rigging in many stages of completion...however....it is the depiction of the black lanyards that drew my attention to point out that even these hired naval rigging architects understood these items had to be identified...even if it meant using modern synthetic material to mimic tarred rope.
When they re-rigged the Constitution...their Naval architects deemed it necessary to rig the lanyards with black rope.  I can't imagine they could get that detail incorrect, if it were not so.
 
Rob

For the moment at least, not only by time travelers. Some of us "of a certain age" who grew up around deep-water ports, had fathers in the shipping business, and from earliest memory had an abiding interest in and infatuation with all things maritime, were lucky enough to be able to explore rotting sailing ship hulks on the mud flats without getting caught, make the acquaintance of "old timers" who for a living actually rounded the Horn in the last of the cargo carrying square-rigged sailing ships, informally "apprentice" themselves to master wooden boat builders and shipwrights, sail small gaff-and square-riggerd boats with real deadeyes and lanyards, and generally learn a lot of the "old ways."

Rope shrouds would stretch to some extent when new, but this was no surprise to them. As you may know, they used "shroud-laid" cordage for standing rigging before metal cable came into use. (And metal cable stretches, too.) Shroud-laid cordage is laid up with four strands around a heart, or central, strand. Shroud-laid rope doesn't have the tensile strength of three-strand hawser-laid cordage, but it is designed to be much less liable to stretch, hence its use as standing rigging. When a gang of rigging was made up, the shroud-laid cordage was often wet down and "pre-stretched" beforehand. By the time shroud-laid rope is properly wormed, parceled, and tightly served, and all of that impregnated with white lead paste and pine tar, it's a heck of a lot closer to an iron bar than a rubber band!
 
I can't imagine a "sudden change of tack" causing a mast to "come over like a whip" in a vessel of the size of Great Republic. Coming about in any square-rigger, and especially a larger one, is a slow, gradual, and rather complex evolution. There's nothing "sudden" about it. Their masts don't "whip."
 
Lee shrouds and stays will always be slack when the vessel is under sail. That is meant to be. Taking up the slack in lee shrouds while under sail results in seriously over-tensioned shrouds when those lee shrouds become windward shrouds on the opposite tack. A lower mast section might survive such abuse, but such tightening of a smaller upper mast section could even snap it on the opposite tack.  I've never heard of a sailing ship heaving to in mid-ocean to take up slack in its standing rigging.
 
The purpose of the standing rigging isn't simply to "keep the masts from falling down." It's more important function is to distribute the energy loads evenly throughout the vessel's structure. Every part of a vessel moves to a certain extent, and particularly wooden vessels. They are engineered to move so as to minimize shock-loading. Shroud tension is widely misunderstood modernly. We see many modern Marconi (jib-headed) rigged sailboats exhibiting structural damage from shrouds and stays being cranked down with turnbuckles until they sing like violin strings. The mechanics are the same as those of a bow and arrow. Tight shrouds push the heel of the mast downwards like the pointed end of an arrow while pulling up on the chainplates and we frequently see cracked frames and opened garboard seams in wooden boats and even catastrophic chainplate failures and hull fractures in fiberglass boats as a consequence. Shrouds and stays really only need to be tight enough to not be slack when the vessel is at rest. When it is under sail, the windward shrouds and stays tighten up and lee shrouds go slack. Their masts may bend a bit to leeward on each tack until the windward shrouds take up, but that is as it's intended to be.
 
The "long equatorial passages" by square-rigged sailing ships were almost exclusively made in the Trade Winds because that put the wind at their sterns. The sailing was all reaching and they would do as much as possible to avoid windward work which was certainly not a square-rigger's best point of sail. Reaching put most of the stress on the backstays which in many instances designed as running rigging, particularly those run to the lighter masts aloft. That arrangement accommodated stretch to the extent necessary.  Reaching doesn't put a lot of stress on the shrouds, relatively speaking.

For the moment at least, not only by time travelers. Some of us "of a certain age" who grew up around deep-water ports, had fathers in the shipping business, and from earliest memory had an abiding interest in and infatuation with all things maritime, were lucky enough to be able to explore rotting sailing ship hulks on the mud flats without getting caught, make the acquaintance of "old timers" who for a living actually rounded the Horn in the last of the cargo carrying square-rigged sailing ships, informally "apprentice" themselves to master wooden boat builders and shipwrights, sail small gaff-and square-riggerd boats with real deadeyes and lanyards, and generally learn a lot of the "old ways."

It is unarguable that lanyards are for tightening the shrouds/back stays.  Their appropriate tension is the goal to maintain erect, stable masts....and to counter the actions brought upon these members.  One can say they are part of an immovable (set) system....others say they are available for adjustment due to warpage and or stretchage.  I believe both notions are true.  I also believe they had to be preserved in some fasion....to what extent can only been known by time travelers.
 
Personally...I choose dark/black lanyards....for my esthetic eye as well as what I derive from thousands of images and paintings of the subject.    Best part of all is that it is a subjective topic as is most of the finer details of these magnificent vessels.
I stand behind Ed's conclusion for Ed and it works out wonderfully in the end.
 
Rob

Just a couple of additions to Ed's well-reasoned response:
 
- here and on other fora there has been a repeated discussion of what actually 'tar' is. To summarise: in the pre-industrial ages this was a destillation product from resinous tree-bark, namely that of pine-trees; the Eastern Baltic area was a major source, due to the prevalence of such trees there and considerable amounts where shipped through Stockholm, hence the stuff became know as Stockholm Tar; this tar varies in colour, but is essentially dark brown. The two main byproducts from coal destillation to obtain town-gas were coke and various tars; these are chemically different from the wood-tar and essentially black or very dark brown in colour; their smell is also different; due to the large quantities of town-gas produced from the 1840s on, also large quantities of tar became available and began to replace Stockholm Tar, being a lot cheaper. Both products have different properties and, hence, different applications. Stockholm Tar stays sticky, unless whethered at sea, while some of the coal-tar solidify and become quite dry, one volatiles have gassed off.
 
- hemp is a natural fibre and changes its property with humidity content mainly, even if the strands of the rope had been tarred originally; so adjusting the rigging is mostly likely a need over a period of months or years; covering the lanyards in thick Stockholm Tar would make this more difficult, covering in thick coal-tar almost impossible.
 
- the sailing properties of ship depend on many factors, including the trim, the draught, and the rake of the masts; it is known that masters optimised the rigging for given conditions in order to improve the sailing performance; so lanyards stuck in the dead-eyes would not help.
 
- we should not be mislead by the appearance of static museum ships; there compromises have to made for the lack of the continuous and intensive maintenance a working vessel would see; so on such ships you are likely to see a lot of paint and tar slapped onto parts that are prone to deterioration.
 
- also on modern ships rigged with steel wire supporting steel masts you are likely to see many more parts being virtually immobilised with thick coats of paint or tar, because there is no need for adjustment.

Rope shrouds would stretch to some extent when new, but this was no surprise to them. As you may know, they used "shroud-laid" cordage for standing rigging before metal cable came into use. (And metal cable stretches, too.) Shroud-laid cordage is laid up with four strands around a heart, or central, strand. Shroud-laid rope doesn't have the tensile strength of three-strand hawser-laid cordage, but it is designed to be much less liable to stretch, hence its use as standing rigging. When a gang of rigging was made up, the shroud-laid cordage was often wet down and "pre-stretched" beforehand. By the time shroud-laid rope is properly wormed, parceled, and tightly served, and all of that impregnated with white lead paste and pine tar, it's a heck of a lot closer to an iron bar than a rubber band!
 
I can't imagine a "sudden change of tack" causing a mast to "come over like a whip" in a vessel of the size of Great Republic. Coming about in any square-rigger, and especially a larger one, is a slow, gradual, and rather complex evolution. There's nothing "sudden" about it. Their masts don't "whip."
 
Lee shrouds and stays will always be slack when the vessel is under sail. That is meant to be. Taking up the slack in lee shrouds while under sail results in seriously over-tensioned shrouds when those lee shrouds become windward shrouds on the opposite tack. A lower mast section might survive such abuse, but such tightening of a smaller upper mast section could even snap it on the opposite tack.  I've never heard of a sailing ship heaving to in mid-ocean to take up slack in its standing rigging.
 
The purpose of the standing rigging isn't simply to "keep the masts from falling down." It's more important function is to distribute the energy loads evenly throughout the vessel's structure. Every part of a vessel moves to a certain extent, and particularly wooden vessels. They are engineered to move so as to minimize shock-loading. Shroud tension is widely misunderstood modernly. We see many modern Marconi (jib-headed) rigged sailboats exhibiting structural damage from shrouds and stays being cranked down with turnbuckles until they sing like violin strings. The mechanics are the same as those of a bow and arrow. Tight shrouds push the heel of the mast downwards like the pointed end of an arrow while pulling up on the chainplates and we frequently see cracked frames and opened garboard seams in wooden boats and even catastrophic chainplate failures and hull fractures in fiberglass boats as a consequence. Shrouds and stays really only need to be tight enough to not be slack when the vessel is at rest. When it is under sail, the windward shrouds and stays tighten up and lee shrouds go slack. Their masts may bend a bit to leeward on each tack until the windward shrouds take up, but that is as it's intended to be.
 
The "long equatorial passages" by square-rigged sailing ships were almost exclusively made in the Trade Winds because that put the wind at their sterns. The sailing was all reaching and they would do as much as possible to avoid windward work which was certainly not a square-rigger's best point of sail. Reaching put most of the stress on the backstays which in many instances designed as running rigging, particularly those run to the lighter masts aloft. That arrangement accommodated stretch to the extent necessary.  Reaching doesn't put a lot of stress on the shrouds, relatively speaking.

All these great comments.  I can hardly keep up, but let me try.  Bob Cleek raised a number of good points worthy of comment. 
 
At 1600 sq ft, the spanker was Young America's 7th largest sail on the original single topsail rig, with the main and fore topsails being the largest at 2840 and 2600 sqft respectively, followed by the courses.  With double topsails it ranks 3rd or 4th in size depending on the crojack size which is not specified on the original sail plan.  It was still a lot of canvas.  I do not know the method or methods used to take in this sail, but I installed brail blocks on the mizzen mast as well as the other lines shown or those that will be shown in succeeding posts.
 
Color of lanyards is a subject that I hesitate to engage in because it is one of those hot buttons that invite many strongly held opinions.  I would suggest that someone – not me – create a topic on this subject.  I will gladly participate there with my admittedly limited knowledge.  I will, however, at the risk of inviting more comments on this build log, contribute here what I believe are some facts:
 
1.      Deadeyes and lanyards were used not only on shrouds but also on backstays.
2.      On a 3-4 month voyage around Cape Horn, upper masts would be struck down, probably more than once, requiring re-rigging of their stays and shrouds at sea.
3.      Climate variations between say a New York summer at the start of a voyage, equatorial conditions a month later, and semi-arctic conditions at the Cape a month after that, followed by a repeat of those variations up the Pacific, as well as the case described by wefalck, would certainly alter the tension in the standing rigging essential to the support of masts.
4.      All hemp strands were tarred as part of the rope-making process – hence the straw-color (see Luce, Seamanship 1868).  No doubt the effects of sun, salt and weather would lighten this over time.
5.      The treatment applied to standing rigging discussed in earlier posts, according to primary documentation widely used at the time (again Luce, 1868), can only be described as thick, black, tarry paint. – black due to the carbon black content, thick due to the addition of letharge (lead oxide), tarry due to the pine tar.
6.      The relatively complex lanyard/deadeye apparatus is obviously designed to add mechanical advantage (6 to 1) to force applied to the lanyard.  It was clearly intended for applying tension as the following well known diagram shows.
 

 
7.      Methods and practices have evolved over time.  Even early 20th century practices were different than those of the 1860's - and wire was different from hemp.
 
 
So, if I accept the above as facts, I ask the following questions:
 
1.      Why install a large number of contraptions like deadeye/lanyards if they would rarely if ever be used?  Why not just seize shrouds/backstays to chains  after initial tightening?
2.      If these were needed to re-tension or re-rig backstays or even shrouds, why would one clog up this friction-prone device with a thick, tarry paint?
3.      If greasing rigging with galley slush or other lubricant was common at the time, why would this not be used on deadeye lanyards, at least when needed?
4.      What does all this mean to the color of model lanyards?
 
I am sure others will approach this issue differently, but this has been my rationale and my reasons for dark, but not black, lanyards.
 
 
Rob, I believe Hervey Garret Smith's comments on deadeyes apply to 20th century yachts, and his description of tar is different than the tar coating described in Luce for application to the "standing" parts of standing rigging.  What he describes as a "thin liquid pine oil" would not be black.
 
 
As for the boom topping lift configuration that Bob very observantly mentioned, I also noted the shortness of the upper tackles after rigging them.  I am addressing this question, considering correction, and will comment in a later post. Thanks for highlighting this, Bob.
 
Cheers, everyone.
 
Ed

Rigging suffered as much as the hull and fixtures of any Sea going, deep water carrier.  Hemp rope became stronger and less flexible with introduction to salt water.  This is why it is reasonable to assume the lanyards, once set, were weather proofed(By tarring).  Once the hemp line absorbed moisture...it was nearly impossible to adjust it through the wooden holes of the Deadeyes.  Lanyards are part of the standing rigging...rigging that generally is not intended to be regularly adjusted...hence the term *standing* or fixed.  In later models cable and turnbuckles replaced hemp...holding fast the masts in their stepped attitude....resistant of any bi-lateral movement.  Stays are used in similar fasion...to prevent for and aft movement.  Like a bunch of guy wires holding erect the towering masts.
 
If one is diligent and observant, early photographic and even paintings will give evidence of blackened lanyards...which are and have always been part of the *Standing* rigging...and that rigging was always preserved with leather and a varying viscus concoction, known as tar...not like the black sticky, gooey stuff we heat up and put on roofs/roads....but a material more like thick oil.  Historically....tar-jacks were what they called sailors who had the nasty job of applying this dark black/brown material to the standing rigging and they were easily identified by the smears of the material all over their uniforms....as they attempted to wipe it off their hands.  The Royal Navy had issues with this problem and tried uniform changes from white cotton to dyed dark blue to hide the tar on the sailors trousers.
 
Rob

I've shown this photo of my workshop in a previous thread on the same topic. This was taken last November. The Portland is somewhat further along.
A portion of my 12' x 16' model railroad is seen at the far left. The second photo, shot by Phil Monat, gives you an introduction to the level of detail 
I incorporated over 33 years of construction. Layout has approximately 8' of water front.
 
John Elwood

Ed’s research, hard work, and execution are well worth the price of his books. 
Steve

The best thing about the *clipper* design or model as it was known, is that it was for ever evolving.  Narely two were ever a like(American that is), because all aspects of them, from their hull design to the rigging was in constant flux....for ever being changed, altered, modified to gain that extra knot.  To beat out the next guy.  Great fortunes were made on their speculation.  And very specific markets were driving their owners to challenge the builders to be specific in design and function...cargo capacity was exchanged for speed in some models.
Howes Rig became the norm as other designs, like Forbes and Linnell's found less application.  But if one simply scans the model and comes across a feature they are not aware of, they criticize, unbeknownst to them.
It was falsely determined that once the design was *discovered*, designers would settle in and produce good quality vessels..being satisfied with such.   This was not the case.
 
Ed's fine example is only one of many examples of the clipper design.  Masterfully replicated to the best of his ability and with the best knowledge known of the design.   HATS OFF!  Ed!
 
Rob  

Any mate worth his salt wouldn't bother adjusting the lanyards anyway, that would put the deadeyes out of line. Yes, he can fine tune the rig that way but normally, if any slack developed, the lashing holding the shroud to the upper deadeye was re-made so the deadeyes were always at the same level. It would of course require setting up the lanyards again but the point was to have the deadeyes all level so fine tuning using the lanyards wasn't really done. As Mr. Cleek said above, they were normally not very slack. It was a periodic maintenance thing to adjust them, not a piece of running rigging that was adjusted with any frequency. Love your progress, she's on beautiful ship. Probably my favourite American Clipper. Cutty Sark being my favourite. 

The story about taking the slack out of shrouds probably comes from the pre-wire rope days, when ships on long equatorial passages stayed for weeks on the same tack. This may have stretched the windward shrouds and slack had to be taken out of the leeward ones because, if a sudden change of tack for whatever reason would be needed, the mast would come over like a whip, risking to snap it.
With wire rope this is not an issue.

I can't say for sure how the spanker was stuck on the real ship, either, ("different ships, different long splices,") but given the snow mast, which would presumably carry luff hoops on a vessel that size (rather than a laced luff,) I suspect the rig you describe was intended to provide the option of some sort of brailing if desired. There are no "lazy jacks" on the spanker boom, although the topping life rigging appears if would offer the same control of the gaff boom, at least, but perhaps not the sail itself. The spanker is going to be close to, if not the largest sail on the ship and difficult to handle when coming down. This is particularly so, since the spanker boom extends outboard a fair distance, foot ropes or not. The task of "smothering" and lashing down a fore and aft sail is, IMHO, a lot more of a hassle than square sails.  The latter usually flutter outward away from the yard when the sheets are started and do not tend to interfere with the job of gathering them up and reefing or lashing them down. A gaff rigged sail comes down on top of you, and in this instance, on top of the helmsman and, in any kind of a blow, will flog all and sundry within range. (And the weight of wet canvas in a sail of that size is not to be underestimated.) I would think the best way to handle this spanker would be to simultaneously lower the gaff boom and haul the clew inboard and the the leech to the extent possible as she comes down, then beat whatever canvas isn't controlled by the clew inhaul, lazy jacks,  and brails into submission and stop her up.  Were she my ship, I'd be inclined to drop a couple of lazy jacks from the topping lift pendants down and under the spanker boom and back up again on the other side to control the canvas as the gaff boom was lowered. I don't know if that was common practice on ships of that size, though it's quite common in smaller gaff rigged vessels I've known.
 
As for the color of deadeye lanyards, it is indeed black, or dark brown, tending to black as additional pine tar is added as a matter of routine maintenance. All deadeye lanyards and other similar lashings were of tarred hemp (and still are, if you can find it!) There is rarely, if ever, any need to "adjust the tension" of standing rigging in ships such as this one and deadeye lanyards rarely, if ever, are "adjusted." The lanyards should be pre-stretched when new and, thus, should not stretch appreciably in use. Even if they did stretch when new, they'd only need to be taken up once and the problem would be solved for all time. The sort of rigging we are talking about here was designed to "give" so that the strain on the spars and hull would be minimized. (We're not talking about a "high strung" modern jib-headed Marconi racing rig here.) In fact, the friction generated by the lanyards against the deadeye holes makes them quite difficult to set up, let alone  "adjust." The deadeye holes are greased before the tarred hemp lanyard is tightened, but even so, the tightening requires that a purchase clapped onto the shroud be taken to the end of the lanyard in order to get sufficient tension on it. (I've actually had to attach a second purchase on the length of lanyard running from deadeye hole to hole in order to "sweat" the lanyard through all five of the running eyes so that each segment was uniformly tight.) The deadeyes do spread the line stresses in much the same manner as a block purchase, but the lanyards do not run freely as they do in a sheaved block... not by a long shot! When a whole gang of deadeyes and lanyards are made up and fastened with the sheer pole and lashings, all tarred and, modernly, often painted, they are essentially a permanent thing not meant to be untied to be adjusted regularly.
 
Here's all anybody building models could ever need to know about deadeyes and lanyards, from a website selling full-sized traditional rigging supplies: http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/articles/setting-up-shrouds.pdf Perhaps it will serve to eliminate those light-colored lanyards we see so often!
 
I don't want to sound inappropriately critical, but I'd suggest you take a close look at your spanker boom topping lift rigging. The distance between the pendant purchase tackle appears too short to be of much use. You might want to play with it a bit and see just how much the end of the boom will rise when the tackle is two-blocked. I can't tell for sure, but it looks to me like it would only raise the boom about five feet at most, which isn't much. You can't really know if it is "right" until you consider how high up off the deck  the end of the boom is going to be when the sail is set, and then the topping lift would need a bit more "lift" beyond that if it were to be effective. Also, note the forward mast band to which the forward topping lifts are attached. It appears to be too far aft to be of any use. Imagine that the topping lift is hauling up the boom. With the forward band where it is now, rather than further forward, the angle of the "pull" is really only pulling the boom forward against the gooseneck and not upwards, as a topping lift should. If the band were placed forward so that the direction of pull of the forward topping lift line were in the other direction, the pull of the pendants would be "up" instead of "forward."  If so, they would also better serve as lazy jacks to control the gaff as it came down.
 
Great modeling, BTW. I'm really enjoying following your build!

I can't say for sure how the spanker was stuck on the real ship, either, ("different ships, different long splices,") but given the snow mast, which would presumably carry luff hoops on a vessel that size (rather than a laced luff,) I suspect the rig you describe was intended to provide the option of some sort of brailing if desired. There are no "lazy jacks" on the spanker boom, although the topping life rigging appears if would offer the same control of the gaff boom, at least, but perhaps not the sail itself. The spanker is going to be close to, if not the largest sail on the ship and difficult to handle when coming down. This is particularly so, since the spanker boom extends outboard a fair distance, foot ropes or not. The task of "smothering" and lashing down a fore and aft sail is, IMHO, a lot more of a hassle than square sails.  The latter usually flutter outward away from the yard when the sheets are started and do not tend to interfere with the job of gathering them up and reefing or lashing them down. A gaff rigged sail comes down on top of you, and in this instance, on top of the helmsman and, in any kind of a blow, will flog all and sundry within range. (And the weight of wet canvas in a sail of that size is not to be underestimated.) I would think the best way to handle this spanker would be to simultaneously lower the gaff boom and haul the clew inboard and the the leech to the extent possible as she comes down, then beat whatever canvas isn't controlled by the clew inhaul, lazy jacks,  and brails into submission and stop her up.  Were she my ship, I'd be inclined to drop a couple of lazy jacks from the topping lift pendants down and under the spanker boom and back up again on the other side to control the canvas as the gaff boom was lowered. I don't know if that was common practice on ships of that size, though it's quite common in smaller gaff rigged vessels I've known.
 
As for the color of deadeye lanyards, it is indeed black, or dark brown, tending to black as additional pine tar is added as a matter of routine maintenance. All deadeye lanyards and other similar lashings were of tarred hemp (and still are, if you can find it!) There is rarely, if ever, any need to "adjust the tension" of standing rigging in ships such as this one and deadeye lanyards rarely, if ever, are "adjusted." The lanyards should be pre-stretched when new and, thus, should not stretch appreciably in use. Even if they did stretch when new, they'd only need to be taken up once and the problem would be solved for all time. The sort of rigging we are talking about here was designed to "give" so that the strain on the spars and hull would be minimized. (We're not talking about a "high strung" modern jib-headed Marconi racing rig here.) In fact, the friction generated by the lanyards against the deadeye holes makes them quite difficult to set up, let alone  "adjust." The deadeye holes are greased before the tarred hemp lanyard is tightened, but even so, the tightening requires that a purchase clapped onto the shroud be taken to the end of the lanyard in order to get sufficient tension on it. (I've actually had to attach a second purchase on the length of lanyard running from deadeye hole to hole in order to "sweat" the lanyard through all five of the running eyes so that each segment was uniformly tight.) The deadeyes do spread the line stresses in much the same manner as a block purchase, but the lanyards do not run freely as they do in a sheaved block... not by a long shot! When a whole gang of deadeyes and lanyards are made up and fastened with the sheer pole and lashings, all tarred and, modernly, often painted, they are essentially a permanent thing not meant to be untied to be adjusted regularly.
 
Here's all anybody building models could ever need to know about deadeyes and lanyards, from a website selling full-sized traditional rigging supplies: http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/articles/setting-up-shrouds.pdf Perhaps it will serve to eliminate those light-colored lanyards we see so often!
 
I don't want to sound inappropriately critical, but I'd suggest you take a close look at your spanker boom topping lift rigging. The distance between the pendant purchase tackle appears too short to be of much use. You might want to play with it a bit and see just how much the end of the boom will rise when the tackle is two-blocked. I can't tell for sure, but it looks to me like it would only raise the boom about five feet at most, which isn't much. You can't really know if it is "right" until you consider how high up off the deck  the end of the boom is going to be when the sail is set, and then the topping lift would need a bit more "lift" beyond that if it were to be effective. Also, note the forward mast band to which the forward topping lifts are attached. It appears to be too far aft to be of any use. Imagine that the topping lift is hauling up the boom. With the forward band where it is now, rather than further forward, the angle of the "pull" is really only pulling the boom forward against the gooseneck and not upwards, as a topping lift should. If the band were placed forward so that the direction of pull of the forward topping lift line were in the other direction, the pull of the pendants would be "up" instead of "forward."  If so, they would also better serve as lazy jacks to control the gaff as it came down.
 
Great modeling, BTW. I'm really enjoying following your build!

I can't say for sure how the spanker was stuck on the real ship, either, ("different ships, different long splices,") but given the snow mast, which would presumably carry luff hoops on a vessel that size (rather than a laced luff,) I suspect the rig you describe was intended to provide the option of some sort of brailing if desired. There are no "lazy jacks" on the spanker boom, although the topping life rigging appears if would offer the same control of the gaff boom, at least, but perhaps not the sail itself. The spanker is going to be close to, if not the largest sail on the ship and difficult to handle when coming down. This is particularly so, since the spanker boom extends outboard a fair distance, foot ropes or not. The task of "smothering" and lashing down a fore and aft sail is, IMHO, a lot more of a hassle than square sails.  The latter usually flutter outward away from the yard when the sheets are started and do not tend to interfere with the job of gathering them up and reefing or lashing them down. A gaff rigged sail comes down on top of you, and in this instance, on top of the helmsman and, in any kind of a blow, will flog all and sundry within range. (And the weight of wet canvas in a sail of that size is not to be underestimated.) I would think the best way to handle this spanker would be to simultaneously lower the gaff boom and haul the clew inboard and the the leech to the extent possible as she comes down, then beat whatever canvas isn't controlled by the clew inhaul, lazy jacks,  and brails into submission and stop her up.  Were she my ship, I'd be inclined to drop a couple of lazy jacks from the topping lift pendants down and under the spanker boom and back up again on the other side to control the canvas as the gaff boom was lowered. I don't know if that was common practice on ships of that size, though it's quite common in smaller gaff rigged vessels I've known.
 
As for the color of deadeye lanyards, it is indeed black, or dark brown, tending to black as additional pine tar is added as a matter of routine maintenance. All deadeye lanyards and other similar lashings were of tarred hemp (and still are, if you can find it!) There is rarely, if ever, any need to "adjust the tension" of standing rigging in ships such as this one and deadeye lanyards rarely, if ever, are "adjusted." The lanyards should be pre-stretched when new and, thus, should not stretch appreciably in use. Even if they did stretch when new, they'd only need to be taken up once and the problem would be solved for all time. The sort of rigging we are talking about here was designed to "give" so that the strain on the spars and hull would be minimized. (We're not talking about a "high strung" modern jib-headed Marconi racing rig here.) In fact, the friction generated by the lanyards against the deadeye holes makes them quite difficult to set up, let alone  "adjust." The deadeye holes are greased before the tarred hemp lanyard is tightened, but even so, the tightening requires that a purchase clapped onto the shroud be taken to the end of the lanyard in order to get sufficient tension on it. (I've actually had to attach a second purchase on the length of lanyard running from deadeye hole to hole in order to "sweat" the lanyard through all five of the running eyes so that each segment was uniformly tight.) The deadeyes do spread the line stresses in much the same manner as a block purchase, but the lanyards do not run freely as they do in a sheaved block... not by a long shot! When a whole gang of deadeyes and lanyards are made up and fastened with the sheer pole and lashings, all tarred and, modernly, often painted, they are essentially a permanent thing not meant to be untied to be adjusted regularly.
 
Here's all anybody building models could ever need to know about deadeyes and lanyards, from a website selling full-sized traditional rigging supplies: http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/articles/setting-up-shrouds.pdf Perhaps it will serve to eliminate those light-colored lanyards we see so often!
 
I don't want to sound inappropriately critical, but I'd suggest you take a close look at your spanker boom topping lift rigging. The distance between the pendant purchase tackle appears too short to be of much use. You might want to play with it a bit and see just how much the end of the boom will rise when the tackle is two-blocked. I can't tell for sure, but it looks to me like it would only raise the boom about five feet at most, which isn't much. You can't really know if it is "right" until you consider how high up off the deck  the end of the boom is going to be when the sail is set, and then the topping lift would need a bit more "lift" beyond that if it were to be effective. Also, note the forward mast band to which the forward topping lifts are attached. It appears to be too far aft to be of any use. Imagine that the topping lift is hauling up the boom. With the forward band where it is now, rather than further forward, the angle of the "pull" is really only pulling the boom forward against the gooseneck and not upwards, as a topping lift should. If the band were placed forward so that the direction of pull of the forward topping lift line were in the other direction, the pull of the pendants would be "up" instead of "forward."  If so, they would also better serve as lazy jacks to control the gaff as it came down.
 
Great modeling, BTW. I'm really enjoying following your build!

I can't say for sure how the spanker was stuck on the real ship, either, ("different ships, different long splices,") but given the snow mast, which would presumably carry luff hoops on a vessel that size (rather than a laced luff,) I suspect the rig you describe was intended to provide the option of some sort of brailing if desired. There are no "lazy jacks" on the spanker boom, although the topping life rigging appears if would offer the same control of the gaff boom, at least, but perhaps not the sail itself. The spanker is going to be close to, if not the largest sail on the ship and difficult to handle when coming down. This is particularly so, since the spanker boom extends outboard a fair distance, foot ropes or not. The task of "smothering" and lashing down a fore and aft sail is, IMHO, a lot more of a hassle than square sails.  The latter usually flutter outward away from the yard when the sheets are started and do not tend to interfere with the job of gathering them up and reefing or lashing them down. A gaff rigged sail comes down on top of you, and in this instance, on top of the helmsman and, in any kind of a blow, will flog all and sundry within range. (And the weight of wet canvas in a sail of that size is not to be underestimated.) I would think the best way to handle this spanker would be to simultaneously lower the gaff boom and haul the clew inboard and the the leech to the extent possible as she comes down, then beat whatever canvas isn't controlled by the clew inhaul, lazy jacks,  and brails into submission and stop her up.  Were she my ship, I'd be inclined to drop a couple of lazy jacks from the topping lift pendants down and under the spanker boom and back up again on the other side to control the canvas as the gaff boom was lowered. I don't know if that was common practice on ships of that size, though it's quite common in smaller gaff rigged vessels I've known.
 
As for the color of deadeye lanyards, it is indeed black, or dark brown, tending to black as additional pine tar is added as a matter of routine maintenance. All deadeye lanyards and other similar lashings were of tarred hemp (and still are, if you can find it!) There is rarely, if ever, any need to "adjust the tension" of standing rigging in ships such as this one and deadeye lanyards rarely, if ever, are "adjusted." The lanyards should be pre-stretched when new and, thus, should not stretch appreciably in use. Even if they did stretch when new, they'd only need to be taken up once and the problem would be solved for all time. The sort of rigging we are talking about here was designed to "give" so that the strain on the spars and hull would be minimized. (We're not talking about a "high strung" modern jib-headed Marconi racing rig here.) In fact, the friction generated by the lanyards against the deadeye holes makes them quite difficult to set up, let alone  "adjust." The deadeye holes are greased before the tarred hemp lanyard is tightened, but even so, the tightening requires that a purchase clapped onto the shroud be taken to the end of the lanyard in order to get sufficient tension on it. (I've actually had to attach a second purchase on the length of lanyard running from deadeye hole to hole in order to "sweat" the lanyard through all five of the running eyes so that each segment was uniformly tight.) The deadeyes do spread the line stresses in much the same manner as a block purchase, but the lanyards do not run freely as they do in a sheaved block... not by a long shot! When a whole gang of deadeyes and lanyards are made up and fastened with the sheer pole and lashings, all tarred and, modernly, often painted, they are essentially a permanent thing not meant to be untied to be adjusted regularly.
 
Here's all anybody building models could ever need to know about deadeyes and lanyards, from a website selling full-sized traditional rigging supplies: http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/articles/setting-up-shrouds.pdf Perhaps it will serve to eliminate those light-colored lanyards we see so often!
 
I don't want to sound inappropriately critical, but I'd suggest you take a close look at your spanker boom topping lift rigging. The distance between the pendant purchase tackle appears too short to be of much use. You might want to play with it a bit and see just how much the end of the boom will rise when the tackle is two-blocked. I can't tell for sure, but it looks to me like it would only raise the boom about five feet at most, which isn't much. You can't really know if it is "right" until you consider how high up off the deck  the end of the boom is going to be when the sail is set, and then the topping lift would need a bit more "lift" beyond that if it were to be effective. Also, note the forward mast band to which the forward topping lifts are attached. It appears to be too far aft to be of any use. Imagine that the topping lift is hauling up the boom. With the forward band where it is now, rather than further forward, the angle of the "pull" is really only pulling the boom forward against the gooseneck and not upwards, as a topping lift should. If the band were placed forward so that the direction of pull of the forward topping lift line were in the other direction, the pull of the pendants would be "up" instead of "forward."  If so, they would also better serve as lazy jacks to control the gaff as it came down.
 
Great modeling, BTW. I'm really enjoying following your build!

I can't say for sure how the spanker was stuck on the real ship, either, ("different ships, different long splices,") but given the snow mast, which would presumably carry luff hoops on a vessel that size (rather than a laced luff,) I suspect the rig you describe was intended to provide the option of some sort of brailing if desired. There are no "lazy jacks" on the spanker boom, although the topping life rigging appears if would offer the same control of the gaff boom, at least, but perhaps not the sail itself. The spanker is going to be close to, if not the largest sail on the ship and difficult to handle when coming down. This is particularly so, since the spanker boom extends outboard a fair distance, foot ropes or not. The task of "smothering" and lashing down a fore and aft sail is, IMHO, a lot more of a hassle than square sails.  The latter usually flutter outward away from the yard when the sheets are started and do not tend to interfere with the job of gathering them up and reefing or lashing them down. A gaff rigged sail comes down on top of you, and in this instance, on top of the helmsman and, in any kind of a blow, will flog all and sundry within range. (And the weight of wet canvas in a sail of that size is not to be underestimated.) I would think the best way to handle this spanker would be to simultaneously lower the gaff boom and haul the clew inboard and the the leech to the extent possible as she comes down, then beat whatever canvas isn't controlled by the clew inhaul, lazy jacks,  and brails into submission and stop her up.  Were she my ship, I'd be inclined to drop a couple of lazy jacks from the topping lift pendants down and under the spanker boom and back up again on the other side to control the canvas as the gaff boom was lowered. I don't know if that was common practice on ships of that size, though it's quite common in smaller gaff rigged vessels I've known.
 
As for the color of deadeye lanyards, it is indeed black, or dark brown, tending to black as additional pine tar is added as a matter of routine maintenance. All deadeye lanyards and other similar lashings were of tarred hemp (and still are, if you can find it!) There is rarely, if ever, any need to "adjust the tension" of standing rigging in ships such as this one and deadeye lanyards rarely, if ever, are "adjusted." The lanyards should be pre-stretched when new and, thus, should not stretch appreciably in use. Even if they did stretch when new, they'd only need to be taken up once and the problem would be solved for all time. The sort of rigging we are talking about here was designed to "give" so that the strain on the spars and hull would be minimized. (We're not talking about a "high strung" modern jib-headed Marconi racing rig here.) In fact, the friction generated by the lanyards against the deadeye holes makes them quite difficult to set up, let alone  "adjust." The deadeye holes are greased before the tarred hemp lanyard is tightened, but even so, the tightening requires that a purchase clapped onto the shroud be taken to the end of the lanyard in order to get sufficient tension on it. (I've actually had to attach a second purchase on the length of lanyard running from deadeye hole to hole in order to "sweat" the lanyard through all five of the running eyes so that each segment was uniformly tight.) The deadeyes do spread the line stresses in much the same manner as a block purchase, but the lanyards do not run freely as they do in a sheaved block... not by a long shot! When a whole gang of deadeyes and lanyards are made up and fastened with the sheer pole and lashings, all tarred and, modernly, often painted, they are essentially a permanent thing not meant to be untied to be adjusted regularly.
 
Here's all anybody building models could ever need to know about deadeyes and lanyards, from a website selling full-sized traditional rigging supplies: http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/articles/setting-up-shrouds.pdf Perhaps it will serve to eliminate those light-colored lanyards we see so often!
 
I don't want to sound inappropriately critical, but I'd suggest you take a close look at your spanker boom topping lift rigging. The distance between the pendant purchase tackle appears too short to be of much use. You might want to play with it a bit and see just how much the end of the boom will rise when the tackle is two-blocked. I can't tell for sure, but it looks to me like it would only raise the boom about five feet at most, which isn't much. You can't really know if it is "right" until you consider how high up off the deck  the end of the boom is going to be when the sail is set, and then the topping lift would need a bit more "lift" beyond that if it were to be effective. Also, note the forward mast band to which the forward topping lifts are attached. It appears to be too far aft to be of any use. Imagine that the topping lift is hauling up the boom. With the forward band where it is now, rather than further forward, the angle of the "pull" is really only pulling the boom forward against the gooseneck and not upwards, as a topping lift should. If the band were placed forward so that the direction of pull of the forward topping lift line were in the other direction, the pull of the pendants would be "up" instead of "forward."  If so, they would also better serve as lazy jacks to control the gaff as it came down.
 
Great modeling, BTW. I'm really enjoying following your build!

Focusing on your comment that "I'm in the process of assessing this craft to see if its something I want to undertake; a decision I'm not taking lightly."
 
Begin with a quality kit that is designed for "beginners." This forum is full of evaluations on kits and you should review those. A "fore and aft" rigged vessel will be much less challenging than a square-rigged one. Bluejacket Shipcrafters offers a fine line of "Ensign" or beginner's level kits. http://www.bluejacketinc.com/kits/index.htm#ensign Model Shipways (MicroMark) has a British Admiralty longboat kit that is highly recommended for a serious beginner's project. This kit includes a basic tool kit and paints needed to complete the model for around $100. https://www.micromark.com/Model-Shipways-MS1457TL-Longboat-Ship-Kit-with-Tools-1-48 If you sign up for the MicroMark's catalog, you will get regular emails providing premium codes for significant discounts. (Presently, IIRC, MicroMark or a similar company, ModelExpo, are having a 20% off premium code sale.) This longboat model was designed by Chuck Passaro, a MSW forum moderator and his construction of the prototype model can be found at https://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/topic/629-18th-century-english-longboat-by-chuck-c1760/. It is incredibly well illustrated and contains full explanations of every process together with answers to the many questions asked by MSW members who are now building the kit.
 
An important point is that the "build logs" in this forum are very informative. (Some more than others, however, for whatever reason. I have no idea how the modelers who post the really fantastically photographed and instructively written logs have the time to build their model and photograph and write about it at the same time!) The detail and workmanship of some of the masters is breathtaking... and can easily scare off someone who lacks a lifetime of experience and a shop full of specialized power tools. Appreciate and learn from the masters, but realize that if you take care and don't rush your work, it is possible for anyone with patience, attention to detail, and perseverance to build a fine kit model which can deservedly be displayed with pride. It is easily possible to spend thousands of dollars on micro-scale machine tools, but it is also entirely possible to accomplish the same work with hand tools and a bit more time.
 
As for what tools are needed, follow this maxim: "Never buy a tool unless you need it and when you do, buy the best tool you can possibly afford." Properly cared for,  tools retain their value and, for those of us who appreciate them, are a joy to own.  Also, remember the corollary to the above maxim, as well: "A cheap tool will have to be bought twice."  I expect that every MSW member who's been building models for any length of time can give examples of the money we've wasted in our younger years buying seductively advertised "ship modeling tools" offered in the many catalogs that are available. I expect many bought the now-infamous "Loom-A-line" plastic frame that was touted as essential for tying ratlines to shrouds and is totally and completely useless for any purpose whatsoever!  (Fortunately, it wasn't that expensive.) Many of the ship modeling tools sold in the popular catalogs, even when useful, are liable to be of poor quality, fit, and finish. Far higher quality hand tools can usually be purchased from professional jewelry-making and medical surgical instrument supply houses, and often for the same price, if not less, than the modeling tool catalogs. (This applies to edged tools especially.) You will probably find that you already have a lot, if not most, of the tools you will need when starting out lying around the house. 
 
The specific tools you might need to get started are little more than a hobby knife, some decent tweezers, a sharp fine pointed pair of scissors, a set of small files, and a selection of sandpaper. (And, some of the top retailers like ModelExpo and MicroMark often package those tools along with their "introductory kits" at a large discount to get you "hooked.") Beyond that, the model you build will instruct you in what you need as you go along. This section of the MSW forum on Modeling Tools and Workshop Equipment provides invaluable information. (The "search" thingy in the upper right hand corner of the page is your friend.) You will find experienced modelers commenting at length on the merits of just about every tool and material known to man or beast. If, perchance, you can't find information on a tool or material already discussed, just post your question and somebody will surely have a good answer for you. If you limit yourself to acquiring fine tools you need, that too can become a hobby in itself! Spending twenty-five bucks or so on a good tool now and then is not likely to be noticed by the purser of the household and is a healthy way to treat yourself when you deserve it!
 
With something like the Model Shipways longboat kit, you will risk little money in finding out whether building model ships is something you enjoy doing and you won't end up being one of those people who spent a thousand bucks or more on a spectacular Seventeenth or Eighteenth Century warship model kit which might well be so intimidating that it is never started, let alone finished.
 
So before getting off into buying a lot of tools, I'd urge you to pick put a model that strikes your fancy, keeping the first one simple. Don't bite off more than you can chew. Then look it up in the "Kit Build Logs" index (at the top of the "Build Logs" section of the forum.) There is a build log, and often several, for just about every model kit worth building in that section. Those logs written by modelers, some building their first model, will give you an excellent idea of what is involved in building any given kit. That will give you the confidence to proceed with the particular model that interests you... or at least determine "if its something I want to undertake."
 
Lastly, stay away from eBay and only buy a kit from a retailer who will supply missing parts and plans if that comes to pass and never, ever, buy Chinese or Russian "knock off" counterfeit kits pirated from legitimate manufacturers. Not only do they rip off legitimate kit designers and manufacturers, but, simply put, they are not worth even the cut rate prices they charge for them.

Your work is a joy to behold! I've hung my share of full-size coiled falls on belaying pins in my day and I can confirm that your deciding to hang them as you have is correct.  It's done as pictured on the Joseph Conrad above, although it looks like in that picture a few more turns around the pin than is necessary (or properly shipshape) have been taken. Correctly, the fall is brought down and beneath the rail, behind the bottom of the pin, up and across and behind the top of the pin, back down and hitched over the top of the pin. More than one "figure eight" around the pin only makes for more work casting the line off the pin.

The 1870's picture of the Inuit kids on the deck also shows the coils correctly hung on the pins, although, as is clear from all the cargo and gear on deck, the vessel wasn't sailing and they were probably working on the rigging and not too particular about it at the moment, as things certainly aren't "shipshape." Still, any able seaman would automatically coil the fall into one hand, or on deck if it were too long to hold in one hand, starting at the pin end and leaving a length free from the pin, imparting a half-twist as each coil was measured out at arm's length, so the laid line would not kink, and when the fall was fully coiled, present it to the pin and reach through the center of the coil and grab the length of line between the coil and the pin, giving it a turn, or two, depending upon it's length, pulling the twisted line back through the center of the coil and up in front of the coil and over the top of the pin. (For lighter lines, one can take a longer length between the pin and coil and take a couple of turns around the coil with it to gather the coil together, and then bring it through the coil above the turn and place it over the pin. This will gather the coil of light line tightly and more neatly.) In this fashion, the loop over the top of the pin could be cast free and the coil fall to the deck, the side closest to the pin facing upwards, and the coiled fall will be ready to run free without fouling. Any seaman that failed to do it that way back in the day would likely get the bosun's start across his back! LOL
 
I don't know how many otherwise exquisite models I've seen with the coiled falls simply hung over the pins. It should be easy to imagine the consequence of that in heavy weather with decks awash... the deck would soon be a rat's nest of tangled cordage! Another frequently seen "faux pas" are coils that are the wrong size.  Each coil should be as long as is necessary for that part of the rigging to run as intended. If the line, such as a headsail halyard, runs to the top of a headstay, then the belayed coil when the sail is set should be made up of a length of line equal to the distance to the halyard block. Were it shorter, the bitter end of the halyard would run aloft and out of reach when the sail was struck. Coils on a pin rail if neatly done should all be about the same length, pin to deck, but of different girths, reflecting the amount of line properly needed. That detail is very frequently overlooked, even on otherwise very well-done models. Then there are the all-too-common "white" deadeye lanyards which in practice are always tarred "black," ... misplaced and oversized  trunnels, plank butts on frames, ... and overly long planks... but I digress.
 
I'd probably be a very unpopular model competition judge, but whether or not a model was built by a modeler with a command of full-sized shipbuilding practices and marlinspike seamanship is immediately obvious to the "sailor's eye." My obnoxious pontification isn't intended as a criticism, but rather to point out that you've illustrated here the correct way to do it and to offer the observation to those "landsmen" who otherwise must rely on instructions that come with a kit that learning to "think like a sailor" will avoid such pitfalls.

I can't say for sure how the spanker was stuck on the real ship, either, ("different ships, different long splices,") but given the snow mast, which would presumably carry luff hoops on a vessel that size (rather than a laced luff,) I suspect the rig you describe was intended to provide the option of some sort of brailing if desired. There are no "lazy jacks" on the spanker boom, although the topping life rigging appears if would offer the same control of the gaff boom, at least, but perhaps not the sail itself. The spanker is going to be close to, if not the largest sail on the ship and difficult to handle when coming down. This is particularly so, since the spanker boom extends outboard a fair distance, foot ropes or not. The task of "smothering" and lashing down a fore and aft sail is, IMHO, a lot more of a hassle than square sails.  The latter usually flutter outward away from the yard when the sheets are started and do not tend to interfere with the job of gathering them up and reefing or lashing them down. A gaff rigged sail comes down on top of you, and in this instance, on top of the helmsman and, in any kind of a blow, will flog all and sundry within range. (And the weight of wet canvas in a sail of that size is not to be underestimated.) I would think the best way to handle this spanker would be to simultaneously lower the gaff boom and haul the clew inboard and the the leech to the extent possible as she comes down, then beat whatever canvas isn't controlled by the clew inhaul, lazy jacks,  and brails into submission and stop her up.  Were she my ship, I'd be inclined to drop a couple of lazy jacks from the topping lift pendants down and under the spanker boom and back up again on the other side to control the canvas as the gaff boom was lowered. I don't know if that was common practice on ships of that size, though it's quite common in smaller gaff rigged vessels I've known.
 
As for the color of deadeye lanyards, it is indeed black, or dark brown, tending to black as additional pine tar is added as a matter of routine maintenance. All deadeye lanyards and other similar lashings were of tarred hemp (and still are, if you can find it!) There is rarely, if ever, any need to "adjust the tension" of standing rigging in ships such as this one and deadeye lanyards rarely, if ever, are "adjusted." The lanyards should be pre-stretched when new and, thus, should not stretch appreciably in use. Even if they did stretch when new, they'd only need to be taken up once and the problem would be solved for all time. The sort of rigging we are talking about here was designed to "give" so that the strain on the spars and hull would be minimized. (We're not talking about a "high strung" modern jib-headed Marconi racing rig here.) In fact, the friction generated by the lanyards against the deadeye holes makes them quite difficult to set up, let alone  "adjust." The deadeye holes are greased before the tarred hemp lanyard is tightened, but even so, the tightening requires that a purchase clapped onto the shroud be taken to the end of the lanyard in order to get sufficient tension on it. (I've actually had to attach a second purchase on the length of lanyard running from deadeye hole to hole in order to "sweat" the lanyard through all five of the running eyes so that each segment was uniformly tight.) The deadeyes do spread the line stresses in much the same manner as a block purchase, but the lanyards do not run freely as they do in a sheaved block... not by a long shot! When a whole gang of deadeyes and lanyards are made up and fastened with the sheer pole and lashings, all tarred and, modernly, often painted, they are essentially a permanent thing not meant to be untied to be adjusted regularly.
 
Here's all anybody building models could ever need to know about deadeyes and lanyards, from a website selling full-sized traditional rigging supplies: http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/articles/setting-up-shrouds.pdf Perhaps it will serve to eliminate those light-colored lanyards we see so often!
 
I don't want to sound inappropriately critical, but I'd suggest you take a close look at your spanker boom topping lift rigging. The distance between the pendant purchase tackle appears too short to be of much use. You might want to play with it a bit and see just how much the end of the boom will rise when the tackle is two-blocked. I can't tell for sure, but it looks to me like it would only raise the boom about five feet at most, which isn't much. You can't really know if it is "right" until you consider how high up off the deck  the end of the boom is going to be when the sail is set, and then the topping lift would need a bit more "lift" beyond that if it were to be effective. Also, note the forward mast band to which the forward topping lifts are attached. It appears to be too far aft to be of any use. Imagine that the topping lift is hauling up the boom. With the forward band where it is now, rather than further forward, the angle of the "pull" is really only pulling the boom forward against the gooseneck and not upwards, as a topping lift should. If the band were placed forward so that the direction of pull of the forward topping lift line were in the other direction, the pull of the pendants would be "up" instead of "forward."  If so, they would also better serve as lazy jacks to control the gaff as it came down.
 
Great modeling, BTW. I'm really enjoying following your build!

I can't say for sure how the spanker was stuck on the real ship, either, ("different ships, different long splices,") but given the snow mast, which would presumably carry luff hoops on a vessel that size (rather than a laced luff,) I suspect the rig you describe was intended to provide the option of some sort of brailing if desired. There are no "lazy jacks" on the spanker boom, although the topping life rigging appears if would offer the same control of the gaff boom, at least, but perhaps not the sail itself. The spanker is going to be close to, if not the largest sail on the ship and difficult to handle when coming down. This is particularly so, since the spanker boom extends outboard a fair distance, foot ropes or not. The task of "smothering" and lashing down a fore and aft sail is, IMHO, a lot more of a hassle than square sails.  The latter usually flutter outward away from the yard when the sheets are started and do not tend to interfere with the job of gathering them up and reefing or lashing them down. A gaff rigged sail comes down on top of you, and in this instance, on top of the helmsman and, in any kind of a blow, will flog all and sundry within range. (And the weight of wet canvas in a sail of that size is not to be underestimated.) I would think the best way to handle this spanker would be to simultaneously lower the gaff boom and haul the clew inboard and the the leech to the extent possible as she comes down, then beat whatever canvas isn't controlled by the clew inhaul, lazy jacks,  and brails into submission and stop her up.  Were she my ship, I'd be inclined to drop a couple of lazy jacks from the topping lift pendants down and under the spanker boom and back up again on the other side to control the canvas as the gaff boom was lowered. I don't know if that was common practice on ships of that size, though it's quite common in smaller gaff rigged vessels I've known.
 
As for the color of deadeye lanyards, it is indeed black, or dark brown, tending to black as additional pine tar is added as a matter of routine maintenance. All deadeye lanyards and other similar lashings were of tarred hemp (and still are, if you can find it!) There is rarely, if ever, any need to "adjust the tension" of standing rigging in ships such as this one and deadeye lanyards rarely, if ever, are "adjusted." The lanyards should be pre-stretched when new and, thus, should not stretch appreciably in use. Even if they did stretch when new, they'd only need to be taken up once and the problem would be solved for all time. The sort of rigging we are talking about here was designed to "give" so that the strain on the spars and hull would be minimized. (We're not talking about a "high strung" modern jib-headed Marconi racing rig here.) In fact, the friction generated by the lanyards against the deadeye holes makes them quite difficult to set up, let alone  "adjust." The deadeye holes are greased before the tarred hemp lanyard is tightened, but even so, the tightening requires that a purchase clapped onto the shroud be taken to the end of the lanyard in order to get sufficient tension on it. (I've actually had to attach a second purchase on the length of lanyard running from deadeye hole to hole in order to "sweat" the lanyard through all five of the running eyes so that each segment was uniformly tight.) The deadeyes do spread the line stresses in much the same manner as a block purchase, but the lanyards do not run freely as they do in a sheaved block... not by a long shot! When a whole gang of deadeyes and lanyards are made up and fastened with the sheer pole and lashings, all tarred and, modernly, often painted, they are essentially a permanent thing not meant to be untied to be adjusted regularly.
 
Here's all anybody building models could ever need to know about deadeyes and lanyards, from a website selling full-sized traditional rigging supplies: http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/articles/setting-up-shrouds.pdf Perhaps it will serve to eliminate those light-colored lanyards we see so often!
 
I don't want to sound inappropriately critical, but I'd suggest you take a close look at your spanker boom topping lift rigging. The distance between the pendant purchase tackle appears too short to be of much use. You might want to play with it a bit and see just how much the end of the boom will rise when the tackle is two-blocked. I can't tell for sure, but it looks to me like it would only raise the boom about five feet at most, which isn't much. You can't really know if it is "right" until you consider how high up off the deck  the end of the boom is going to be when the sail is set, and then the topping lift would need a bit more "lift" beyond that if it were to be effective. Also, note the forward mast band to which the forward topping lifts are attached. It appears to be too far aft to be of any use. Imagine that the topping lift is hauling up the boom. With the forward band where it is now, rather than further forward, the angle of the "pull" is really only pulling the boom forward against the gooseneck and not upwards, as a topping lift should. If the band were placed forward so that the direction of pull of the forward topping lift line were in the other direction, the pull of the pendants would be "up" instead of "forward."  If so, they would also better serve as lazy jacks to control the gaff as it came down.
 
Great modeling, BTW. I'm really enjoying following your build!

I can't say for sure how the spanker was stuck on the real ship, either, ("different ships, different long splices,") but given the snow mast, which would presumably carry luff hoops on a vessel that size (rather than a laced luff,) I suspect the rig you describe was intended to provide the option of some sort of brailing if desired. There are no "lazy jacks" on the spanker boom, although the topping life rigging appears if would offer the same control of the gaff boom, at least, but perhaps not the sail itself. The spanker is going to be close to, if not the largest sail on the ship and difficult to handle when coming down. This is particularly so, since the spanker boom extends outboard a fair distance, foot ropes or not. The task of "smothering" and lashing down a fore and aft sail is, IMHO, a lot more of a hassle than square sails.  The latter usually flutter outward away from the yard when the sheets are started and do not tend to interfere with the job of gathering them up and reefing or lashing them down. A gaff rigged sail comes down on top of you, and in this instance, on top of the helmsman and, in any kind of a blow, will flog all and sundry within range. (And the weight of wet canvas in a sail of that size is not to be underestimated.) I would think the best way to handle this spanker would be to simultaneously lower the gaff boom and haul the clew inboard and the the leech to the extent possible as she comes down, then beat whatever canvas isn't controlled by the clew inhaul, lazy jacks,  and brails into submission and stop her up.  Were she my ship, I'd be inclined to drop a couple of lazy jacks from the topping lift pendants down and under the spanker boom and back up again on the other side to control the canvas as the gaff boom was lowered. I don't know if that was common practice on ships of that size, though it's quite common in smaller gaff rigged vessels I've known.
 
As for the color of deadeye lanyards, it is indeed black, or dark brown, tending to black as additional pine tar is added as a matter of routine maintenance. All deadeye lanyards and other similar lashings were of tarred hemp (and still are, if you can find it!) There is rarely, if ever, any need to "adjust the tension" of standing rigging in ships such as this one and deadeye lanyards rarely, if ever, are "adjusted." The lanyards should be pre-stretched when new and, thus, should not stretch appreciably in use. Even if they did stretch when new, they'd only need to be taken up once and the problem would be solved for all time. The sort of rigging we are talking about here was designed to "give" so that the strain on the spars and hull would be minimized. (We're not talking about a "high strung" modern jib-headed Marconi racing rig here.) In fact, the friction generated by the lanyards against the deadeye holes makes them quite difficult to set up, let alone  "adjust." The deadeye holes are greased before the tarred hemp lanyard is tightened, but even so, the tightening requires that a purchase clapped onto the shroud be taken to the end of the lanyard in order to get sufficient tension on it. (I've actually had to attach a second purchase on the length of lanyard running from deadeye hole to hole in order to "sweat" the lanyard through all five of the running eyes so that each segment was uniformly tight.) The deadeyes do spread the line stresses in much the same manner as a block purchase, but the lanyards do not run freely as they do in a sheaved block... not by a long shot! When a whole gang of deadeyes and lanyards are made up and fastened with the sheer pole and lashings, all tarred and, modernly, often painted, they are essentially a permanent thing not meant to be untied to be adjusted regularly.
 
Here's all anybody building models could ever need to know about deadeyes and lanyards, from a website selling full-sized traditional rigging supplies: http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/articles/setting-up-shrouds.pdf Perhaps it will serve to eliminate those light-colored lanyards we see so often!
 
I don't want to sound inappropriately critical, but I'd suggest you take a close look at your spanker boom topping lift rigging. The distance between the pendant purchase tackle appears too short to be of much use. You might want to play with it a bit and see just how much the end of the boom will rise when the tackle is two-blocked. I can't tell for sure, but it looks to me like it would only raise the boom about five feet at most, which isn't much. You can't really know if it is "right" until you consider how high up off the deck  the end of the boom is going to be when the sail is set, and then the topping lift would need a bit more "lift" beyond that if it were to be effective. Also, note the forward mast band to which the forward topping lifts are attached. It appears to be too far aft to be of any use. Imagine that the topping lift is hauling up the boom. With the forward band where it is now, rather than further forward, the angle of the "pull" is really only pulling the boom forward against the gooseneck and not upwards, as a topping lift should. If the band were placed forward so that the direction of pull of the forward topping lift line were in the other direction, the pull of the pendants would be "up" instead of "forward."  If so, they would also better serve as lazy jacks to control the gaff as it came down.
 
Great modeling, BTW. I'm really enjoying following your build!