rybakov

Hello again to all, and thank you all for staying with me on this journey of the SS Michelangelo project which ends with this final segment.   My efforts are now focused on the next project, the USS/SS Leviathan, which you can follow by clicking on the new link in my signature, below.
 
As the last segment ended I had made up and installed the three types of lights around the ship.  The final detail was the rigging.  This was fairly simple and consisted of only two types, the stays and the radio antenna. 

The stays were of three different weights, but all were made up in the same way.  The lowest shrouds for the two masts and their forestays were done with Accu-Flex stainless steel beading wire in 0.0095” diameter, while the middle backstays were done in the slightly smaller 0.007” diameter.  Despite these small sizes they are each laid up from 7 strands of stainless steel wire wrapped in a clear plastic coating.  They look like metal because they are metal.  The uppermost backstays and the lifts for the spars are made from silver fly tying line, about 0.005”. 
 
Each line was secured with a scale turnbuckle made from a small piece of brass tubing.  The line was fed through the body of the turnbuckle, then through a small eyebolt twisted up from iron wire, then back through the turnbuckle tube.  After the shaft of the eyebolt is glued in place the wire is pulled taut and the tube slid down to lock it in place.  Then it is simply glued and the excess line clipped off and the turnbuckle painted silver.  For size comparison, the background is a normal paper towel with its embossed pattern.

Here is the finished model with the stays installed.  The radio lines are black so they do not show up here.

Taking a tour of the ship, here is the forward half with the winches, hatches, and cargo cranes of the bow working deck.

The midships area has the main pool, the boats, and those 3-D printed cages for the funnels.

And the stern, with the two smaller pools and the numerous complicated light poles.

Viewed from dead astern I can see just a little wobble in the upper green stripe, but overall I am quite happy with her.

And of course, the obligatory shot from low on the bow.

The final decision was how to display and case her.  I located a nice mahogany case on line and had it shipped from Vietnam.  The shiny aluminum pedestals nicely set off the colors of the model, but the light maple wood base that I first selected just did not go.  It did not match any of the colors, and made the model look too high in the case.

Instead, I refinished the base to match the mahogany case and the results were, I think, a significant improvement.

So now it is ready to motor off to someone else’s collection.  I will be contacting brokers who deal in ship models to see if there is any interest.  Frankly, my wife will not mind if it does not sell.  She thinks it looks perfect on our sideboard.  I have to agree, though I say it who shouldn’t.

Meanwhile, I will be posting my progress on the Leviathan project.  If you enjoyed this journey with me, I invite your participation, comments and suggestions on that one, as always.
 
And as always, be well.
 
Dan

Here is what I used, based upon R.C. Anderson The Rigging of Ships in the Days of the Sprtisail Topmast 1600 - 1720:
 
The rigging sizes all are figured relative to the main stay which has a circumference equal to half the maximum diameter of the main mast, so
42.76 inches mast diameter x 1/100 scale gives 0.43 in.  scale mast diameter
.043 / 2 gives a main stay circumference of 0.215 inches
0.215 / 3.14 gives a main stay diameter of 0.068 inches.
 
The closest line I had available is 0.08 inches (which may be a bit too large. 0.06 may be a better choice)
 
The following rules of thumb then apply (in order of size):
Fore stay = 4/5 of the main stay
Main shrouds and Main topmast stay = 1/2
Fore Shrouds, Fore topmast stay, Mizzen stay = 2/5
Main topmast and Mizzen shrouds = 1/4
Fore topmast shrouds, Mizzen Topmast stay and the two Topgallant stays 1/5
Shrouds for the last 3 = 1/6 
 
These following rules apply to the rest of the rigging but they are relative to their respective lines (this should become clear in the table below):
 
Mast tackle pendants = shrouds (i.e Main mast tackle pendants = the Main mast shroud diameter)
Shroud deadeye laniards = 1/2 the shroud
Stay collars = 3/4 of the stay
Tackle runners = 2/3 of their pendant
Tackle falls = 1/2 of their runner or pendant
Backstays = Shrouds
Tyes = Shrouds
Halyards = 2/3 of the Tye
Lifts = 3/8 of the shroud
Lift pendants = 1/2 shroud
Braces = 3/4 of the Brace pendant
Brace Pendant = 1/2 shroud
Deadeyes = 1/2 the diameter of the mast
Tacks = shroud
Sheet = 3/4 shroud
Clews = 1/2 of the sheet
Bowlines = 1/2 shroud
Leech lines = 1/3 shroud
Bunt lines = 1/3 shroud
 
Block length should be about 12 times the diameter of the rope and their sheeves should be about 9x the diameter of the rope
 
Hope that helps some.
 
Regards,
 

I’m looking for “The Perfect Compass”. I’ve never found one that suited my specifications for “The Perfect Compass”. The world is encircled by inadequate compasses. If you drew a pie chart, using a disappointing compass, you could show that there’s only a tiny slice devoted to “serious compasses” and the rest of the pie is made up of cheap dollar store flimsy compasses, often made of plastic. 
the “serious compasses” are nearly as bad as the cheap flimsy ones in terms of performance. 
My requirements for a compass are simple. I need it to stay in the adjustment I set it to. Most compasses “open up” as you draw the circle and you only notice when the two ends fail to meet at the completion of the circle. 80% of the time I’m using my compass as a divider, for measuring, and this tendency for the tool to lose its adjustment mid-use means I’m treating the tool like a glass of nitroglycerin as I move it from the thing I’m measuring to the place I’m recording the measurement, I never trust the compass to remain fixed and unaltered. For this I guess you have to hav a Screw-adjusting Compass.
the other requirement is that I want the compass to allow me to use a pencil in it, not tiny awkward proprietary bits of naked lead I have to keep in stock and endlessly fuss with.
 
 You can certainly find compasses that accept an ordinary pencil.
and you can certainly find high-end compasses that are Screw-Adjusted. But apparently you can’t get both features in the same quality instrument. 
This one is my favorite, as you can see it’s ancient. Modern versions are available but the metal they use to make them is so malleable it’s FLOPPY.

I had high hopes for this one but the plastic sleeve that holds the pencil is elastic! The pencil isn’t really fixed and unmovable.

Same problem with this one. Everything is fine but for the means of attaching the pencil, the pencil flexes in the joint. Sigh.
 

More spurs above water level; all West European, all somewhat later than the period in question, but indicative that spurs above water level were what was used. Unfortunately there are no surviving representations of galleys with their spurs from the 10th or 11th century, neither Byzantine nor any other. However, beginning with the 1993 Maritime Mirror article by Frederick van Doornick Jr and expanded on by Prof Pryor, first in Age of the Galley and later at more length in Age of the Dromon, it has been firmly established that Byzantine dromons had raised spurs, not waterline rams.

From the Liber ad Honorem Augusti, late 12th/early 13th century Italian.

 
 
 
And here is my first draft of how the katakorax might have fixed the spur to the bow of a dromon. Theoretical only, and I'll have to make it in 3D (probably in plasticiene) to check that it would work.
 

In real life it could have been constructed of wrought iron, but it might have been easier to cast it in bronze. I'd meant to draw nails/rivets through the "knees" into the wales, but forgot. Perhaps it should also have a solid back to it and extend further forward as a socket for the spur rather than have the spur directly against the stempost , but this is after all a first draft.
 
By the way, the pictures above have inspired me to reconsider the height of the forecastle. I realise the proportions on mediaeval pictures can't be totally relied upon, but all of the forecastles shown are lower than the one I've worked up for the dromon. On the other hand, these don't have to allow room below the forecastle for the Greek Fire apparatus. Still thinking about it.
 
 
Steven
 

Roger nailed it above.  I don't have any experience sailing a square-rigged vessel, but on my little sloop, adjusting the rake of the mast even a little can noticeably change the way she handles.
Below is a relevant excerpt from a message sent by Lt. Stewart, Commanding US Brig Syren to Captain Preble in USS Constitution on 01 January 1804 (during the Barbary War, sourced from the US Navy History of same)...
 
"The 27th we sailed and kept company with the United States Brig Argus until the 29th.  At midnight, a severe gale of wind came on with a tremendous sea that hove the Syren on her beam ends and filled her waist full of water.  We got her before the wind, knocked out some of the ports, and freed her decks.  The jolly boat was stove to atoms and lost.  Nothing but strong gales from the westward, with heavy squalls (that prevented our carrying any sail but storm stay sails) prevailed from the 2nd of December to the 12th, during which time we were driven considerably to the eastward and all my officers sick but two young and inexperienced midshipmen."
 
Later in port...
 
"I immediately commenced the necessary repairs that the Brig requires.  She leaks very much in her upper works, which has damaged some of the provisions and other articles.   I am therefore under the necessity of caulking.  Her rigging we take this opportunity of overhauling and also to shift her main mast further aft, which it requires, and feel confident it will much improve her sailing.  I left at Leghorn Robert T. Spence, Midshipman, whose mind had been for some time deranged.  He is a son of Mr. Spence, Purser of the Philadelphia".
 
Cheers,
 
Keith

Matrin is heading you down the right path.  Mast Raking is a calculation based on several forces, one of which is the hull design.  If large areas of canvas are vertical to the center of gravity...forward and down forces drive the hull forward and down as well...causing the hull to plunge into the oncoming water.  Instead of having a *trim* path through the water, the hull is pressed down forward...and the vessel plows instead of drives.
Raking the masts several degrees prevents this action and draws the most energy from the sails and translates it forward along the long axis of the hull.
 
Some extreme clippers had extreme rake to the masts and even some schooners had even greater rake...to capture the winds energy and lift and push the hull forward..NOT, cause it to plunge down forward.
 
Good luck.
 
Rob

For size comparison.
Karl

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 287 –Mast Caps and Parral Yokes
 
As was mentioned in the last post, making all the upper masts allowed the bores for both the caps and parral yokes to be made and fitted efficiently using one basic milling machine set up.  Holes were bored using the rotary table with the milling bit offset to produce each required bore diameter to fit its appropriate mast.
 
The first step was to create the necessary blanks of proper thickness for each required piece.  The first picture shows the collection of blanks for all the remaining caps and parrals.
 

 
To make these efficiently, a list of thicknesses was tabulated from the drawings.  Long (12") wood blanks were then reduced to size on the thickness sender starting with the thickest, then cutting off a roughly 3" blank, then reducing the thickness, cutting off the next blank, and so on. 
 
The next step on each of these was to cut it to the required width.  The next picture shows a correct-width blank for a cap with its center being marked using a center point in the mill chuck that has been precisely centered on the rotary table.
 

 
This mark – on the center of the bore - permitted a center line to be drawn on the piece that will later be used to mark out the shape of the cap and the square mortise for the masthead tenon.  This line was only needed on cap pieces.  The four-jaw centering chuck is a convenient way to hold these pieces, but a check should be made to determine which pair of jaws centers the work most precisely. 
 
The next picture shows a centerline being drawn with a compass.
 

 
To set the bore, the actual mast diameter was used, although this differed from the drawing diameter by at most a few thousandths of an inch. 
 

 
I did not leave an allowance for a simulated leather lining on either the caps or the parrals, but this could be done by increasing the offset by the thickness of the expected lining.  The milling bit diameter – smaller than the final bore - was subtracted from the mast diameter measurement and the remainder divided by 2 to determine the radial offset of the bit.  The table is rotated to make the hole.   The next picture shows the offset bit boring a hole in a cap piece.
 

 
These blanks were made long enough to produce at least two final pieces as insurance against later finishing errors.  Also, each setup was checked for fit after initial boring – usually on a scrap piece – so any necessary offset adjustments could be made before making the final bores.  The next picture shows a cap piece after boring and fitting to the mast.
 

 
This piece will later be marked out for final length, shape, and cutting of the square mortise.  After boring each cap hole, the same mill setup and offset was used to bore the parral yoke for the yard above.
 
Each parral blank was first ripped to double width based on measurements taken from the drawings as shown in the next picture.
 

 
The calipers were used to measure the parral width, which was then doubled to set the blank width for boring.  This method is accurate enough for the purpose.  After boring, the piece was ripped to the width measured above leaving a half-circle.  No centerlines were not needed on the parral pieces.  The next picture shows the main upper topsail parral piece being checked on the mast.
 

 
The parrals will be cut to length and shaped later when the yards are made. 
 
The last picture shows all the basic bored pieces – masts, caps and parrals - with some duplicates, ready for the next steps.
 

 
The mizzen topmast was included here since it has not yet been permanently installed.
 
This process worked well and saved a lot of machine setup time vs. making these parts one at a time as needed, although re-centering of the milling chuck was required a few times.  With the smaller bores, offsets were adjusted based on the previous bore then checked by trial and error, rather than returning to center each time.  Scrap pieces were used for trial and error fitting of the bored holes.
 
It took about four hours to make all these cap and parral pieces – pre-work thinking time not included.
 
Ed

Hello Friends.
 
Thanks to all for the kind comments.
Karl
 
 
Part 24
 



 
 
 

Hello,
currently I am working with the tackles of the stern davits.


The lowering of the stern boat had to be done in a certain order, otherwise there was a risk of capsizing.
Here is a picture from the Harland:
Excerpt from "Seamanship", John Harland, p. 286
 
The danger of capsizing was of course very great in rough seas.
Therefore, hooks for disengagement were introduced.
Does anyone have any information when the first ones were used?
Can it be that the La Creole already had something like that?
In Harland the Robinson's disengaging gear is described. When this system was introduced can not be determined exactly, probably between 1870 and 1890.
For more information, I would be very grateful.
 

My decision to continue this frame and panel motif through the waist rail will, ultimately, be worth the effort.  The project is not without its challenges, though.
 
Chief among them is finding some way to neatly and uniformly cut stepped haunches into the vertical framing elements, so that they tuck neatly around the sheer moulding, itself.
 
The parts are so tiny, that they can’t really be held and worked with your fingers, alone.  My solution was to use blue tape to mark the shoulder of the haunch onto a steel ruler, and to then pinch the part between the ruler and an emory board, using a spacer block in-line with the piece being cut.
 

I could then use my free hand (holding the 1/8” chisel blade like a pen) to make a series of shallow waste cuts, lengthwise, before aligning the back of the chisel blade with the edge of the ruler, to cut a square shoulder for the haunch.
 
Just as you would for any other repeating part, I had to do a few test pieces, in order to get the dimensions right.  Once I had it, though, the pieces fit snuggly along the length of the waist rail without additional fiddling.
 
What you see, here, has not yet been leveled and a spot of filler, here and there, will be necessary.  I just think this gives much better dimension to the timberheads and gives the whole thing a more finished appearance, befitting of her stature as a Capital ship.


In other news, casting continues alongside this little project, and my castings look good and clean.

Well, to start the basic premise is only partially correct.  A "Sloop of War" is just an unrated vessel with guns but not enough to be a 6th rate.  Rig could be anything (brig, snow, ship etc.).
 
Looking briefly at a few vessels rated as sloops I see capstans and, on at least 1, what appears to be an anchor windlass.
 
If, on the other hand, there is no capstan or windlass, I suspect that the anchor is raised in the same way as cargo - using the yards as the attach point for block and tackle arrangements. 
 

I know it’s an old thread but it’s been a big help with my own project.
 
I’ve been making a designer tool that you trace over plans and you lay your own waterline rake and location and it knocks out the math for displacement, block coefficient for each segment, and center of buoyancy.  The hull form then feeds into righting arm, speed, stability, and etc.
 
This is work still in progress but the end game is to sail these ships once again across the oceans using recorded weather and realistic sailing characteristics.
 
 
 
 

Talos - thank you!  -  I may (as in probably will) get that book - I did find a russian book that included hull lines for the Martel and had copies of most of the french ministry of defense drawings for carnot, messena, and Bouvet (which I already had) - I started lofting up the hull (see attached pic) I think photographs will be most of what I can use for reference since there's so few drawings of the Martel
 
I've already started on the Charles Martel as I'm about 80% done with the USS Maine (basically print out, fix tolerences, add some details, and then reprint a final model).  Basically I couldn't hold off starting the Martel, it is sooo cool!   The Messina will come next or maybe the USS Katahdin  
 
So many boats I want to do, so little time!

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 282 – Main Yard Rigging 3
 
Bowlines were used to control the leeches on large sails.  When the sails were bent, bowline bridles were lashed to cringles on the sides (leeches) of the sails.  On the model without sails, the bridles are tied off to the jackstays where they would be accessible to topmen when rigging the sail.  The first picture shows the bowline gear.
 

 
The bowline bridles, in this case two-legged, have eyes spliced in each end and pass through bullseyes at one end of each "lizard".  The bowlines, themselves, pass through the bullseyes at the opposite ends.  The standing ends of the bowlines are made fast to the lower ends of the topmast stays, pass through the lizard eyes, and are belayed on the foremast fife rail.  To avoid the falls rubbing on the roof of the main cabin, the two lead blocks shown in the picture were secured to the stay below the standing end fastening.  The attachment of the bridles and the upper ends of the lizards are shown in the next picture.
 

 
These lines serve well to square the model main yard and assist in holding it down.  The bridles are tied off at locations on the yard near where the cringles on the sail would be when it was raised as a rolled up package.  These and the other lines would then be fastened before the sail was loosed.
 
I have expected that belaying lines in the confined space between the cabin and fife rail would be one of the major rigging challenges on the model. I wasn't disappointed.  The next three pictures showing this work and the belaying of the main topmast staysail downhauler illustrate the problem.
 

 
First, the staysail halyard and downhauler were rigged.  The halyard may be seen running parallel and below the topmast stay.  Its lower block is shackled to the downhauler that passes through a smaller lead block on the stay and belays on the athwartship fife rail just forward of the cabin.  The two bowline lead blocks are also fastened to the stay legs below the downhauler block.  These are then also belayed on the fife rail. The next picture shows the tangle of lines involved and the small working space.
 

 
Apart from the difficulties of belaying lines in this small space with interferences from the shrouds and other obstacles, the two bowlines had to be tensioned together to hold the yard square.  Both were looped under their pins, adjusted to square the yard, then each belayed on top.  Finally, another view of the work in progress.
 

 
This job took special tools, quite a few hours, and a number of expletives.  The last picture shows this stage of the main yard rigging completed.
 
 

 
You may note in this picture that the shroud lanyards that have been seen loose in previous pictures have now been wrapped and secured.  Some rope coils have begun to be fitted forward where belaying is complete.  There is still much of this to do and also quite a bit of ratline work on the upper main mast and mizzen.
 
Ed

The build almost finished. Flags of the Moro family in place (silkspan). Note: the Moro family crest consists of bunches of blackberries. This is a pun on the venetian name. The original name of the Moro family was Mauro or a moor. This was corrupted to Moro which is also the italian for blackberry. I have only the anchors yet to make.

 

 

 

 
Dick

Oh, and regarding my quandary over whether to make the dromon single or two-masted, I think I've been convinced to go for two by this (admittedly 14th century) picture of a two-masted lateener sailing goose-winged. 
 

 
Really the only way I can see a dromon could sail without heeling over too much (10 degrees) for stability is to sail directly before the wind - and goose-winged not only equalises the forces from port and starboard, but it looks so cool!
 
Steven 

My work on the upper bulwarks continues.  After thinning and detailing the beakhead bulkhead plank edge, I decided to tackle the 3/8” stern extension pieces for the upper bulwarks.  As is apparent, here, all of my fitting and adjusting so that the upper bulwarks would align neatly with the waist ladder, necessitated adding back a little extra material to the starboard upper bulwark.  The port side is the minimum 3/8”, but starboard is nearly 1/2”.
 

It may not be readily apparent in the pictures, but I had scraped away the thin sheer strakes from the extension pieces because, with the exception of the lowest strake, none of the others were going to align with those of the upper bulwark; this owes to the sharp rise in sheer, in the last half inch, or so.  While I was able to use the Dremel to waste away most of the sheer strake mouldings, I can now see that I have quite a job ahead of myself to remove the bulk of these sheer strakes from the upper bulwarks, in order to clear a field for my custom bulwark frieze lattice.  I use a fine, curved blade to manually scrape down what was left, until I get down to the grain-moulded planks.
 
As was the case with all of the other extension pieces, getting good mating joints that didn’t disrupt the fairness of the hull was a challenge.  This picture might not be the best; the extensions do appear to flair outwards, but in fact, they fall neatly in line with the extension pieces of the lower hull.

With that much settled, I decided to dispense with the upper-most sheer step, as that is one more sheer step than was ever typically constructed before 1693.  Here I am cutting it away, and the following series of pictures show me fairing the new line of the upper sheer.
 



I really like this slight reduction in the top-hamper, although it should be noted that I will be adding back a low sheer rail that runs the full length of this third sheer step.  Although, I will have to lower and shorten, somewhat, the poop royal deck, there is still ample room to do so.
 
Here are a few shots of the upper bulwark piece in place on the lower hull.
 



Little by little, we are getting there!

There is light at the end of the tunnel. Earlier in this build log I was pessimistic about unravelling mediaeval rigging. I believe i have come a long way toward now somewhat understanding their rigging and the constraints forced upon the sailor of the middle ages. The rigging of the middle ages should not be compared to that of the later centuries as evolution was proceeding in leaps and bounds. Much of what the mediaeval sailor used looks strange and complicated to us. It was however, in essence practical. The rigging of the mizzen mast is a case in point. In contrast to later rigs, the mizzen of the fifteenth century was based on the lateen rigs of previous centuries. The sail, for instance, was deployed outboard of the shrouds. The following is my attempt at depicting this rig.

the mizzenast installed. Note it is a single pole mast, not "built" as was the mainmast
 

the mizzen yard and sail. Note that a single line is used for furling clew and leech

 
 

 

 

 
I have decided that it is not appropriate to have a foremast as it would look naff. The Mataro nao was a two master and was of the same period.
 
More soon
Dick
 
 
 

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 264 – Fore Lower Topsail Yard Detailing
 
I finally got the fore topmast ratlines installed, something I wanted done before mounting the lower topsail yard.    
 

 
The spreaders at the top of the yard continue to take a beating.  Some protection is probably in order.  At the top of the shrouds the ratline extend across the backstays.  The next picture is a closer view.
 

 
The next picture shows the fore topsail yard with footropes, quarter blocks and buntline blocks installed.
 

 
In the next two pictures the yard has been temporarily mounted using the permanent pin in the crane.
 

 
In the next picture the yard has been returned to the holding fixture for further work.
 

 
In this picture the footrope stirrups have been pulled straight for stiffening and the chain upper topsail sheets have been threaded through the cheek blocks, under-yard fairleads and the central sheet block.  Below is a closer view of the sheet block.
 

 
The fabrication of this block was described earlier, as was the linking of the two chains inside the block so the sheet tackles could be used to keep the yard down.  In the next picture these tackles have been rigged and shackled to the chains.
 

 
The upper topsail sheet chains are short and those shown will be cut back later. The upper sail was taken in by lowering the yard and not using clue lines as was typical for the other yards, so there was no need for the sheets to be hauled up when furling.  The tackles were thus used to take up slack in small adjustments.  The short tackles shown will belay in the foretop – in the next post.
 
 
Ed

Hi, and thank you 
 
a bit of work inside:
 
 

The purpose of the lanyards was to be able to adjust the shrouds as needed.  There are occasions were additional tension was applied to counteract forces on the mast.  The foremost shroud was occasionally slacked off to allow for bracing the yard up more sharply.  Also, no matter how well set up the mast would 'work' or move to some extent.  There would always be some adjustment of the shrouds necessary at some point.  Conversely, shrouds set up too tightly might cause a mast to be sprung because it was too stiff and could not work. 
 
Lanyards (with deadeyes or hearts) are employed because in a block and tackle the enormous forces involved would be concentrated on two points; the pins of the sheaves of the blocks.  Lanyards and deadeyes allow you to spread that load over six solid points not susceptible to breakage like a sheave pin.
Regards,

Tanks, Amalio
last photos of the outside, before moving on to internal work:

I am with Jud, as an ex-navalman I am mystified with some of the over weathering of models I see (mainly plastic).  I believe that through the ages, basic naval practices (cannot speak for merchant service) will be based around the same principles.  I am sure that as there was not too much shore leave (fear of runners etc)  one of the first things the First Lieutenant would have organised was a cleaning and painting party for the ship's sides etc.  I acknowledge however, this is more difficult in such times as performing blockades etc.
 
The ship is the sailor's home and cleanliness is paramount if you do not want a sick ship, or an angry Admiral/Squadron/Flotilla Commander.  Ship's husbandry and maintaining fighting skills can be achieved together.  Even in times of war, in most theatres some effort was made to keeps interiors clean, and basic ship's husbandry done on accessible parts of the upper decks and ship's equipment (especially life boats etc).  Yes in times like WWII, during prolonged partols or escort duty in rough weather (Murmansk run) would have prevented any maintenance at all.  That said, even during our long deployments (6-9 months) some effort was made to minimise corrosion and maintain the ship's appearance (but not at the expense of proficiency).
 
While I am not a fan, and this is intended as a personal opinion only,  I understand some modellers use weathering to display their skills - each to their own preferences and I do admire the skills required to do this level of weathering.
 
cheers
 
Pat

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 261 – Fore Topsail Yards
 
I have finally been able to break out of the ratline work to start on the next set of yards – specifically the fore lower and upper topsail yards.  These will likely be the next two to go up, but the main yard is also an option.  I want to get all the ratline work done on the lower and upper masts before staring on the yards.  I got ahead of myself with the fore yard and that made finishing the ratlines a tougher job.
 
I described the methods I am using to make spars in Parts 217-218 and Parts 247-248, so I will not go through it all again.  I will mostly stick to some things that may not have been covered earlier.
 
I generally like to drill all the holes in a spar at the first trim.  At this stage it is sized but still square and not tapered, so it is easier to hold and center the piece.  I forgot to do this on the lower topsail yard so it had to be done later as shown in the first picture.
 

 
In the picture the holes for the jackstay stanchions are being drilled.  The yard is clamped to the tooling plate at the octagonal center area and at the yardarm square section – not optimum but not too difficult.
 
In the next picture the upper topsail yard is set up for drilling while still at the first trim.
 

 
In the earlier description of this drilling I used the mill vise, but since I had the tooling plate set up I decided to use it instead.  To make the yard parallel with the plate, I used the small depth gauge described back during the deck framing.  The next picture shows the jackstay stanchion holes drilled into this yard.
 

 
The stanchion holes are the most important to do at this stage because they need to be centered on top of the yard and equally spaced.  Other holes will be drilled later.  In the picture the quarters are marked out.  In the next picture dividers are being used to mark the diameters on two opposite sides at each quarter.
 

 
These are taken directly from the drawing and serve as guides for the first roughing out only.  The final dimensions at each quarter will be measured and adjusted more accurately as shown below.  In the next picture the two marked faces are being tapered using a plane with the yard clamped in a vise.
 

 
The vise works well before the spar is tapered.  The fixture described earlier and shown below could also be used.  The taper is planed, scraped, rasped and sanded down to the divider marks.  In the next picture calipers are being used to check and refine the sizing to the dimensions specified on the drawing.
 

 
The drawings specify the diameter at each quarter in full size decimal inches, which are then divided by 72 to get the measurements to the three significant digits used in the final sizing as shown above.  The sandpaper board is used for the final sizing. 
 
With the spar tapered on two sides, the planning fixture shown below was then used to taper the remaining two faces.
 

 
For these smaller spars the top section of the stop was removed to clear the plane.  In the next picture one of the remaining two sides are being tapered.
 

 
The yard was then converted to an octagonal shape, except at the yard arms, as described in the earlier posts.  The center area on these "single-tree" spars were left octagonal, so the final rounding begins at the end of the octagonal section as shown below.
 

 
After filing off the corners of the octagon, the rounding was completed down to the square yardarm section using the sanding stick shown.
 

 
This has 220-grit paper on one side and 320-grit on the other.  The last picture shows the two topsail yards ready for their ironwork.
 
 
 
Ed