Beef Wellington

Post 28

 
Raising canvas


 
With the reef points completed the sails can now be raised and the sheets, tacks, halyards, and Burton pendents attached.

6257(2)

6258(2)
Rigging the Fifie, basic as it appears, is an interesting exercise not least because I am unfamiliar with the arrangements on these small commercial vessels, and my researches have revealed details not reflected on the kit plans.


 
I am rigging the model by reference to a combination of reference books, Edgar March, primarily.
I have used the plans of Underhill relating to the Zulu Muirneag, and of the Fifie’s Reaper and True Vine. Various photos, both old and of the current Reaper, were also of great assistance.


 
There is an indication on the plans of Reaper that the tyes were of wire rather than rope (not a modern substitution)


 
I did think about using wire, a scale diameter of 0.25mm would be required. This was fairly easy to reproduce from thin twisted  copper wire, but I couldn’t get the colour right, so I let it pass.


 
I am using Syren 0.45mm ø line for the Tye, and 0.20mm for the tackle.



6284
The tackle consists of a pendent and two large triple blocks.

I am using Syren 6mm blocks.

 
The strops represent iron and wire formed from silver soldered brass wire.



6282
A similar arrangement is used for the Mizen Tye and Halyard with smaller 3/16th double blocks (4.7mm).


 
Mizen Tack.

 

6295
A chain necklace was used to secure the Mizen tack which I have sought to replicate. The Scots called it a tuckle chain.


6288
A more interesting feature clearly shown on an old photo of the Zulu Muirneag.


 
The Fore tack

This is attached to a hook shackled to the eyebolt atop the stem. Often large hooks (horns) were attached to the port and starboard sides of the stem for this purpose.


6248
An alternative attachment point for the Fore tack is set in the deck a few feet aft of the stem.
 


This is as far as I can go with rigging at present, I am awaiting receipt of fresh rigging supplies from Chuck.


 
 
In the meantime I have been fiddling around with deck fittings.


 
These boats were also equipped with a set of sweeps for rowing. Mine are a scale 23’ overall.

 
There are also two ‘wands’ or hefty push sticks some 36’ long used to fend off and assist movement in harbour situations.


 
A 14’ boat hook completes the set.


6270
In this shot on the near side are the set of six sweeps, on the far side the Boat hook and wands.

The alternative hook for the Fore tack can be seen on the foredeck.



6272
Another shot of the sweeps and a glimpse into the hold containing the nets and floats.

 

6250(2)

6253(2)
Not far from completion but I still have the sheets and Burton Pendents to complete, the block sets have been assembled in readiness.


 

 
B.E

23/07/20

 


 

HI Mark,
 
No other blocks, it goes straight to the steering wheel.
On the second deck, the ropes pass through some kind of wardrobe, or should we say a wardrope.
On a more serious note, the biggest difference between a French an English  74 gun ship for the steering wheel; is the location:
the French installed it behind the mast, the English installed it in front of the mast, needing a much longer rope this way.

Some update.
Added one little detail to guns. Probably will not do tackle that is fixed to deck.
Small double blocks from Cornwall ordered.
Will take weeks until guns are done.
After that to chainplates and then to shrouds and ratlines.
 

Thank you all very much for your opinions and suggestions - this type of feedback is exactly what I needed.  Your comments reinforce what I have been reading, or more to the point what I could not find in the reading.  Kipping, Fincham, Crothers, Underhill and Harland are all silent on these particular matters.
 
Based on these comments, I agree re use of iron fids, they were the go by this period.  Unless I find better information I will retain the fid hole as cut with sides parallel with the masts heel sides (square to the heel) and perhaps add, as Druxey suggests, a beveled bottom so that the fid is flat along the bottom relative to the mast's rake.  There was a iron plate set on or into (the authors differ) the upper face of the trestle trees to carry the iron fid, so that would take the weight - but Rob's advice re rounded fids intrigues me.  I have seen, in Underhill I think, that a round bar preventer fid was fitted, but these did not bear the weight unless the lower (main) fid failed.  Just for interest I may have a go at the diagram of forces acting on the fid suggested by Eberhard (at some point).   Ed's point about readjust the rake would also impact any bevel on the fid hole iand fid is also relevant....
 
WRT to the stops, the overwhelming advice appears to cut them square to the mast.  The point about the wire opening up with increased bending was my main concern, but It appears I may be overly concerned
 
WRT to the mast cap, still very early days - ED, I agree these would have been square to the mast.  In this case, an iron forged cap with circular openings/mortices.
 
WRT the tops; well that is another story now - more on this later.  Suffice to say, that no matter what type, the issue I am having WRT holding/securing the topmast heel remains extant.  Rob, that is a great photo and shows that the gaps athwartship were of little concern as there is a reasonable gap shown in your photo.  If you have any more photos of clippers or ships of this era that confirm these gaps, I would be most interested in the confirmation of the following.
 
Fincham and Kipping advise a 1 inch allowance for play (but Fincham also says 1/4 inch elsewhere.....confusing) .  This is well within the athwartship tolerance of Victoria's topmast heels - possibly of little concern as the shrouds would essentially keep it upright.  The fore and aft securing though still leaves me a little confused with masts at extreme rake.  Again the stays may have kept it centred once set-up; but, .... I am concerned that the rake and a flat fid would tend to try and make the mast 'skate' forward?    I have also found guidance, as has been suggested by Ed, that any filling pieces are payed onto the masts and not the trees.
 
All that said, in doing another close inspection of the imagery I now have concerns on the actual framing of these tops.  I will post separately about these but the top was still set parallel to the waterline, but closer inspection shows that perhaps most of the top was made of iron.  Underhill advises that this was increasingly the practice in merchant ships during this era.
 
Many thanks again
 
Pat

Hi again folks.
 
Not much work done on the model in the past few weeks as I am getting into research of the spars and rigging, which is taking far more time than I thought.  I am making progress though, and I need to do this before progressing as it affects the positiong, type and configuration of other equipment in the ship.  
 
As usual I have run into a few issues the more experienced may be able to assist me with?  Pleeeaase!
Some of these do not effect the model as such as the scale woill mask the problem, but I wish to get it righ for the drawings I am doing.  Rather than flood the log with all questions at once I will 'batch' them, getting the results before moving on I hope
 
The first batch are related and all are caused by the extreme rake in Victoria's masts (5, 10 and 15 degrees for the Fore, Main and Mizen masts respectively.)  The problems listed below all relate to the various contemporary and more recent authors discussing the masts as if the stand vertical.  That is, the stops, tops etc asre all cut or placed as if the mast is not raked and no guidance is offered for what to do when they are raked aft (except for the tops which we know are placed horizontal or parallel to the waterline.)
Please see attached drawings where I have tried to illustrate the issues.  Cross hatch is ironwork including a 1 inch fid plate fitted on top of the trestle trees.  The diagonal hatch represents the ends of timbers.  Please look closely as the drawing of the top as gaps are small but evident as is the misaligned fit of the heel (slanted) into the squared hole for the heeling.  The small unhatched piece is a 'small cross-piece' that sits behind the rim.  Again the guidance infers to make this square on its after face. I can move the rim forward a bit which fixes the overlap at the forefoot of the topmast heel; but opens the gap.  The larger gap abaft the crosstree is there by design, as the Kipping and Fincham adise a 1" allowance was made here (assumed to allow the upper mast (long pole) to pass through due to the rake of these masts.

Q1.    Should the stops (no hounds) for the upper mast be cut horizontal also?  If not, as the standing rigging (wire rope) have eyes seized to fit snug/tight on the stop, the backstays would, and perhaps the shrouds may, lead fair, BUT the forestays would have a large kink induced as , say for the main mast, they would point 10 degrees into the sky (vertical) before bending down.  My gut feel is they should also be parallel to the waterline but cannot find any guidance on this.

 
Q2.    AS the top, and therefore the crosstrees are fitted parallel to the waterline, but the upper mast is set-up at an angle corresponding the the relevant mast's rake, it would not sit up-and-down in the hole framed between the trestletrees and crosstrees. 
 
The imagery shows that the foremost crosstree passed between the lower masthead and heel of the upper mast (combined pole including top, topgallant and royal masts).  This would mean this crosstree would sit square (true up-and-down) having been let into the trestletrees, whereas the masthead and heel would be raked.  This results in only a part of the crosstree fore and after faces providing support (sides are not an issue).  The contemporary practice was to use a shaped chock here (instead of a crosstree) but that was for a standard top (larger and fully made with a platform, battens etc)  The tops in Victoria are unlike in any other ship I have seen, and, in form, were more like the tops used at the topmast hounds where loose masts were fitted.  Even here, the guidance shows squared crosstrees.  Simply fitting a wedge would not work.  My only solution might be to fit/fay a shaped filling piece on the fore side of the masthead, and after face of the heel to square the resulting gaps (hope that makes sense) The issue there though is that increases the distance between the crosstrees much more than what is shown in the imagery. Such filling pieces were used to remove excessive 'play' of the heel but were usually evenly  sized in section (not sloping/wedge shaped).  Any ideas?
 

 
Q3.    Similar to the issue with the stops, it would appear to be sensible to adjust the fid holes tosuch that the fid  would sit flush on the trestletree.  Again all auther say this is cut in parallel to mast sides, but does not make sense for mastes that are raked.  Do I agjust these to up-and-down?  Would this weaken the fid or holding power as the centre of force (weight) is now not acting direct through the fid.

Any help, suggestions, pointers etc most welcomed.
 
cheers
 
Pat

Hi Tony, thanks for looking in.
 
To clarify, if it wasn't for the extreme rake of the masts (15 degrees for the Mizen mast) the options 1 through three would not be an issue at all as the masts are fairly upright.  Therefore when checking in to fit the hounds (single piece in steam vessels of this era) the upper edge would provide a 'natural' flat/horizontal length onto which to fit the trestletrees.
 
Unfortunately, as you rake the mast backward you are changing the angle and taking out much more of the mast when checking in for the hounds.  Similarly, you have to adjust the heel of the mast such that it fits snug and parallel along its length against the keel/mast footing to allow a tight fit for the heel tenon.  When the mast is up and down the hounded and headed lengths are IAW the dimensions of the masts given in the Specification.  This allows easy application of the rules for shaping the mast as given by Kipping and Fincham.  However, as you lay the mast backward more what is the hounded length?  Is it from the partners  to the stop (where the head starts) along the mast centre line (CL) or is it a true perpendicular/vertical height? 
 
I am assuming it is the first option, and therefore by adjusting the heel and how much of the stop is taken away will influence/impact of the hounded length (only a bit but still....)  I am trying to stay within the rules and the given dimensions for shaping the mast by minimising the amount the heel and the stop is adjust to allow the skeletal tops to be fitted parallel to the waterline.
 
If you look closely, option 1 has the after part of the hounds sitting proud of the stop as the tops is axis is centred on the CL crossing with the mast.  Option two, which minimises the amount checked out of the stop, creates an even larger area abaft the leading edge of the mast that is not conformal/level with the stop's shoulder.  Option 3, and my selected way ahead, checks more out of the mast but provides maximum support.
 
The issue is though where is the hounded length measured, from the CL or from the point where you have checked in for the hounds creating a new lowest point for the shoulder.  In reality, I don't think this would make much of a difference and the rules are given as the starting point for shaping the mast, but then adjusted to fit the ship/need?  As such I created the masts (in my CAD drawing) to be slightly longer, such that after shaping the hounded length is measured along the CL of the mast between the partners and the centre/mid point of the hounding stop's shoulder.
 
I hope this clarifies what I was trying to elicit?  Simply, having to write it out and the reassurance of the responses helped me settle on a solution.
 
cheers
 
Pat

You are getting really into the specifics there ... can't give founded advice on the hounds, but wondered, whether the difference between the options would be discerneable on the model ? OK, this is our old plague, that we want to get it right, even if no one would notice the difference.

You clearly  have become THE "go-to expert" for everything which is related to the Victory! 🙂
 
Thomas

Got the foremast topsail sheet and clew done this afternoon. Hard to see the "cloverleaf block" under the foreyard, but the chain is belayed to the pinrail, then through the cloverleaf block, the out to the sheave at the end of the yard (remember when I put those in?) and then to a single block, which receives a line from the topmast near the center, then down to the pinrail. The sheet tackle is .015, while the clew is .010. This is because the sheet carries a lot of force when he sail is deployed, but the clew only pulls up the sail itself.
 

So here's the mizzen topyard halyard - with these all done, next is the topsail sheet and clew lines. Chain with blocks on each end.

So now I have put all 3 top yards on and attached their lifts. Now this project goes on hold while I build a New Bedford Whaleboat for a customer.

Congratulations Kevin, you should be very proud of her and your fine craftsmanship.

Congratulations Kevin, you should be very proud of her and your fine craftsmanship.

Congratulations Kevin, you should be very proud of her and your fine craftsmanship.

congratulations to this excellent Model Kevin,
lovely work !
Nils

thank you Alan its is indeed an optical illusion 

18 foot cutter

One special feature - and probable inaccuracy - which was disturbing me with the launch made even more problems with this small cutter: The false floor is too high above the keel. With the 1mm thick floorboards the launch's floor is quite high up.

With the cutter that problem is severely aggravated. To gain some space below the thwarts they were placed as high up as possible. I also used 0,5 mm thick deck planks, cut to a width of 2mm to plank the floor which gained me another half mm (I was really desperately looking for some space). Even so the cutter looks somehow flattened. By filling much of it with equipment I hope to mask the missing depth.

For the wales and the cappings of the sides I took only 1x1mm strips instead of 2x1. That way the proportions seemed more harmonious for such a small boat.

The cutter was placed in the launch and both boats equipped with the kit's oars, boathooks and grapnels. Additionally both got a rudder with a tiller and also the removed thwarts and a water barrel were placed within the launch.


 
While working on the boat  also finished the poop and quarterdeck barricades with hammock nettings and the sand buckets.


 



 



the small cutter with its rudder


 



the skipper checks the completeness of the equipment


 



the launch with equipment


 



poop deck barricade


 



quarter deck barricade (I see that the top of the hammock nettings need some reworking.)


 



the launch on the beams


 



an overview of the work done in this chapter

Main Mast
 
It was built similar to the mizzen with the same small changes to topmast- and topgallant mast-feet.
 
I've got the impression that the width of one mast top and the foot of the next upper mast should be the same, in order to fit both cleanly between the trestletrees. So again I had to double up the mast feet.
 
The upper crosstrees are rather delicate parts and I successfully broke a couple of ends off before strengthening them with some epoxy glue. Perhaps it would be better to provide them as photo etched metal parts.
 
Also installing the rack with the boarding pikes was some fiddling work. Finally I had to drill out the holes of the metal rings to fit the pikes properly.
 
 

Details of the main top without platform yet. The topmast even has a correct octagonal (instead of round) lower end. Of course nobody will ever notice it on the finished model.
 
 

the nearly finished main top...
 
 

...is quite impressively high above the deck.
 
 

topmast top
 
 

foot with boarding pikes
 
 


the masts are only provisionally stepped

I decided to dig out my files and do a few edits  - hope you like.
 
OC.

Ghost of the Pearl  - 
 
OC.

Okay - I had the opportunity to make some real progress yesterday, so by midnight the yards were turned, and I'm beginning to pin them into position. I really love this part as the ship really begins to take her final form... The yards are just pinned in place, so are removable. I'll try and put as much of the rigging on before I fix them finally in place.
 

 
I'm toying with the idea of putting on royals as well - they turn up in the AOTS book, and I have the longer topgallant masts up, so I might just take the plunge. Could be fun!
 
I've also been messing about with the boats. I had another crack at the pinnace that comes in the kit. It's by no means finished, but it's on the way. The following picture shows the pinnace with a just started vanguard kit of the 18ft cutter beside it.
 

 
As a bit of fun, I bought a 1:64 model of a mini cooper (the Italian job model) and put it on the foredeck as a comparison...  Not quite historical, but it gives you some idea of just how big these ships were.
 

 
Happy building!
 
Rob

Not much to show, but I am still here. Thanks to everyone for the likes. As always, an encouragement - especially when tying knots one after the other.
 
Mainmast ratlines are complete.
 

 

 
I plan to get some more yards done on the lathe now as a break from tying clove hitches!
 
Happy building
 
Rob

Hi all,
 
It's a few weeks since I last posted, and lots has happened in the shipyard. 
 
Fighting tops
 
I wanted to finish off the fighting tops, so I could get shrouds in place, and start the (significant) job of the ratlines. That meant constructing the barrier at the back of the fighting tops. I was concerned that wood would be a little vulnerable in that position as I rigged the ship. Also, I suspected that the ship itself had metal posts, and not wooden uprights, so I ordered the smallest square brass cross-section I could fine, and set about soldering them with a little jig made using balsa and pins.
 

 

 

 
Burton pendants
 
These are added to the mast before the shrouds - made of 1.25mm thread, tied with .25mm thread and secured with watered down Aliphatic glue (carpenters PVA).  My understanding is that they're attachments to which temporary rigging can be fixed when necessary.
 
Starboard first, Larboard second  for the main and fore, one hanging down on either side on the mizzen mast. That was achieved by unravelling the rope in the centre by twisting it - passing it round the mast, and then letting it spring back.
 

 

 
Shrouds
 
Again, a starboard pair, then a larboard pair - starting at the front and working back. I used 1.25mm black rope for these. (The recommended 1mm looked a bit weedy to me!)
 

 

 
It's worth noting at this point that if the shrouds don't sit on top of each other, but sit side by side (i.e. the higher loops are bigger and sit down around the lower) - you may run out of space between main and top masts, and it will force the base of the topmast forward, thereby stopping the two from being parallel. Thankfully, when I checked this hadn't proven an issue, but it almost caught me out, so hopefully others will avoid the dilemma.
 
Bent steel wire was used for spacers on the deadeyes whilst rigging the shrouds... I found the recommended brass wire both too large in diameter for the deadeyes, and suspected the wire I had might be too soft. 
 

 
As you can see below, I rigged the lanyards on one side of each shroud pair first, before I secured the other end of the shroud so that I could be confident of the length. As it was, I think I still left the shrouds a little loose, but I didn't want to pull the chainwale off the side of the hull causing all sorts of inglorious muttering and holding of head in hands.
 

 

 
As running rigging, the lanyards were 0.5mm light rope, and I'm quite pleased with the contrast... 
 
Rattling down the ratlines
 
I wanted to learn serving, and rope-making, but those are going to have to wait for the next model
 
DISCLAIMER: Now comes the controversial bit. Bear with me here. I've used both light and dark rope in the past for ratlines. I like the light. It's a personal choice. I know it's showy. And this is a showy frigate... just look at the paintwork - the captain would rightly have been proud of this crack frigate... so I've gone with untarred manila! I know it's probably not the right colour, but hey... it's my model  And I really like the effect it made on my Pickle schooner... Sherborne and Royal Yacht Caroline both look great with black ratlines, but I also found the 0.1mm thread much easier to get neat scale tidy ratlines with... So. That's the decision. I'm 1200 knots in, so the decision is well and truly made... and I'm not about to go anywhere near this model with india ink (as the instructions suggest) - I'm simply not brave / foolish enough to attempt it over neat maple decks.
 
With that said, I printed off a bunch of CAD sheets with lines 5.8mm apart, and used these as the guides. Here are the pictures of progress so far.
 
It always takes me a bit of head-scratching to remind myself what a clove hitch looks like... (at least the way I do them  - am I wrong again?) 
 

 

 
And an inspection of the work so far... I find by applying watered down PVA to each row as I finish it, the whole thing stiffens up quite well, and as I go it gets quicker... This way I can pull out the tension as it shrinks, too and avoid the whole thing bowing in and becoming curved along its length. (to some extent at least...)
 

Major milestone tonight. Finished the rat lines on all the lower shrouds. I said I would count them but I couldn’t help myself... 1,392 clove hitches. 
I used the “draw the actual shroud position on paper” technique to keep the lines properly spaced and the shrouds straight. 

 

 

 
Here is the finished product.  Maybe not  a “10” but looks pretty good to me.  I used  50 wt thread to keep the scale and keep the knots from being too bulky. 
 
Not sure what I will work on next. Definitely something without clove hitches. The yards seem to be calling. Those are pretty much the last wooden pieces that need to be made. 
 
Tom

 

 

Hi all
reached another milestone today. After 2,852 clove hitches,  all the main, top and futtock shroud ratlines are complete. 

 
Now I will start to work on the forestays and backstays for the top masts. Then on to the top gallant masts and rigging and finally the royal masts. Working my way through the standing rigging. At least that is the plan for now. Also still have a decent amount of work to do on the bow sprit. 
 
Really starting to enjoy the results with some of the rigging in place. Brings the model to life a bit. 👍😁
 
Tom