18th and early 19th Century cutter models

[tkay11]

Sorry, Alex, but I simply don't know as I didn't ask -- although I was told that some of the rigging was done in the museum as a repair.

 

Tony

[Stockholm tar]

Tony,

 

I agree, it's a little difficult to understand, and I haven't read anything about it anywhere, as to why it was done that way – only that it was!

It seems to have been quite common.

 

The only reason I can think of, is that the pressure from the sails would be against the lower masthead, rather than trying to pull away from it, were the topmast on the fore side. I hope you can understand that! Perhaps they also thought that less rigging would be preferable on a vessel that already had quite a lot! To be honest though, I don't really know – but it would be good to have an explanation!

[tkay11]

Thanks for the thought, Kester. I was also wondering whether, when they increased the length of the topmast (perhaps with a view to supporting wider or more yards) they found the need for backstays and therefore that the more logical position would then be aft.

 

Tony

Edited April 30, 2015 by tkay11

[jonny.amy]

Tony,

 

Thanks for posting this on the forum, it will be a very helpful source of information for my build of Sherbourne.

 

Once I have a spare moment I'll take an in depth look at the photo's and see what I can obtain from them. I'm fortunate enough to have an annual pass to Portsmouth Historic Dockyards, so I'll take some time to arrange a private viewing of any models of cutters they have in their vaults, and if I can get a private showing, I'll post a similar topic with my findings (if that's ok with you guys)?!

 

Thanks for clearing a few details up for me already.

 

Cheers

Jonny

[Gregory]

I agree Frankie.  This has become my go-to place for rigging details ( Not necessarily the run of the rigging ) and deck fittings for cutters.

[tkay11]

Thanks, Frankie and Gregory. I'm really glad I could share the photos and that others have found them useful.

 

Tony

[Marcus.K.]

What a great collection of information - thanks Tony!

 

I wondered about 2 things:

1. I do not see any opening for oars. Wouldn´t those small crafts not be moved by oars every now and then - especially in harbours?

 

[Edit] I was wrong: Trial seem to have additional openings between the gun ports.. small squard openings a bit above the deck level. May those have been for oars? Is a square opening usefull for such an operation? [Edit End]

 

2. I see only in 2 models very small scuttles - close to the pumps and very likely to be connected with a tube when pumping is needed. They seem to be much too small to deal with green water on deck.

 

Only Smokey Joe seemed to show wider bigger scuttles - but with a closer look I see: its not at all scuttles - its in fact an open reling .. Which would fit much more to my expectation for such a vessel ..

 

"Working" mainly in the English Channel, the Irish Sea and the North Sea those vessels would have to deal with rough weather and a lot of waves - wouldn´t they need wide scuttles or even a more open bulkward to get rid of green water?

 

Anyone with ideas for this?

Edited May 10, 2022 by Marcus.K.

[tkay11]

Sorry, Marcus, all I can say is that these are contemporary models and some seem to show one or the other type or both, and others don't. Contemporary plans may show scuttles and/or oar-holes, and the NMM plans for the 1763 Cutter Endeavour do show oar holes but no scuttles. The NMM plans I have for the Sherbourne (an English cutter) don't seem to show either type, although the Caldercraft kit of the Sherbourne has oar holes.

 

I don't know if oars would be redundant on some cutters as they could perhaps be pulled by their longboats. Perhaps the low gunports might be regarded as adequate to act as scuttles.

 

Is this something that would be assumed by the builder or requested by the purchaser? I'll leave that for others who are far more knowledgeable to comment.

 

Tony

[druxey]

Some contemporary plans show sweep ports (the proper term for those little square ports) and some do not. They would, however, be present on these small craft. Occasionally the sweep ports were circular with a small slot on each side just large enough to slide the blade of the sweep through. One could not work a sweep in a gun port; it would slide back and forth wasting effort, quite apart from the fact one would need to move all the guns - to where? The decks were crowded enough already!

[tkay11]

Thanks, druxey. Of course the gunport idea was crazy for a sweep port (which I had used Marcus' term for) but just thought for a blindingly silly moment they might be ok to allow water to escape. So thanks for pointing this out!

 

Tony

[Gregory]

Perhaps scuppers, when appropriate,  were one of those things taken for granted and not always shown on models and plans.  Chuck says they are on the plans for Cheerful, but I can't identify them on the plans I have seen.

[dunnock]

Thanks for posting this great set of photos.

I have been puzzling about the rigging on my model of Trial and although I have got the RMG pictures, your close ups of the actual model are going to be so useful.

Many thanks once again

David

[Roger Pellett]

Tony,

 

Thanks for sharing these with us.  It’s always a pleasure to see original models of these vessels.  I love visiting museums in your country; something that we have sadly not done since Covid descended on the World.  I remember spending an afternoon at Chatham.  I still have the sample piece of rope made for us at the ropewalk.  We also spent time chatting with the docent in the ship model display.  Several days earlier we visited Chartwell, where the docent in Churchill’s living room practically brought me to tears talking about his relationship with FDR that saved Western Civilization.  We found that if you just show a little more interest than the ordinary tourist they enjoy talking to you.  Not necessarily so in the USA where a canned talk is the norm.