Sources for Rigging tables before Steel 1794 wanted

[trippwj]

You ask some good questions, Michael.  In reference to the first portion:

 

"Imagine the meeting or meetings where the new Establishment was agreed on sometime in 1745. Don't you think that sailors captains rigger, so called technical experts would have been called in. Ship's top hamper was constantly being repaired, modified,  and experimented with. Look at the never ending discussions on this website about the finer points of Old Ironsides rig. So I think these guy showed up and said "here are some things we have been doing at sea over the last few years that improve performance".And they got them made official. Under that scenario you might reasonably find some of the changes of 1745 actually in use on ship prior to that time."

 

According to Brian Lavery, for the previous Establishments, the dimensions had been decided upon through consultation with the Surveyor and senior shipwrights.  In June 1745, the Admiralty took the lead when it decided to deal with the problem of ship sizes, and set up a committee to review proposals made by the Navy Board. The original purpose of the Establishments was to standardise the fleet, but because ships had been built and rebuilt at various times to varying established dimensions, there was little more standardisation than had been present before the 1706 Establishment came into being. The new Establishment of 1745 was intended to correct this situation, and at the same time solve the issues with British ships that had been the cause of complaint by sea officers for several years.

 

The Establishments, in some ways, reflect the evolution and internal bureaucratic struggles within the navy.  The earlier establishments were more like guidelines, and subject to individual interpretation.  They reflected the conservative tendencies of the established shipwrights.  The 1745 establishment attempted to require standardized design by also require the development of plans for each ship designed to the establishment, and the strengthening of the authority of the surveyor of the navy.

 

In regards to the second part:

 

"Everyone is fixated on the ratio of beam to mainmast. True enough and it changes over time. But the other spars changed in relation to the main mast as well. In particular the length of the topgallant yards in relation to the length of the other yard increased steadily over the years.  You can see from my tables above the ratio of topgallant yard yo topsail yard went from .58 in 1719  to .69 in 1745.The ratio of the topsail yard to the main yard remained at .7 The ratio of the topgallant mast to the top mast remained the same as well at about .48-.49. The topgallants in 1745 were noticblely wider in proportion to thier depths and to the topsails in 1745 than in 1719.  This had the effect of reducing the taper of the sail plan as it went up. I ma certainly not an engineer but it must have been improvements in hull stability and spar materials that allowed them to raise the center of effort."

 

It may have reflected a gain in experience, but hardly a recognition of the importance of terms like "stability" and "center of effort".  The Royal Navy was exceedingly slow to recognize the physics involved and incorporate those ideas into ship design - not until the late 18th and early 19th centuries did the Navy shipwrights begin to discuss these ideas, establishing the School of Naval Architecture in 1811 (and then closing it as a result of political infighting and changes in who was most influential) until the mid 1800's. 

 

There is much more that could be added concerning those issues, but not germane here - see my ongoing analysis here http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/9892-seeking-information-on-determining-load-waterline/

 

"So the question is which Establishment do my self titled" inter-Establishment" ship look most like."

 

That, my friend, is indeed a very good question.  Look to the builder and captain, and their other ships of similar size, for the most likely answer.