HMCSS Victoria 1855 by BANYAN - 1:72

[BANYAN]

Thanks Carl

[FriedClams]

Hello Pat,

 

What an interesting vessel and build this is going to be, and the progress to date is looking very nice indeed.  I admire your determination in turning over every rock and going down every rabbit hole looking for information and history on this ship.  That's a lot of work, but worth the effort - you're keeping history alive.  I look forward to watching your groups progress.

 

Gary 

[BANYAN]

Hi folks, have not updated this build for awhile as I have been busy researching all the fitting necessary to be fixed to the bulwarks as once deck furniture is added there will be little or very restricted access to the bulwarks.  I am currently determining the rigging/belaying plan to determine where cleats, eyebolts, belaying pin racks/rails and leads/blocks need to be fitted.

 

I am also continuing to research the armaments: see following which has been resolved.

cheers

 

Pat

[BANYAN]

Hi folks,

My long-awaited copy of the CSS Alabama: Anatonomy of a Confederate Raider arrived a couple of days ago.  Great book with some excellent belaying and rigging/sail plans for a Barque rigged ship.  As she is relatively contemporary with Victoria, I am using the Alabama belaying plan as the basis for Victoria's rigging and belaying plan.  There will be some difference in the plan based on the size of the ship, different design aspects (bow / sprit) etc.  I am also using the internal arrangements plan of HMS Harrier (1860)  to identify some cleat/belaying pin locations and leads; as well as using the arrangements shown for HMS Immortalite (1860) and HMS Warrior (1862) for some guidance.

 

I have two immediate issues I wish to clarify and hope someone can assist me in deciding a likely arrangement for the bow related rigging and belaying points.   Victoria was barque Rigged.

 

First, I need to devise a likely arrangement for belaying the running ends of ropes passing through the bulwark timbers at the bow.  The attached graphic extracts (Immortalite and Warrior) and my drawings for HMS Victoria show some of the arrangement alternatives.  In drawing the likely arrangements for Victoria I need to account for the much more sharply angled junction of the bulwark timbers at the bow and the fact that her jib had more of itself exposed above deck than the other ships.  Other drawing also show the use of metal (iron) straps in thejunction of the bulwark timbers to provide strengthening and support. My current concept is that the jib will have need some substantial support at the bow also hence the use of the bow block (as I have called it - please advise proper name?).  As with the other ships I will use the fairleads through this bow support block, but I remain open to any of the three belaying options shown in the three graphics below, or a fourth as used in HMS Harrier:

1.  Pins in a rack fitted athwart the roughtree timbers at the bow (second preference)

2.  Cleats  immediately below the fairleads.

3.  Cleats on the bowsprit (in line with the fairleads)

4.  Cleats on the bulwark timbers (similar as those leading away as shown in the Immortalite graphic and similar to HMS Harrier)

 

    

 

I have selected the bowsprit option as there are only 6 ropes (three each side) for me to worry about and this provides a direct lead (no chafing of the ropes as they would be subject to some abrading if the led is angled away.  One thing that has ne puzzled though is that these graphics show 9 fairleads and lines; whereas, the Alabama only has three each side - what is missing?

 

Open to ideas/suggestions.  I know that any would be OK but I am looking for the most likely.

 

Secondly, I am trying to identify what line/rope would have been lead via the whiskers on the cathead?

 

Any assistance greatly appreciated.

 

cheers

 

Pat

[popeye the sailor]

the whisker lines are basically stays for the bow spirit,   from what I've come to know of them.   they are terminated with dead eye assemblies,  so they are adjustable.......but I know of no belaying line for them.   that a lot of line for a ship that doesn't have a yard associated with the bow spirit,  or I might guess that they would be clew lines,  if a sail was used.   you'd be safe to go with the three on each side.   to me,  it looks like the diagrams are portraying the bow spirit,  rather than lines associated with it.   I did a little looking online......but I didn't find out much  

[druxey]

Please see my PM, Pat.

[BANYAN]

Thanks Denis and Druxey.   Appreciate the feedback.  

 

Denis, I assume you are referring to the guys? If so, as far as I can determine these had a tackle or double heart arrangement, the former with a lead through a fairlead and secured inboard as 'running rigging'  - this is shown in the HMS Harrier arrangement (1860) - so that may be a viable way to go - thanks.

 

Druxey, many thanks for your helpful PM; that arrangement for a chock block (my bow block) seems a likely candidate.

 

cheers

 

Pat

[BANYAN]

Hi again folks.  After closer inspection of the lithographs and photo I have of the Victoria, and using the belaying and rigging info in the CSS Alabama book, I have derived the following possible rigging arrangement for the bow.  Please see this in context with the attached annotated extract of one of the litho graphs.  Click on graphic for a larger view.

 

Please note:

a.  presence of vertical whiskers (2) at the bow

b.  presence of whiskers on the cat heads (for two lines) - very thin line denotes these (hard to see sorry)

c.  only one line (at the moment) identified as passing through the bulwark fairleads at the bow.

d.  the forestays (2) pass inboard of the vertical whiskers and I assume will terminate via tackle at deck eyebolts either side of the bowsprit (inboard)

e.  stays are terminated via deadeye and heart to eyebolts outboard (as shown in the Alabama belaying plans - not included here). 

f.  cathead whiskers have fairleads for two lines either side. One for Jib sheets?  other?

 

I have yet to identify a few of the lines, and some of the lines I have identified may be the wrong interpretation, so ALL comments and suggestions most welcomed.

 

 

The current interpretation (question marks denote some clarification or confirmation required; and, TBD = to be determined)

 

1.    Fore Royal Stay

2.    Fore Top Gallant Stay

3.    Outer Jib Stay

4.    Fore Topmast Stays (x 2)

5.    Fore Stays (x 2)

6.    Fore Royal Stay (starboard side of martingale)

7.    Fore Topgallant Stay (port side of martingale)

8.    Martingale Stay (chain)

9.    Outer Jib Stay (starboard side of martingale)?

10.  TBD

11.  Fore Topmast Staysail Downhaul (leads aft and through bulwark fairlead at bow)?

12.  TBD (x 2)

13.  Martingale backstays (x 2) - chain

14.  Fore Staysail  Downhaul - leads aft over vertical whiskers?  Why two??

15.  Jib Sheets (aft via cathead whiskers - outer fairlead)?

16.  Fore Topmast Staysail Sheets

17.  TBD

18.  Fore Staysail Sheets

19.  TBD (possibly guys  but nor extended forward?)

 

I would appreciate any feedback on these.

 

cheers

 

Pat

[druxey]

Perhaps this will muddy the waters, but I've marked some possible interpretations:

 

1.    Fore Royal Stay

2.    Fore Top Gallant Stay

3.    Outer Jib Stay

4.    Fore Topmast Stays (x 2)

5.    Fore Stays (x 2)

6.    Fore Royal Stay (starboard side of martingale)

7.    Fore Topgallant Stay (port side of martingale)

8.    Martingale Stay (chain)

9.    Outer Jib Stay (starboard side of martingale)?

10.  TBD Outer jibsail downhaul?

11.  Fore Topmast Staysail Downhaul (leads aft and through bulwark fairlead at bow)?

12.  TBD (x 2) Lead-in of lines 9 and 10?

13.  Martingale backstays (x 2) - chain

14.  Fore Staysail  Downhaul - leads aft over vertical whiskers?  Why two?? Are these perhaps man-ropes (hand-lines)?

15.  Jib Sheets (aft via cathead whiskers - outer fairlead)?

16.  Fore Topmast Staysail Sheets

17.  TBD

18.  Fore Staysail Sheets

19.  TBD (possibly guys  but nor extended forward?)

 

I hope this is of some use, or at least food for thought.

[wefalck]

Ad 17: couldn't this be the fishing tackle for the anchors ?

 

I would have thought that the foresails would be running on stay, not set flying. Therefore, there should be another stay between nos. 3 and 4, and 4 and 5. The stays leading down to the jibboom could go around fairleads and then down to the whiskers and back to the stem or the knights. So 9, 10 & 12 would be stays.

[BANYAN]

Hi Druxey and Wefalck; many thanks for your responses - certainly add food for thought and provides some real options for me.

 

WRT 14; I had thought about manropes (especially noting their presence in the HMS Immortalite drawing earlier but I was thrown by another lithograph which shows the presence of a horse under the bowsprit and I wasn't sure which way to go as they surely wouldn't have both?

 

I will need to look harder to see if there is evidence of the additional stay, but do like the possibility of 10 being the downhaul  - need to check that closer especially noting Wefalck suggestion.

WRT 17 - good suggestion - again need to check closer but it had me baffled as to its use  

 

Much appreciated.

 

Pat

[cog]

PAt,

 

Take into account, lithographers do use their creative, and artisitc freedom from time to time ...

[BANYAN]

Thanks COG, based on what we determined today the lithos are actually very close to reality (compared to the photo we have) but as you say - with a grain of salt

 

I had a good day of addressing the rigging plan with a fellow-club member today.  With reference to several reference publications (China Tea Clippers - G Campbell, Masting and Rigging the Clipper Ship - H Underhill, and Fast Sailing Ships - D Mcgregor) we were able to resolve quite a few of the issues I needed clarified; including, the bow rigging arrangement (we think :)).  I will post an updated annotated picture and legend in the next day or so.  The breakthrough came from the comments/suggestions offered by  by Druxey and Wefalck, which led me to think of a clipper bow rigging arrangement.  The extra stays etc , on closer inspection, had a flying jib (which was furled in the litho) and when compared to the rigging plan for the fictitious Foochow in Campbell's book, resolved the issues we think.  

 

Still a few issues to resolve but I am getting very close to likely rigging and belaying plans.

 

Thanks again all.

[BANYAN]

Hi folks, as advised above, i think I have arrived at a likely configuration for the bow rigging of the Victoria.  The final layout is basically that of a Clipper Ship (with Flying Jib) and rigged as shown by Harold Underhill in his "Masting and Rigging: the Clipper Ship and Ocean transport" Plate 2.  Thanks to Druxey and Wefalck whom provided earlier suggestions that took me down this path.  After Wefalcks suggestion, I inspected the lithograph a bit more closely and there is a furled flying jib shown, which would then account for the additional stays I had not identified earlier.  The manropes definitely run from the cap back through two stanchions which I had mistakenly thought were whiskers (thanks Druxey).  Also, a comment in Underhill's book also allows us to confirm the jib boom guys ran via cleats on whiskers attached top the catheads.

 

I still have a couple of questions and would appreciate further suggestions.  I ask these questions below the latest Rigging graphic and legend.

 

First though the following are relevant:

1.  "She was a beautifully modelled screw-steamer of 580 tons, built of mahogany, and was barque-rigged to royals."   The New Zealand Wars: A History of the Maori Campaigns and the Pioneering Period: Volume I (1845–64)

2.   "Lower and all standing rigging to be of wire rope." - IAW Contract (Specification).

 

ID	Name	Comment	Terminations
1	Fore Royal Stay	Wire Rope	Shackled to spider band with iron heart ..or.. through hole in boom to martingale (see 11)
2	Flying Jib Stay	Rope	Through hole in jib boom to Martingale (see 12)
3	Fore Top Gallant Stay	Wire Rope	Through sheave port side of jib boom to Martingale (see 9a)
4	Outer Jib Stay	Wire Rope	Through sheave stbd side of jib boom to Martingale (see 9b)
5	Fore Topmast Stay	Wire Rope	Through sheave (port side) of bowsprit near cap then to hearts and lanyard at bow.
6	Jib Stay	Wire Rope	Through sheave (stbd side) of bowsprit near cap then to hearts and lanyard at bow.
7	Fore Stays (x 2)	Wire Rope – P&S	Stayplates (padeyes)with iron hearts either side of Bowsprit – Staysail on port stay
8	Bob Stay	Chain	Shackled to eyebolt at the stem, hearts and lanyard at Cap Band
9a	Fore Topgallant Stay	Wire Rope	Through sheave to martingale then to hearts and lanyard at bow – port (see 3)
9b	Outer Jib Stay	Wire Rope	Through sheave to martingale then to hearts and lanyard at bow – stbd (see 4)
10	Martingale Backstays	Chain	Hearts and lanyard P&S at the cheek pieces
11	Outer Martingale Stay     or Fore Royal Stay	Chain Wire Rope	Shackles at boom (spiderband) and Martingale (eyeplate) - Underhill Through boom & terminates at Martingale – iron heart in wire
12	Flying Jib Stay	Wire Rope
13	Inner Martingale Stay	Chain	Shackles at boom (spiderband) and Martingale (eyeplate)
14	Flying Jib Sheets	P&S	Belayed?
15	Foot ropes for Jib Boom (P&S)	Knotted foot rope	See other Lithograph
16	Inner Jibboom Guy (P&S)	Wire Rope	Led aft to inner fairlead at cathead whisker, then aft to hearts and lanyard
17	Outer Jibboom Guy (P&S)	Wire Rope	Led aft to outer fairlead at cathead whisker, then aft to hearts and lanyard
18	Manropes for Bowsprit	Hemp	Via two vertical stanchions at bow
19	Flying Jib Halliard and Downhaul *		Downhaul leads aft and through bulwark fairlead (port)
20	Outer Jib Downhaul *		Downhaul leads aft and through bulwark fairlead (stbd)
21	Jib Downhaul *		Downhaul leads aft and through bulwark fairlead (port_
22	Staysail Downhaul *		Downhaul leads aft and through bulwark fairlead (stbd)
23	Outer Jib Sheets
24	Jib Sheets
25	Fish Tackle		See China Tea Clippers – George Campbell page 49 – bottom left graphic
	Bowsprit Guys (P&S) – No shown	Chain	Shackled to eyebolts at cathead

*Downhauls to bow through fairleads in the chock block, then to cleats.

 

Notes: 

1.       Campbell (China tea Clippers) and Underhill (Masting and Rigging the Clipper…) shows order of jibs from fwd to aft as: Flying, Outer, Jib, Staysail. (Drawing of Foochow – proposed Clipper).

2.       Paasche Plate 83 shows order of jibs fwd to aft as: Flying, Jib, Inner, Staysail (Drawing of three masted fore and aft schooner).

3.       Campbell (China tea Clippers) page 143 (Plate 51) illustrates stayplates with iron hearts.

4.       Campbell (China tea Clippers) page 80/81 (Plate 27) illustrates hearts and lanyard, and the Martingale, Cap and Jib Boom Spider bands.

5.       Campbell (China tea Clippers) page 78/79 (Plate 26) illustrates Bowsprit and Jib Boom stays, guys etc

6.       Underhill (Masting and Rigging the Clipper…) illustrates Bowsprit and Jib Boom stays, guys etc

 

 

Questions:

1. I am assuming that as wire does not stretch as natural fiber does, that some stays etc would be secured at both ends with out the need of  hearts and lanyard for tightening?  I am also assuming that by tightening the martingale stays and bowsprit bobstay, that sufficient pressure was applied to fixed length stays from the masts to the jib boom.  This is certainly borne out in the Underhill and Campbell drawings.  Is this a fair assumption?

 

2.  Are there any other running ends of lines I have not accounted for that need to be led to the bow fairleads (only downhauls at this point))?

 

3.  Noting the use of wire rope for stays, I am assuming there would be too little 'meat' left in the jibboom timber (especially at the outer end) to take the pressure of the sheave pin for sheaves fitted in the boom for these stays?  I am therefore assuming that greased holes would have been used if needed.  This is why I think the lines 11 and 12 are an Outer Martingale stay and the Flying Jib stay, with the royal terminated at a spinder band on the outer end of the jib boom? (this is how Underhill also shows it).

 

Any further suggestions or corrections gratefully accepted

 

cheers

 

Pat

 

[BANYAN]

Hi folks, well after a delay due to holidays and some further research, I decided I needed to make some further progress with the build.

 

I am trying to create and fit all of the necessary detail to the inside of the bulwarks that need to be done prior to painting as I do not wish to mar the finish once the paint has been applied (airbrush).  I am also hoping to identify and fit all the necessary fitting to the inside of the bulwarks prior to fitting any deck furniture and equipment as these latter items will impact my ability to add detail later - hence the research.  

 

I have fitted the pinrails, the chock in the bow through which the jib(s)' downhauls etc are led, and have made a start on the after bench through which the stern davits are fitted.  The following photos show my progress on these items; the after bench and davits are only loose/dry fitted at the moment..

 

  

  

  

 

 

 

I have yet to let in the ash shute, pissdales and heads.  i am also just starting to contemplate where and how to let in the scuppers.  I am also experimenting with the Lang Scuttles, which look a little like a porthole from outside, but are quite unique.  I have located a drawing (following) showing the detail and an article in the Nautical Magazine of 1841 (extract shown) which provides me with some relevant detail.  essentially I will mimic the external appearance only by using a very thin walled brass tube (drilled out) into which I will set some thin acrylic .  I will then drill out the holes in the hull to match the OD of the assembly and glue thin slices of this material into them.  Unfortunately I only have 10mm acrylic rod so I have had to turn the diameter down on my lathe - this proved somewhat difficult as the rod tended to melt if I had the cutting angle or the rpm wrong- persistence paid off   I would value any feedback on how to turn acrylic properly as i cannot get rod of the correct diameter (being so small - 1.8mm to fit the ID of the brass tube).  The following photograph shows that I can achieve this look  and my experiment in a scrap of wood does the trick.  When I shine a light behind, it mimics the appearance of thick glass.  The expanded brass tube slice (top right in the photo) is the start of my experimentation for the scupper inlet in the waterways.  My current punch is not suited and I will need to turn a better punch and die arrangement to use.

 

 

      

 

 

 

cheers

 

Pat

[russ]

Pat:

Nice details. Your inner bulwarks are really something. Lots of detail and it all looks right on the mark for scale.

 

I agree about getting all those fittings in along the bulwarks. It would be the devil to try and get them after painting. I am looking forward to much the same issue on my build.

 

Russ

[BANYAN]

Thanks Russ

[wefalck]

Pat, I work a lot with acrylics (Plexiglas™, I have an affinity for it as my father worked for a daughter company of Röhm GmbH, one of the major producers; he developed inter alia acrylic varnishes for tablets) and have the benefit of owning a complete copy of Röhm's technical manual for working with acrylics. The problem when turning, milling or drilling acrylics is that the material has a comparatively low heat conductivity. So the cutting energy cannot be dissipated quickly enough and the material heats up above the melting point. So you have to chose the right combination of feed-rate, cutting thickness and rpms. In practice the best strategy when turning is to reduce the cutting thickness per pass. The tools also need quite an acute cutting angle, as you would use for wood. A tool-bit for brass wouldn't work. The tools should, of course, also be very sharp. So, general purpose carbide turning bits wouldn't be a good choice, HSS is much better in this case. If you get the parameters right, the part should come out almost polished - I usually get a nice satin finish that is better for painting anyway.

 

Turning down a 10 mm acrylic rod to 1.8 mm is a chore ... would you have access to acrylic cement somehow ? I am using Röhm's (now part of Evonik) Acrifix 192, which is essentially unpolymerised acrylic glass. It polymerises quickly when exposed to day-light and particularly UV light and then has the same mechanical and machining properties as acrylic glass. You could turn your brass ferrules a tad longer than needed and then fill them in with the cement. Once polymerised, you can take them back into the lathe, face them off neatly and then polish the face.

 

For acrylic rods, have you tried architectural modelling supply houses ? Here I can get 2 mm rod.

[BANYAN]

Hi Eberhard and thank you very much for that very helpful feedback.  I have tried to find smaller rod but to date can only get 3mm BUT only in bulk and at 1m lengths.  This supplier is quite distant (here in Aust) so postage is an issue.  Based on your info I will look further into this.  I like the idea of the acrylic cement.  Noting the small tube size, would a drop of this solidify within the ferrules and remain fixed to allow me to work it?  That way I would not need rod at all?

 

As to turning, yep, I have learned those lessons the hard way   I take very very small cuts and pause after every three.  I have also found the appropriate feed speed and rpm to make this work but it is very tedious.  I only need 10 all up so thankfully, I will not need to turn too many more as I have found doing 15mm lengths the best.

 

cheers, and many thanks again.

 

Pat

[Jim Lad]

Nice to see her still progressing, Pat.  She sure looks good so far!

 

John

[BANYAN]

Thanks John.  The research is the hardest part as there is not much direct info; we're having to make a lot of assumptions based on the wording of the Contract.  For example, we know she had a single Browne and Harfield Capstan but not exactly where it was placed - same for Elliott Riding Bitts etc etc

 

cheers

 

Pat

[mtaylor]

Pat,

 

Just curious, would filling the brass tube with something like the liquid glazing we use for stern windows, etc. work?  

[BANYAN]

  experimenting with that as you ask Mark  - only concern is slicing it if I fill the tube.  I think the safest bet is to fill after I cut the slice from the tube but run the risk of getting excess on the edges and sides which can't be cleaned until it is dry.  Get back to you on that.

 

cheers

 

Pat

[Beef Wellington]

What a great build Pat, she has lovely lines and the research is very interesting.  Great to see you overcoming all the challenges.

[BANYAN]

Thanks Jason, Appreciate that.  She looks a little rough around the edges where I am still working on it as I had to take off most of the old paint so she looks worse than she actually is   I probably won't repaint for a while yet while I continue to sort out all the fitting that go onto the bulwarks.  The scuppers are the next task.

 

cheers

 

Pat

[BANYAN]

Hi again folks, some help please.

 

According to the Contract "Sundry Fittings. - Metal spider hoops, with brass belaying pins to each mast, and hoops with hooks and rollers for awning, a patent winch on fore and main masts, …"  I am trying to determine what these 'patent winches' were.  

 

According to Underhill in Masting and Rigging the Clipper Ship and Ocean Transport, page 149, "The use of deck capstans as mentioned earlier in this Chapter also went far to reduce the labour in hoisting yards, but the final stage was the introduction of the halliard winch in place of the rope purchase, (Fig 148c [not shown here]).  These winches are very simple, and although the supporting frame may vary in different makes, the mechanical design is the same.  The principle feature is the drum, which not only does the hauling but also stores the wire taken in, so there is no need to feed it off the winch.  A large hand operated flywheel at one end drives the drum through a worm and pinion gear, while at the other end of the drum is a band brake."

 

Noting that Victoria had wire rope for much of her standing and lower rigging, I think it safe to assume this may be the patent winch being referenced?   I also note the use of 'singular' form of 'winch' in the Contract wording.

 

A quick search of the internet found a catalog from Bruner and Lay (undated) in which several versions of single and double winches for use with wire rope for hoisting loads (the catalog is for mining equipment but the princile would be the same? see following:

 

 

However:  as the caption to the following picture (taken from the Sea Shanties website, also indicates a 'singular' winch of a similar style but double sided.

 

"THE HALYARD WINCH has replaced the use of the capstan for hauling on the topsails in many sailing ships. The machine does the pulling on the ropes and the singing of a shanty will not help it to work more efficiently. The capstan is still used, however, for other purposes, and can be seen on the right of this photograph, which was taken on board the Penang."

 

Does anyone have further information on these winches?  OR, does anyone think this is too large a leap of faith?

 

cheers

 

Pat

[wefalck]

The term patent winch appears at various places in both, the English and German literature.

 

The kind of winches as on the first picture appear on all sorts of vessels, mainly merchant ones, from around 1820 on. They reduce the number of crew required to haul-in lines, because they can be operated by one or two men, while a capstan would require several. These geared capstans also have obvious mechanical advantages. However, I was not aware that they were used as haliard winches with a winding drum. If they had no winding drum they would have had a spill-head on either side and could be operated by two to three men, depending on the load; one or two work on the cranks, while the third (or boy) would make sure that the rope doesn't foul, when coming off the spill head.

 

The second picture shows a brace-winch that were common at least on large German ships (e.g. the Flying-P-Liners) from around 1900 on. There drums were conical to give a varying purchase, depending on the angle of the course.There are some quite detailed drawings of them in

 

MIDDENDORF, F.L. (1903): Bemastung und Takelung der Schiffe.- 401 p., Kassel (reprint e.g. 1977 by Horst Hamecher).

 

I can post them here, once I am back in Paris (travelling currently).

 

At the same time small sheet-winches came into use that were mounted at the bulwarks. They look similar to the little capstan-like winches on modern sailing-yachts, but the axis is horizontal rather than vertical.

 

I would tend to think that your winches are more like the ones shown on the first image.

[Roger Pellett]

I agree with Welfalk.  The winch in the photo is a Jarvis brace winch. The double drum arrangement allowed the brace on one side to be wound in while the other paid out.  There is a good discussion of these winches in John Harland's book Capstans and Windlasses.  Closer to home (for you) Allen Villers has written about these from a sailor's point of view.  See his  The Way of a Ship.

 

Roger

[Jim Lad]

Pat,

 

The first reference I can find to the use of the Jarvis brace winch is on the German ship "Preussen" in 1897, so far too late for your "Victoria".  It was very seldom used on British built ships and I very much doubt that it was ever used on naval ships as it was a labour saving device - hardly needed in the Grey Funnel line with their huge crews.

 

An example of the sheet winches mentioned by Wefalck is on the bulwark  at far left in the photo below - this is one of my old photos of the 'Cutty Sark'.  The drum on this type of winch would be too small for wire rope.

 

The types of winches shown in your catalogue were generally known as 'dolly winches' in the British merchant navy and were very commonly used for cargo work.

 

The good news is that I haven't the faintest idea what your 'patent' or 'singular' winches would have looked like! 

 

John

 

 

[BANYAN]

Hi Eberhard and John, thanks for the very useful feedback.

 

I agree that the first is the most likely candidate and most closely resembles a drawing in Underhill's book.  I will go with that.  I have also found this in the meantime:

 

 

The next thing is to work out exactly where these would have been located as this image suggests it was not on the centreline?  I would also like to try and get some decent drawings if they exist - does anyone have any ideas where they may be located?

 

cheers

 

Pat