HMS Bellona 1760 by SJSoane - Scale 1:64 - English 74-gun - as designed

[Siggi52]

Hello Mark,

 

with that what I know is Druxey right. Then you could shorten the ropes easily to store the guns during voyages, or move the guns. A good example is the model of the Royal George (1756) https://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/66456.html at the NMM. Here a screen shot

 

 

And there is no turn of the rope around the cascable. I don't know where, but I remember a picture where the breach rope was sized there with a small rope around the cascable.

 

I hope I could help.

 

 

[druxey]

I have reservations about the Royal George sectional model. If you look carefully, the trucks of the guns have black iron rims - something that would never have been the case on shipboard guns. Only land-based batteries would have had iron-shod wheels. Secondly, there appears to be no difference in size between the lower deck battery, presumably 32 pounders, and the guns above. The quarter deck guns were 12 pounders - they should be considerably smaller. The inboard paint scheme is questionable, too. The model has been 'improved' by obviously 20th century labels. What else might have been improved or altered as well?

[Siggi52]

Hello Druxey,

 

may be the black rim at the wheels are only black paint. The guns at the GD where 42 pdrs and at the MD where 24 pdrs according to R. Winfield's British  Warships in the Age of Sail 1714-1792. They have at the breech nearly the same size. The NMM write, that the model was made 1756 and ok, the color. You like more white ships, without much color. But the ships in those days where colourful. And this was a 1. rate! 

 

Please have also a look at Falconer's cross section of a 74 gunner, there you see the same thing.

 

[druxey]

I won't argue with you about the sizes of 32 and 24 pounders, Siggi, but those 12 pounders on the quarter deck look much too large. Why would anyone want to paint the truck rims black? The paint would mark up the decks that they kept scrupulously clean. It is not logical. As for my comments about paint, my understanding was that lower decks were whitewashed, as there was limited light - my comment has nothing to do with any personal preference! Yes, I've seen blue painted inner bulwarks on contemporary models (also blue-grey and grey-green), but only in cabin areas. I stand to be corrected in my remarks.

[SJSoane]

The Falconer drawing is about the right time for the Bellona, and is contemporary. So a good guide here. I see the breech rope lying on top of the button, not wrapping around, and also more permanently seized around the bulwark eyebolt without a hook.

 

It does seem very hit and miss whether that breech rope would stay in place in the heat of battle, when the gun is run out and the rope is slack. In a recoil, it looks like it could slip up over the top of the barrel, or even slide down and catch the carriage below, allowing an unexpectedly long recoil. Maybe just a light seizing run around the button that the Falconer drawing does not show?

 

Mark

 

[shipmodel]

Hi Siggi, Druxey and Mark - 

 

I am greatly enjoying your discussion.  To add my two cents -

 

The one consideration that has not been mentioned yet is how the gun would act during recoil.  If the rope is fixed around the cascabel, either by a loop and a seizing or by a cont splice, then if the gun is anything but exactly perpendicular to the bulwark, the shock of the recoil will be taken up unevenly, leading to a torque on the rear of the barrel, which could not be good for the gun or the gunners.  In extreme cases I guess it could overturn the carriage.  Leaving the breaching rope to run free, whether with a loop or without, would even up those stresses.

 

Dan

 

[druxey]

Interesting comment worth considering, Dan.

[AON]

I believe the CG (centre of gravity) is low enough that this would not normally happen.  So long as the men stood clear to the sides they would survive the recoil.

 

With the camber of the deck and a calm sea everything helps the gun crew reposition the gun too early.

 

They need to haul it back away from the gun port to have access to clean, swab, and reload.

 

Then haul it back out to fire again in record time... back breaking work with ringing in their ears and smoke in their eyes.

 

Then the normal condition is they would be on a tack, heeled over,  and in rough seas... with someone firing back at them.

 

Logically the breech rope is a large size to withstand the strain.  The wheels are different sizes front to back to assist in range, compensate for the deck camber, and adjust the CG.

 

This rope would be wrapped and seized until a better idea was implemented (the ring cast into the cannon to eliminate the need to seize the line)... sort of an ISO2000 concept... constant improvement.

[dvm27]

From Building the Wooden Walls, Brian Lavery, 1991:

 

" Gun Tackle - The thickest were the breech ropes, 7 1/2in in circumference on a 32-pounder, and one was used for each gun. The middle part of the rope was turned round the button of the gun, and seized on to it; each end was then led to a ring bolt on the side of the ship and attached to it, probably with a bowline. The tackle was intended to restrain the recoil of the gun when it was fired. It was long enough to allow the gun to run someway back from the port and so be reloaded, but not so long that it ran onto the coamings and other fittings near the centerline of the ship".

 

When it comes to English ships I can think of no better source than Lavery. I'm not quite sure how to interpret "seized onto it" but perhaps seizing under the button as Druxey suggests is what he is referring to. Lavery is also very specific in describing the carriages and makes no mentions of iron hoops on the trucks.

[Siggi52]

Dear Druxey,

 

starts now the same procedure as with the paneling of the outer walls? There also all pictures, paintings and sketches I posted where in your eyes fantasy, artistic freedom or you could’t see anything. But at least it turned out, that I was right.

 

So why are the outer circumstances, the color, the wheels and the cannons now are an argument that all the rest is not true? That model is from 1756, may be a little fancier then an original ship. We don’t know what the artist would show us with this model. The white wash came later and also red wheels on cannons made the floor colourful, not only black one. But they are ok. I never heard something against that. At the Victory these wheels where not painted.

 

We agree with the fastening of the breech rope to the rings bolds at the walls. So it’s also at the Victory. I think Falconer did’t show that knot, because it did’t matter. Every man knows, that there has to be a knot. And he shows clearly, that the rope is only laid over the cascable. And that you could all see at that model, so why it’s not useful?

 

I thought that we are here in this forum to share wisdom to build better models. But if it’s not liked to have an other view, or find something out, I let it. I have nobody to ask how I build my ship, and at least it’s not important for me, how other build theirs. So many build there ships in Hahn style and others in druxey style. I was really shocked to see the double curve you build in your wales. Did you never noticed that you are the only one who build it so? And the port lids, only two models I found have that step around the lid! But nobody noticed that before! And nobody, except mtaylor, liked it. Thank you for that Mark.

 

Druxey, I liked the support I got from you over the time. But you should also be more open for others, who found out something different, or noticed something you have overseen.

[oldpaperone]

A few exaples from my library. The guns were lashed when not in use, often with multiple lashing ropes. Different when made ready for action.The first three are from Boudriot’s 74 gun ship book. 

Edited February 17, 2019 by oldpaperone

[paulsutcliffe]

Another option that may be of interest is David White in the AOTS Diana armament section shows the breeching rope lying over the cascable and a ring but says in the text, the ring is a grommet seized to the cascable, so similar to siggis photo but with a ring tied on to the button

Regards

Paul

[mtaylor]

The problem I see with this discussion is that we have no authoritative source other than Falconer and his drawing leaves a lot open for interpretation.  And there's a problem with Falconer.. it appears that he's only showing the training tackle or the "run-out" tackle and method of stowage.  If you look at the lower of his drawings, the "breech rope" goes from the button down to the eye bolts on the carriage, which in my opinion if used for firing would cause the gun muzzle and front wheels to rise.

 

What I'm seeing as pertains here is mostly second source info, not just here in this discussion but many involving the rigging of guns, even the masts and more.  Much was left up to the discretion of such things to the Captain.  We have tales of captains re-rigging and changing things that could be changed.  So what's correct for rigging guns?  All of them?  Some of them?  Basically, it boils down to best guess unless we can get that time machine working. 

[Alex M]

Are you sure that Falconer show breeching rope in his drawing? It is too thin to be a breeching rope. I think, he show an extra Tackle used to held the gun in position. D. Steel show a cut splice in his drawings and I think, it is only right methode to bring the breeching rope aroung the cascable of the gun.

 

Regards

Alex

Edited February 16, 2019 by Alex M

[Hubac's Historian]

You know who might have a clear and practical answer to this question?  Henry - AKA Popeye2Sea.  He serves aboard the U.S.S. Constitution, and has a tremendous working knowledge of rigging, and of gun rigging.  Maybe send him a message.

[SJSoane]

Hi everyone,

 

I apologize for not answering these recent many great comments. We traveled to Virginia and North Carolina this last week, and I forgot to take my password for the website; I could read the comments on my phone, but not post!

 

I will address these in the morning, and also post a couple of interesting things I saw at the Mariner's Museum in Newport News, as well as at Colonial Williamsburg.

 

Mark

 

 

[SJSoane]

Twenty hours of traveling yesterday, with flight delays, and a ground blizzard driving 67 miles home from the airport. But a good trip. Here are some highlights before jumping into the Bellona gun question.

 

1. The location of the first powered man flight, at the Wright brothers museum at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. The first flight took off at the blue circle, and landed at the red. Subsequent flights the same day went much further, as the plaque shows. 66 years later, we landed on the moon.

2. A 28# gun from the Mariners Museum at Newport News, Virginia. The gun is mid 18th century Spanish, except for the more elaborate detailing, it has much the same configuration as the British guns of the time. This museum has a large section on the Monitor and Merrimack (or Virginia as renamed by the Confederacy), which engaged in the Battle of Hampton Roads in 1862 nearby. The turret of the Monitor has been recovered, and is in restoration in this museum.

3. The Royal Cypher (George II) above a door at the Governor's Palace at Colonial Williamsburg, Virginia. This was when the British still owned Virginia, obviously.

4. A door hinge reproduction made by the apprentices at the blacksmith shop in Colonial Williamsburg. I believe these are the exact same design as those used on British 18th century ship partition doors.

 

 

 

Now on to the Bellona gun question!

 

Mark

Edited February 20, 2019 by SJSoane

[SJSoane]

Now, on to the breech rope question.

 

Apologies again to Siggi, druxey, Dan, Alan, Greg, Oldpaperone, Paul, Mark, Alex and Hubac's Historian, for not replying sooner to your all helpful comments. I will never forget my password when traveling again! I hope I will address all of your thoughts in the following:

 

After looking at the various sources you have provided, it still looks like Falconer is closest to contemporary, unmodified material. I think it is showing the breech rope, even though it is too thin, because it reeves through the ring and eyebolt on the side of the gun carriage, just where many other sources show it. Even the carronnade shown below (from the Mariners Museum at Newport News, Virginia) shows the breech rope reeving through the ring and eyebolt on the side of the carriage.

 

Now Falconer shows it lying over the top of the button, not wrapped around. This corresponds to the 1756 cross section of the Royal George, which Siggi showed us. At that scale of drawing, I doubt Falconer would have shown a seizing or not; he does not show the details of the fastening at the ring at the side of the ship, either.

 

So maybe a seizing with a quick few turns around the button and breech rope? Or, as Paul suggests, a grommet seized to the breech rope and then to the button?

 

Or, what if it were not seized at all? I studied this with a quick sketch below. The danger would be that the breech rope would accidentally slip up over the barrel (B), or down under (C), when the gun was pulled into the firing position and the breech rope was slack, or when it recoiled.

 

But the sketch shows that neither situation would have been disastrous, because the ring and eyebolt fastening the breech rope to the sides of the carriage would have retained the gun in roughly the same way. A is the desired arrangement, showing how the breech rope pulls down on the button thanks to the side ring. But B does the same thing although the rope is sliding a bit on the top of the barrel. And C catches into the carriage itself. B and C might have allowed a greater distance of recoil, but not dramatically so. The ring on the side ensures that the forces acting along the line of retention is parallel to the deck and the gun recoil, no matter what happens to the breech rope at its inboard end.

 

Oldpaperone, your drawings are very interesting, showing I think French guns? As I read them, there appears to be an additional hole in the side of the carriage, through which the breech rope is sometimes pulled. I don't believe there is a similar hole in the British carriages. Does anyone have further information about how that hole was used?

 

Alex, it is interesting that Falconer's upper drawing shows the gun tackles tying up somehow to the button, with the breech rope removed. I confess I don't understand that at all. And a cut splice would be logical here; can we see the lower Falconer drawing as a cut splice? I should probably read through Falconer to see if he says anything about this.

 

Thanks again, everyone, for your helpful comments and insights!

 

Mark

 

 

 

[SJSoane]

Never hurts to read the text...

 

Falconer does say that the breech rope is fastened to the button, which he calls the pumiglion or pummelion. But he also shows in figure III on the deck view to which this entry refers, that the breech rope simply sits on top of the button, and does not wrap around it.

 

So, I think at this point I am going with it sitting on top, with a simple seizing or grommet with seizing, to the button. Does anyone have an image of how a grommet would be fastened to the breech rope?

 

Come to think of it, the drawing of the deck below would also allow of a cut splice, although that is not quite what we see in the previous side view.

 

Mark

Edited February 20, 2019 by SJSoane

[druxey]

My only concern with your sketch B is that, were the breeching to slip up over the gun on recoil, the line would scorch due to gases being expelled through the vent at that moment.

[SJSoane]

Hi druxey,

 

Good point about the problem if the breech slipped up over the barrel. After reading Falconer, I will assume it was seized onto the button; and this would have been a good reason why!

 

Do you have an idea how a grommet would have been formed on the middle of the breech rope? Would the ring of the grommet have legs on either side that are wrapped into the seizing around the breech rope?

 

Mark

[druxey]

I've no idea, I'm afraid, Mark. This topic seems to be in uncharted waters.

[AON]

A short splice would do it.

Below are a couple plates that show a short splice or ... option B: seizing

[SJSoane]

Aha, Alan, that looks about right. I doubt I will get this done at 3/16" scale, but it is good to know how. The thinnest thread I have is the equivalent of 1 ½" circumference rope.

 

Mark

[AON]

If I were doing it for real (full size) I'd likely use a short cutting of three strands and splice each end in normally like an eye splice.

 

One of our local club members showed us that he makes an eye splice in his models he first makes a bevel cut in the end of his rope and glues it to the standing end, then rubbing/rolling the joint between his thumb and finger and when it drys it is a strong eye splice looking jointed rope.

That might work for you.

 

Try on a piece of scrap.

[Siggi52]

Hello Mark,

 

I think, you think all too complicated. There is a gun crew, and I think that there are one or two members who have the duty to look after the breech rope. And if there would be any problems, they would have changed that system.

 

Then the breech rope is quite heavy, so I think that they will not move so easily then the ropes we use in our models. 😕

 

An last, as I wrote before above, that there may be a small rope (or something smaller than that, I have at the moment no name for it) to size the breech rope at the cascable. For a better understanding I made a picture.

 

[SJSoane]

Siggi, thanks, sometimes the simplest is the logical answer. This would be consistent with everything we see in the Royal George model and in the Falconer drawings. And this I can make!

 

Mark

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

Mark, I got  an idea, rename your model: Le Bellona,  and then,  you will be able to go this way, amply documented by Boudriot.

 

And yes, it is true, why make it complicated when they surely made it the easy way.

 

Here is probably another wrong way, on how I did it about 25 years ago: last photo

[druxey]

This is my last shot (pun intended) on this topic! A cut splice in the breeching would allow for some lateral movement in a gun trained around and firing, without slewing it back on recoil. The later pattern of gun with a cascabel ring would allow the same degree of freedom, but without the complication of making a cut splice.

[paulsutcliffe]

Mark, the picture I mentioned in the Diana book with the grommet clearly shows the grommet as a ring around the breech rope above the cascable presumably then seized to the cascable, I will venture to the garage tomorrow and take a picture if you like, I'm guessing the seizing is under the breech rope so both are going through the grommet

Regards

Paul

 

Edited February 21, 2019 by paulsutcliffe