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

[garyshipwright]

6 hours ago, Mark P said:

Good Evening Mark;

 

See below extracts from a few contracts which give some detail of what was done.

 

Warspite, William Wells, Deptford, contract date 17 Nov 1755:

 

Furnace & Fireplace. To put up Jambs, and lay Cants for the Furnaces and Fireplace; to line the Jambs, Wingboards, overhead, round the Chimney and the foreside of the after Bulkheads of the Fore Castle, with double Tin plate, and to Cover the Deck with Lead Seven pounds to the Foot Square, and to put up such Convenient Dressers & Lockers as shall be necessary.

 

Resolution, Henry Bird, Northam, contract date 28 Nov 1755: (repeat of the above)

 

Culloden, specification for Deptford Dockyard, 1770:

 

As you can see, they all seem pretty much of a muchness. Not much variation. Earlier contracts speak of lead and bricks on top of it; but probably best here to just rely on lead. There seems to have been a raised border around the edges of the hearth, which might give the illusion, viewed from the side, of a raised hearth.

 

All the best,

 

Mark P

 

Well Mark guess we can put a slash through using Peter's fig 5/28 about the brick floor and go with a a metal floor.  Teaches me that I should look at primary first and use books today as secondary. 🥺

[garyshipwright]

Mark instead of steaming the wood, what about  cutting thinner piece's and glue them back to back held in a jig? That way you don't have to worry about the strong spring back. Just my thought's good sir. Gary

[Mark P]

Good Evening Gary Sir;

 

It all depends upon what sources the author uses. Don't fret too much; certainly the floors were once covered with brick. I did read somewhere, don't remember if it was a modern book, or a contemporary document, that brick stoves were done away with because the maintenance cost of them was very high.

 

Re the joints in the lead, these would almost certainly be what we over here call 'welted' seams, where the edge of one sheet is completely enclosed in a folded edge of the adjoining sheet, and then the two are beaten flat. 

 

All the best,

 

Mark 

 

 

[garyshipwright]

Mark when you showed the contract of the Culloden I just knew that I had seen this a few times before. I am sure I read this but one soon forget were they read it,  untill you need the info, and then you can't remember were you read it. That is untill a sir comes along.🙂 Never thought about the cost and the reason they did away with the brick, interesting. Wish I had got a few earlier contracts in the 1750's and only have one from the 1760's. They would come in handy that's for sure. 

[SJSoane]

HI eveyone,

 

Working away. I have installed the foremost port spirketting, using the idea from Rob Napier of SWOPEM (Situation Where One Piece Equals Many) in 18th century ship model construction. You can see the  hooked scarfs inscribed in the single spirketting piece, which allowed me to fit and stain this piece outside the model, then install for a clean line to the waterway. I will hide the vertical joints between these large spirketting pieces behind the standards.

 

Clamping was challenging; I made a shaped block for the outboard side at the centerline, which hooks over the stem to keep it in place while placing the clamp. I also had to use some pins in hidden places to keep the piece tight to the stem and to the waterway while putting the clamps in place.

 

 

While waiting for stain and glue to dry, I continued to work on the stove predating the Brodie stove. Here is all the information I have on my NMM plans for the Bellona ca. 1759:

 

 

 

It matches almost exactly in dimensions the stove shown in the NMM plans for the HMS Dorsetshire of 1757, which has more detail. Check out the massive nozzle to the left:

 

Note in both cases the 4" substance sitting between the stove and the deck below. Mark P.'s original contract from this pre-Brodie stove period clearly calls for a lead-lined tray shaped at the edges by cants around the stove, and says nothing about brick. Looking at the model of the Princess Royal of 1773, 20 years later than the Bellona but a little before the Royal Navy switch to the Brodie stove, the model indicates what Rob Napier interprets as masonry on the base, painted this nice cream color and with a roughly 1 foot square paving pattern (see below). But also notice that it has a black cant around the outer edge. This seems to accord with the drawings of the Bellona and the Dorsetshire. So I wonder if the brick sits over the lead tray but was not mentioned in the contract, or if there were several ways this was done before the Brodie stove, sometimes with lead only, sometimes with masonry.

 

 

Given the certain information of a contemporary model that is consistent with my Bellona drawing, I have decided to go with this attractive cream colored base. Whether it is masonry or not I will leave to the imagination of the viewer!

 

Now, on to some interesting details at the roasting end of the stove, on the right side of the elevation. In the Dorsetshire drawing, the fire grate for the roasting area sits to the right and at the base of the dotted curved line. It appears to be open all the way up to where the chimney starts to angle in. Right in the center of this open space appear to be four horizontal round bars seen as circles in this elevation.

 

We can also see these in the Rob Napier's photo of the Princess Royal stove, below. The location of these would seem to prevent the use seen later in the Brodie stove of arms that can be swung in and out of this fire for holding pots. Indeed, the Princess Royal stove seems to show a shallow pan at the top of the horizontal bars; was this for frying? The pan does not show in the Dorsetshire drawing.

 

Also, note in the Dorsetshire drawing 3 wiggly shapes projecting out from the face of the fire, with one, three and then two hooked shapes for holding a horizontal spit bar or bars, perhaps? they can's swing in over the fire, since the bars are in the way. Did they roast on spits hanging at different distances from the fire, to control the heat? There is definitely a tray for drippings under all of these spit bar holders. So were these wiggly projections just bolted onto the sides of the stove, like the simpler spit bar holders in the later Brodie stove? That will be my best guess at this point.

 

 

All for now!

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[druxey]

I agree that the 'wiggly thingies' (great technical term!) were for spits at varying distances from the heat source.

[SJSoane]

Hi druxey,

 

I think whenever possible, we should use proper technical terms like "wiggly thingies". It helps with clear communication!😊

 

Mark

[garyshipwright]

Ok guys, been looking for this term in all of my books for what it means and have come up short.  It such a great term that they havn't even put it  on Wikipedia but probabley show up in the future. 😲😆😜.  O forgot good job Mark just love your updates.

[SJSoane]

HI Gary, doesn't it feel good to be ahead of Wikipedia!🙂 And by the way, I was pointed by Alan (AON) to your posting on your stove, which I haven't looked at for some time. You did an an outstanding job on that, an inspiration!

 

A small update, but important to me. I finally installed both the spirketting and the quickwork on the port side of the bow. The quickwork was challenging, in having to fit between two existing pieces, with no room to maneuver, while at the same time dealing with constantly clamping to the curve as I tried to fit it. But it came out OK, including scribed planking you can just see. I have also temporarily put in the hawse hook, just to see the area where the hawse holes will finally come through. A couple of routed rabbets provide slots for the spirketting and quickwork to slide behind the hook while still leaving a surface for the hook to butt directly against the frames for a positive gluing connection.

 

Mark

 

 

[druxey]

Looking very nice indeed, Mark!

[garyshipwright]

I have to second that druxey. Mark the  stove was a real joy  to build and most of the info came from Arthur Bugler book, HMS Victory, Building Restoration and Repair. It gives you the full size dimensions and with out it would have been a pain in the butt.  Gary

[SJSoane]

Thanks so much, druxey and Gary. I am very slow but steady!

 

Waiting for glue to dry on the starboard spirketting at the bow, I finished up the drawings for the pre-Brodie stove. Given the material I found,  this is my best guess. It may be a few years before I actually get to construct it, so I may find out more before I begin.

 

It is intriguing, in the Dorsetshire drawings, the nozzles out of the kettles seem to have a ball connection between the fitting and the side of the stove. They are clearly a ball in the drawing, with shading to indicate it as such. I wonder if this was a rotating fitting, allowing the nozzles to change their direction left and right and up and down. Don't know why this would be of value.

 

And my "squiggly thingies" are drawn to the scale of the Dorsetshire drawing, but they do look flimsy for carrying a large joint roasting out at the outer edge. Maybe these need to be thickened up a bit.

 

Mark

 

[druxey]

Does look like rotating ball joints. I've not seen those before. It would be an advantage to point them down so any overflow would not go onto the deck.

[SJSoane]

I realized that other day that summer is coming to an end, and cold weather will be upon us before we know it. That means I need to plan ahead for anything needing the use of the router table in the garage before it is too late. So, I temporarily put aside spirketting, to concentrate on making the beams for the remaining decks. I used a router jig for the gundeck beams, and plan on the same idea for the rest of them.

 

First, the upper deck beams. Much as I admire the tabled joints done by our great craftsmen including Gary (garyshipwright) and Ed Tosti, I remind myself that my design goal is to emulate the Admiralty style models I can see close up including the two Bellona models and also the Princess Royal model in Rob Napier's book. My hull framing is thus stylized, and so should the deck beams as seen here in my photo of the first Bellona model. The two beam halves are a simple scarphed joint. I did this on the gun deck, and so will continue onto the upper deck. The higher decks are one piece beams.

 

 

So, I measured the angle needed to form the correct length of the scarph, and used angle gauges of 3.5 degrees to set up the table saw for an angled cut:

 

 

I then slid this angled plywood piece under the angle table on the Sherline mill, to set the correct angle of taper. On top of this I bolted a simple holding jig, into which I can slide beam blanks, clamp them down, and then run the cutter across to form the angle. The brass bolt was used for fine tuning of the angle after I ran some tests for the correct length.

 

 

I have 27 beams in the upper deck, times two halves, times 3 passes for controlling the depth of cut, equalling 162 passes of the cutter. A happy five hours!

 

Here are the blanks awaiting their turn at the mill...

 

 

Next, gluing up and shaping the roundup on the router table.

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SJSoane]

Hi everyone,

While waiting for the upper deck beam glue joints to dry before shaping their roundup, I worked some more on the tiller and its tackle. In a post to Alan (AON)'s site, Gary (garyshipwright) pointed out the need for directing the wheel ropes up through the deck forward of the mizen mast. I started working on this and discovered a few things.

 

First, according to Brian Lavery's Arming and Fitting of English Ships, pp. 18-20, at the 1760 date of the Bellona, the Royal Navy was holding up the fore end of the tiller with a gooseneck running along a curved sweep track, just under the upper deck beams. A rope ran from the end of the tiller to a block on either side of the ship, back to a central block and up to the steering wheel. A problem with this method was that the tiller rope did not equally tighten and slack on each side of the tiller, causing sloppiness and some accidents. The solution was found in 1771, when Pollard, a Master Boatbuilder at Portsmouth devised a way to run the tiller rope along rollers within the track itself, keeping equal tension. But this was 20 years after the Bellona, so I will have to model the earlier, cruder method.

 

And here it gets interesting. the original Bellona draft shows the tiller very tight up against the upper deck beams. We are seeing below the tiller at midships, but the beams at the sides. When the beams are shown at the center location, their bottom surface is only an inch or so from the top of the tiller surface. How does the gooseneck and the sweep fit?

 

 

Here we see close up that the gooseneck and sweep cannot fit under the main beam. Both have to fit up into the space between the beams. There is more clearance at the small intermediate beam shown in orange. but eventually as the tiller sweeps to the side the gooseneck (shown in dotted orange) it hits the next big beam aft. (this drawing is not accurate for the position up and down, since the tiller sweeps downward as it sweeps to the side, following the roundup of the deck beam. But the space between tiller and beam will remain the same through the sweep, so this is just showing that eventually the gooseneck hits the beam.)

 

 

In plan, this means that the tiller can only swing as far as the location shown in purple. The green location is a 33 degree angle David Antscherl discovered as the ideal angle in a study of helm angles in the eighteenth century, and described in The Fully Framed Model, vol. II, pp. 47-8. The Bellona geometry only allows a 26.7 degree sweep. However, the contemporary study David quotes also notes that some ships in the period only swept 28 degrees. So maybe this is close enough. There really isn't any lee-way, given the restricted space between beams 23 and 24, into which the gooseneck and sweep have to fit if the tiller really is as tight to the beams as the original Bellona section shows. Even with this, the sweep will have to be pared down at its outer ends to fay onto the underside of beam 24.

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[druxey]

Apparently more than about 25 degrees of rudder become ineffective: the rudder then acts like a brake. So I think that you are safe, Mark!

 

Read Hutchinson:

 

http://www.bruzelius.info/Nautica/Seamanship/Hutchinson(1777)_p38.html

[garyshipwright]

Hi Mark. Am not sure but in the AOS Bellona shows on page 65 that the sweep is set back by one beam compared to what you showing and maybe that is were the goose neck fitted on the back side of the sweep. It shows blocks further forward on the end of the tiller and looks like the tiller rope is going from those blocks, through a eyelet then to a block at the side. Finally going fwd to be guided up to the wheel. How right this is am not really sure. Will see what I come up with. I added a photo of my sweep with the rollers. You just make them out on the far right and far left side with bolts holding the rollers in place. Gary

[garyshipwright]

Mark here is a photo from Brian Lavery  book Building the  wooden Walls, The design and construction of the 74 gun ship Valiant and shows the tiller and ropes  which seems to be the same as what's in Bellona. Says it comes from the NMM and gives a date of 1760. 

[Siggi52]

Hello Mark,

 

I would agree with Gary, that you should set back the sweep between beam 24 and 25 and follow Lavery's sketch at page 65 of his Bellona book. But I set the blocks for the tiller rope in front of the 24. beam and fitted my sweep between the beams and then it works. I hope the picture explains better what I mean.

 

 

 

[SJSoane]

thanks so much, Gary and Siggi. That makes perfect sense. It is confirmed by the section of HMS Dorsetshire from NMM, below. Here the sweep and gooseneck are clearly in between the beams, and also one beam back as you suggest. This shows what looks like a sheave in a fixture in the side,  not a free-hanging block as Lavery shows in the Bellona book....

 

 

 

 

It doesn't allow any wider swing of the tiller, but it fits constructionally.

 

 

 

 

[druxey]

As mentioned, a wider swing is neither necessary nor advisable.

[garyshipwright]

Mark are you talking about the item below the tiller, am not sure what that item is but it could be.  Gary

[druxey]

The red block is the one, Gary: it's an internal fitting. The black inked fixed block with red surround on the deck above is through the side; internal and external!

[garyshipwright]

Thanks druxey, well it could be, am easy and  won't be no augment from me.😁 

[Siggi52]

Hello Mark,

 

I made some changes in your drawing, so that your drawing fit the Dorsetshire drawing. 

 

  

 

The sweep is there totally between the beams. For the Dragon I build the lip under the beams and only the upper part between them. And yes Gary, the structure below the beam is the sheave for the tiller rope. In my drawing I put it a little forward to get free from the tiller, whom I also shorten a little. But Mark, may be you find a way not to shorten the tiller.

 

 

And so looks the sheave for the tiller rope at the Dragon

 

 

Mark, one question about the layout of the carlings and ledges. I went here with Lavery, page 52/53 in his Bellona book. From where did you get your design? It looks strange when you cut of the tops of the knees for the carlings. 

[garyshipwright]

Thanks guys learn something new ever day. 

[Mark P]

Good Evening Siggi;

 

I hope that Mark won't mind me answering for him, but if you are asking about what I think you are, this is a deck beam structure using half-beams; which is a fairly common method of fitting the deck beams in the after end of the deck. It allows for shorter beams to be used than are otherwise required. 

 

All the best,

 

Mark P

[garyshipwright]

Hi Mark I don't think Siggi is talking about the half beams but the knees at the side being cut off  at the ends. I think if Mark moves the carlings in closer to the middle line  they would not need to be cut off at the ends. I up load a photo of aft part showing how this was set up. Its for a 74 but not sure which one.Also added one of Hector.  Forgive  me if you know this which am sure you do🙂 More for others  to see what we are talking about then us old timers like my self.

[garyshipwright]

Guys being that we are talking about the aft part the Dorsetshire had a different set up of those aft carlings so I take it that those half beams may of been shorter then the one's on Hector being she was built  in 1757 right around the time of Bellona? Mark forgive me for talking about this on you log  but figure it would be interesting to talk about. Gary

[SJSoane]

Hi everyone,

Well, this is embarrassing, I can't find the plan I was looking at when I drew my upper deck. I assumed it was the Dorsetshire, but here is the Dorsetshire:

 

 

I need to keep looking through my various sources. Should have written this down years ago.

 

But if I don't find the source, the drawing Gary showed of the Hector, with the carlings moved in to the heads of the knees does make sense.

 

Thanks for flagging this Siggi! A little more digging to do....

 

Mark