Albatros by Dr PR - Mantua - Scale 1:48 - Revenue Cutter kitbash about 1815

[Dr PR]

Caution: See the note at the end of this post about an error in the spacing of the ringtail boom irons.

 

More work on the main boom. Here it is being lifted by a temporary line to the top. When fully rigged the end of the boom will be raised by the main boom topping lifts. I examined a number of drawings and texts and found that the booms for the mainsails on schooners and drivers on square riggers were positioned 5 to 9 feet (1.5 to 2.7 meters) above the deck - high enough in most cases that the helmsman could stand upright below them. Here there is about 7 feet (2.1 meters) clearance.

 

 

Several ring bolts, cleats and thumb cleats had to be added, and the boom irons for the ringtail boom had to be fabricated.

 

 

Ringbolts at the jaws were added for the main sail tack (top) and the main sail outhaul tackle (bottom). Aft of that are cleats on either side of the boom where the outhaul tackle fall will belay. Farther aft (right hand photo), at the widest part of the boom, are two thumb cleats on top for the boom sheet tackle necklace. Forward of these (left in the photo) are cleats where the ringtail halliard (port) and the flag halliard (starboard) belay. The two thumb cleats on the boom sides are where the inboard ends of the foot ropes belay. Aft of this are cleats where the ringtail tack (port) and ringtail outhaul (starboard) belay.

 

The ringtail boom irons were a bit of a challenge. The two small rings in the left photo below are cuts from stock 0.125 inch (3.2 mm) diameter brass tube. The inside diameter is a bit larger than the ringtail boom (0.085 inch, 2.2 mm) and just right for the irons. And the diameter of the end of the boom where the aft iron is fitted was 0.125 inch (3.2 mm) and the standard 0.155 inch (3.9 mm) brass tube fits perfectly, so a corresponding section of that tube was used. A small strip of 0.015 inch (0.38 mm) brass strip was doubled and served as the connector between the two rings.

 

But the place where the forward iron fit around the boom was 0.165 inch (4.2 mm) and none of the stock brass tubes is close to this size. I wanted to use brass the same thickness as the stock tubes (0.015 inch, 0.38 mm), so I decided to cut off a ring from a larger brass tube (0.25 inch, 6.3 mm), cut the ring, and reform the metal around a drill bit into an appropriate sized ring to fit on the boom and tabs to serve as the connecting piece between it and the 0.125 inch (3.2 mm) ring for the ringtail boom. All of these pieces are shown in the left photo.

 

Lining up all of these pieces for soldering was tricky. I used three arms on my Quad-Hands tool to hold them in position while I soldered. The results are shown in the right hand photo above. Not perfect, but good enough. After blackening the brass and reshaping the boom end a bit the ringtail boom irons were installed on the boom.

 

The boom topping lifts will attach to the groove just forward (right in the picture) of the boom iron on the end, and the foot ropes will be just forward in that groove.

 

The mainsail outhaul will run through the sheave in the boom. Looks like I got a bit of the straw color paint on the sheave - something to clean up.

 

There is also a small single block to be added at the outboard end of the ringtail boom for the ringtail outhaul.

 

 

 

 

 

I should say that the positioning of the ringtail boom irons is speculative. I have them above the boom and rotated 45 degrees to the port side. This is similar to how studding sail booms were rigged on warships in the early 1800s. But I have seem modern schooners with the ringtail boom slung directly under the main boom.

 

I chose the current configuration to minimize interference with other lines. The foot ropes hang directly below the boom, and even if the ringtail boom was below to one side it would be in the way of anyone trying to use the foot ropes on that side. Directly above the boom are the boom topping lifts and the sail. So above and to the side seemed the best choice.

 

Ringtail boom iron spacing is in accordance with what Marquardt says in The Global Schooner - 1/6 to 1/8 the length of the ringtail boom. In this case the boom is 4.7 inches (119 mm) long, and the spacing between the irons is 0.75 inches (19 mm).

 

NOTE: I have been trying to find the reference in Marquardt for the ringtail boom iron spacing - with no luck (the index contains no useful information about such things). However, on page 167 he discusses studding sail booms, and says the boom iron spacing is 1/3 the studding sail boom length.

 

Zu Mondfeld's "Historic Ship Models" (page 232) says studding sail boom irons were spaced "1/8 to 1/6 of the yard's length" apart. However, he is referring to the square sail yard's length, and not to the studding sail boom's length. I obviously got these things mixed up.

 

So the ringtail boom iron spacing shown in the photos is too close together - it should be about twice what I show. Well, another learning experience!

Edited November 21, 2023 by Dr PR

[Dr PR]

I have a little more progress to report. I have been checking for "last minute" details to finish before I dive into rigging the masts. Every time I check again I find some other small detail that will be easier to install before the masts are rigged. If you have been modeling long you will appreciate the messy details.

 

First I installed the boom sheet tackle blocks on the boom. Each block is stropped and secured to the boom separately. No problems here.

 

Then I installed the foot ropes (also called "horses" in some books) on the outboard end of the boom. It was a simple task, but I had problems getting the knots on the two ropes to line up closely. One knot was a bit out of position, and I needed a needle to open it so I could move it.

 

I went to the cabinet to get my sewing kit, and it wasn't there. After searching the house for the misplaced kit for thirty minutes, I found it where I left it after getting a spool of thread to use on the model!

 

All I wanted to do was finish a simple modeling task and it turned into an annoying delay!

 

Here is a photo showing how the thumb cleats on the boom are used. The two on top hold the boom sheet tackle in place.

 

The two on the sides secure the inboard end of the foot ropes. The books show these foot ropes but don't say much about them. This is how these ropes are rigged on the Lady Washington.  I am assuming (unjustifiably) not much has changed in the last two centuries to justify this configuration.

 

This picture also shows the temporary lashing to hold the end of the ringtail boom in place when the sail isn't rigged.  I don't plan to fly the sail on the model.

 

I am still fiddling with the foot ropes to try to get them to hang "naturally."

 

Another last minute detail was the rudder pendant chains. The books don't say what size chains were used, but from the drawings in the books and photos of the Lady Washington I guessed that the width of the links was 1/3 to 1/4 as wide as the rudder.

 

I picked what looked like a piece of brass chain from my parts stash, cut it to length and blackened it. It did blacken nicely. Trying to make shackles 0.050" (1.27 mm) wide would be a bit too tedious work, so I decided to just open the links at the end of the chains, hook them over the ring bolts on the rudder and transom, and close them again.

 

 

“The best laid schemes o' mice an' men / Gang aft a-gley.” Robert Burns

 

Things started going a-gley almost immediately. The chain must be brass plated iron, because every time I tried to pick up an end link the chain leapt up and stuck to the (magnetized) tweezers! I tried and tried again but I just couldn't pick up the open links without getting other links that were always (of course) in the way! Frustration was building. Most of the metal work on the model is with brass, so the magnetism the tools picked up over the years had gone unnoticed. Now they had to be demagnetized.

 

I tried a little Husky brand "Magnetize/Demagnetize" tool that had been around for years. It was worthless. I think the "demagnetizer" just magnetized things worse. Than I remembered I have an old 120 VAC soldering gun with large induction coils. I turned it on, brought the tools close and they vibrated in the alternating magnetic field. I moved them back and forth a few times, then pulled them away slowly before releasing the trigger to turn it off. Voila! It worked perfectly and the tools were demagnetized.

 

Even so, those links are tiny, and they have a way of turning the wrong way, slipping off the chain, refusing to go over the ring bolts, and so on. Murphy was right! It must have taken an hour to secure the four ends of the chains to the ring bolts!

 

I write this in case there are any new modelers reading this thread. This was just a normal modeling day!

 

Burns and Murphy must have been ship modelers!

 

Edited November 12, 2023 by Dr PR

[georgeband]

Well said, Phil. Model building is similar to DIY projects in that simple jobs can sometimes take hours. The opposite, on the rare occasion that a job goes quicker than expected, is a joy to experience. 

 

George

[Dr PR]

And now for something entirely different ...

 

 

Some time back there was a discussion on the Forum about anchor handling on small ships that did not have a capstan or windless.

 

https://modelshipworld.com/topic/27410-small-ship-anchor-handling/?do=findComment&comment=787942

 

You don't see fishing the anchor depicted on many models (bringing the anchor up to the rail when retrieving it is called "fishing" the anchor), so I decided to try to implement the strategy on this model. Remember that some of this is speculative, but it does follow what several references say was done.

 

First there is the anchor itself. I assembled this piece back in the 1980s when I started this build. The metal part appears to be a lead casting, and it had prominent mold seams. I filed it down to eliminate the seams, and it was shiny lead color. Now 35 years later it has developed a nice dull metallic look. The stock and ring are what came with the kit.

 

The anchor cable is attached to the ring with a fisherman's bend which Marquardt says was used with smaller anchors. While this one was relatively large, a vessel this size would have a "smaller" anchor. Whether the fisherman's bend was correct for this one I am not sure, but that's what I used.

 

The next part of this anchor retrieval method was the "nipper." Lever says the anchor cable was lashed to a messenger cable with nippers. The picture shows how this was done - the nipper is the small line that loops around both messenger and cable.

 

 

The messenger is the part that was actually hauled upon, pulling the larger anchor cable with it to lift the anchor. On ships with capstans or winches the messenger was pulled by these. But when a vessel had neither a tackle was used to pull the messenger. In this case the messenger was just a short piece of rope with an eye spliced in one end for the hook of a block to fasten to.

 

 

 

For this job I used my "Quad Hands" mechanism. I bought this a year or two ago after seeing one in another post on the Forum. It looked like it would come in handy when there were a lot of loose ends to manage. I have been using a simple two arm unit mostly, but here I had to pull the anchor cable taut while wrapping the nipper line around the cable first, then the cable and messenger, and finally the messenger only (six ends).

 

I keep a bottle cap with a drop of white glue handy, and occasionally apply a small drop of glue on the windings with a needle point to prevent everything from unwinding. And the tweezers are essential tools for this kind of work.

 

Here is the anchor and cable with two messengers and nippers in place.

 

 

 

The next part of the puzzle is the fish boom and fish tackle.

 

The boom is a small portable pole with a sheave in the outboard end and a hook on the inboard end. The hook catches an eye bolt in the deck to secure that end. The fish tackle runs over the sheave.

 

The fish tackle is a rope with the fish hook spliced into one end and an eye in the other. The real thing would have a thimble in the eye, but fashioning a 0.020 inch (0.5 mm) thimble is just a bit too much of a challenge (I used white glue to stiffen it).

 

 

 

Here you see the fish tackle in use. The hook catches on the flukes of the anchor while it is hanging from the anchor cable. The eye on the fish tackle is hooked onto the fore tackle. This heavy lifting cargo rig is used to raise the anchor. The fish boom guides the crown end of the anchor outboard of the hull.

 

Here the head of the anchor has been "catted" up to the cathead with the cat tackle, but the tackle is still attached.

 

After the anchor is hauled up a stopper rope or chain (not shown) is looped through the anchor ring to support the head end and the cat tackle is unhooked from the ring.

 

 

In this model two retrieving or in-haul tackles made of double sheave blocks are used to haul on the messengers. One is hooked to a ring bolt just aft of the hatch (normally used to rotate the pivot gun). It has been drawn back to pull the nipper almost to the hatch.

 

The second tackle hooks to a runner line with an eye in one end and a hook on the other that is attached to another ring bolt in the deck (or any other secure hold). The second tackle is run out to the forward messenger. While it is being hauled in the first tackle will be unhooked and run out again, and the messenger will be untied from the cable and moved forward again to receive the first tackle, and so on.

 

 

Here is a view from the bow showing all of the parts of this anchor retrieval rig.

 

Note that the falls for the cat tackle and retrieval tackles are secured to whatever stout attachments that are handy. This is a temporary setup so the ropes are not belayed in a more secure fashion.

 

Since the anchor is hanging from the cat tackle the strain is relieved from the in-haul tackle.

 

A "shank painter" rope or chain would be looped around the crown of the anchor and secured to timber heads or cleats on the bulwark. Then the fish tackle would be unhooked and it and the fish boom would be stowed.

 

The stopper would be attached to the anchor ring to take the weight of the anchor head and the cat tackle would be unhooked. The anchor was stowed to the rail as shown in earlier photos of the starboard side anchor.

 

https://modelshipworld.com/topic/19611-albatros-by-dr-pr-mantua-scale-148-revenue-cutter-kitbash-about-1815/?do=findComment&comment=1011922

 

Normally on long voyages the anchor cable would be detached from the anchor and the cable would be stowed in the cable tier below the main hatch.

 

All of the parts shown here are documented in period publications like Darcy Lever's "The Young Sea Officer's Sheet Anchor" (1808). Marquardt's "The Global Schooner" shows similar rigs for schooners. But the places I have shown the retrieval tackle and falls to be belayed is just speculation.

 

I think this may be the last "deck work" that has to be done before starting the rigging of the mast and sails. But I still need to build the ship's boat and hang it from the davits on the stern. That is a separate modelling project in itself!

Edited November 18, 2023 by Dr PR

[georgeband]

Phil,

 

It all looks very plausible and the descriptions I have read about fishing show that there were many variations. 

 

I like the way that you attach a short length of rope-with-an-eye to the anchor cable with nippers in the same way as a messenger cable. The method that sits in my mind is to wind the rope-with-an-eye around the anchor cable and dispense with the nippers. The far end of the rope only needs a half hitch to stop it from unwinding. I cannot remember where I saw this explanation and it might have been about fixing eyes or hooks to the anchor cable to use as stoppers. I will have a look in some references later. 

 

The letter below is attached to ZAZ6118 (Greenwich drawing of Haddock) and is not on their website. The last line confirms that a tackle was used to weigh the anchor. No mention of how the tackle was attached to the anchor cable... 

George

 

[druxey]

I think that the fish hook would be around the lower end of the shank of the anchor rather than at the fluke as you have it, Phil. Otherwise, that looks very nicely done.

[John Ruy]

Wow! Incredible detail, Phil… Well done. 👍

 

[Dr PR]

George,

 

Lees describes the method I have shown for the main anchors, but he also says the other anchors were brought in with the mast tackle. Lever describes several ways to haul in an anchor, including hooking the fish tackle to the block on the mast tackle.

 

Maybe I did take liberty calling the short rope a "messenger" but I didn't know what else to call it. It serves the same function as a messenger. The term messenger usually refers to a rope loop that runs around a capstan and through a block on the bow. The anchor cable is attached to it with nippers or a jigger (Lever page 109).

 

Druxy,

 

I have seen it depicted several ways. I think it was Chapelle who said the fish hook was first hooked to the anchor ring when it broke the surface and the mast tackle was used to lift the anchor ring up to the cat stopper. But I think this was on vessels (fishing schooners) that had a cathead but no cat tackle.

 

Then the fish hook was taken from the anchor ring and hooked around something at the  crown end to raise the crown. Lees (Masting and Rigging English Ships of War, page 128) shows it hooked to the flukes. Chapelle (The American Fishing Schooner, page 321 Anchor Gear (notes)) says the hook was used to catch an anchor fluke.

 

A problem with just getting the hook around the shank of the anchor when it is hanging vertically under the cathead is that the hook can slide along the entire length. They needed to get the hook around an arm in order to raise the lower part of the anchor (crown) up so the shank was more or less horizontal. If the hook was around an arm it would slide up until it caught on the fluke. At least that is the way I imagine it.

 

I find these discussions about how things were (might have been) done to be as interesting as building the model itself. It took me 14 years to create my CAD model of the USS Oklahoma City CLG-5 because most of that time was spent digging up tech manuals, data sheets, blueprints, etc., and discussing things with other sailors who served on the ship. I have been working on the Albatross deck fittings for four years this month! Good thing I am not in a hurry. Or as I saw on a postcard back in the '70s:

 

Maybe it is a good thing I am moving slowly because I might be going in the wrong direction!

 

John,

 

Thanks!

 

As I have said many times, there is a lot of guesswork in figuring out how things were done centuries ago. Back then there were a lot of details that weren't written down because everyone already knew them!

Edited November 16, 2023 by Dr PR

[Dr PR]

It occurred to me that I should check the anchors that came with the Mantua Albatros kit to see if they are anywhere near the correct size for this model. Kit parts tend to be whatever was on the manufacturer's shelf and can be relatively random scale sizes.

 

For the long convoluted saga of calculations of anchor sizes see this post:

 

https://modelshipworld.com/topic/27410-small-ship-anchor-handling/?do=findComment&comment=1015834

 

Amazingly, the kit anchor with my 1980s Mantua Albatross kit has a shank length of 1.94 inches (49.3 mm)! I am building it at 1:48, with a beam of 19 feet (5.8 meters), so the kit anchors are just right!

Edited November 18, 2023 by Dr PR

[Dr PR]

Note: I made an error in post #211 about the spacing of the ringtail boom irons. The spacing should be about 1/3 the ringtail boom's length, and not 1/4 to 1/6.

[Dr PR]

I had to fix the error in the ringtail boom iron position! I put the second boom iron about 1/5 of the boom length from the boom iron on the end of the boom, and the separation should be about 1/3 the boom length. I have several hours work in the existing boom, so I wanted to repair it if I could and reposition the forward boom iron.

 

This photo shows where the original boom iron was positioned (old), and where it should have been placed (new).

 

The original boom iron was a bit undersized so I filed a reduced diameter area where it was located. Some wood was also removed closer to the end of the boom so the iron would slip into position.

 

Now I needed to build up the area (step) where the wood was removed. The solution (I hoped) would be to use my old Stanley miniature plane to shave a thin strip off a square dowel and use this as filler to be glued around the boom in the repair area.

 

 

 

 

I had no idea if this would work but it seemed a better option that starting over on a new boom. The wood shaving was 0.009 inch (0.22 mm) thick. I wrapped it around the boom one turn, trimming the ends to overlap slightly. I used a liberal amount of  Sig-Bond aliphatic resin to glue the shaving in place.

 

 

I wrapped the shaving around the boom as tightly as possible - but of course the shaving wanted to spring back out. I wrapped some blue painter's masking tape around the shaving to hold the shaving tight around the boom. Then just to be sure I wrapped some carpet/button thread tightly around the tape to be sure the whole thing was compressed.

 

After about eight hours I removed the tape and thread and started filing and sanding the wood shaving into shape. I forgot to take a photo before starting, so the picture on the right above is after a bit of reworking to shape the shaving.

 

 

After sanding the shaving to shape it was coated with shellac (left). When that dried I used some Squadron White Putty to fill in some low spots (right) I also shaped the boom so the new boom iron could be added at the correct position.

 

 

I should have used a more homogeneous wood for the shaving. The dowel I used had pronounced grain, and the softer light colored growth ring material sanded away faster than the darker growth rings. I sanded it carefully and with the shellac managed to get a fairly smooth surface. But this was another "learning experience."

 

After two coats of paint, with sanding between the coats, the result looks pretty good. But just don't look too closely! There are some very slight "ripples" where the harder growth ring wood stands slightly proud.

 

 

But all in all, I'll keep it. It is a lot better than starting over with a new boom! Two steps forward, one step back!

 

 

 

Edited November 23, 2023 by Dr PR

[Dr PR]

Another detail to be added before starting rigging was swivel guns. Some references say some early 1800s schooners carried them. So I thought I should add a few at the bow and stern.

 

I ordered a package of "Resin Swivel Guns (13/16") w/handle and Yoke" from Syren Ship Model Company. The package included six molded resin guns with yokes and round plates for mounting them. It also included a handle for the back of the guns. However, you have to drill a hole in the rear end of the gun below the cascobel to mount the handle (not a problem).

 

I looked in Chapelle's "The History of the American Sailing Navy" (1949) and on page 89 he has drawings of swivel guns just like the Syren product. Furthermore, the dimensions of the Syren guns are perfect for a 1:48 scale 1 1/2" bore 1/2 pound shot swivel gun like those used in the American Navy!

 

The Syren mounting parts are OK, but I wanted to replicate something like the yoke on the swivel guns on the modern Lady Washington replica. These swivel guns look exactly like Chapelle's drawings and have the "U" shaped rest to hold the gun in position for loading.

 

They also have a wooden handle attached to the rear end, and Chapelle says this was common, along with several other styles of handles. I thought about adding a wooden handle to the Syren parts, but I like the handles supplied with the guns and decided to use them.

 

 

OK, how was I going to fashion the yoke and the "U" shaped fitting? Since I don't have a machine shop to make these pieces it would have to be pretty simple. I decided to  use brass wire. The yoke was made from 0.025 inch (0.64 mm) wire as shown in the picture below left. After making the small loops for the gun's trunnions at each end of the wire I soldered the loops closed. Then the wire was folded double and the upper "U" shape bent to the proper width. Then  the doubled part was soldered. These were cleaned up later with a file to remove excess solder.

 

 

The "U" shaped rest was made from 0.012 inch (0.3 mm) brass wire as shown in the picture above right. The wire was bent around a 0.125 inch (3.2 mm) drill bit (the cannon is 0.115" (2.9 mm) where it fits into the rest). Then it was folded back double to finish the "U" and the support arm was created as shown.

 

The wire ends of the rest piece were then wrapped around the shaft of the yoke and soldered in position. This was the only difficult part of the assembly. The two wire ends of the rest needed to wrap tightly around the shaft of the yoke, and the support arm of the rest should be aligned with the shaft of the yoke so the "U" was positioned correctly for the gun to fit into. But as I added solder to fasten the rest in place things wanted to move around. Eventually I worked out a way to keep everything in place while I soldered it.

 

You can see how things fit to the gun on the right, but the rest arm should be a bit lower and horizontal, and the "U" bent up a bit to cradle the gun.

 

 

 

After a while I had six yoke assemblies, six trunnion pins and the six guns. I drilled holes through the guns for the trunnion pins. The brass parts were blackened with Birchwood Casey Brass Black. After the guns were assembled I clipped off the excess length of the trunnion pins and touched up with a bit of flat black enamel.

 

 

I decided to duplicate the arrangement on the Lady Washington and add thin wooden blocks to the rails where the guns would be mounted, and a thin metal plate for support. After these were glued in place and painted the swivel guns were installed.

 

 

 

Edited March 20 by Dr PR

[John Ruy]

Wow! Nice bit of detail, Phil. Excellent micro foundry work. 👍

[Dr PR]

John,

 

Thanks. I could have omitted the swivel guns but I liked the guns on the Lady Washington. When the Syren parts turned out to be the right type and size I couldn't resist.

[Dr PR]

Here is another small detail. Two hatches have gratings, and the books say this was common on warships (merchantmen usually had solid hatch covers). They had to have a way to cover these hatches in heavy seas. On mid-20th century US Navy ships we had small metal hooks called "lady fingers" welded in places where we needed to secure  tarps and such. However, I have never seen these mentioned for 19th century ships.

 

I looked at a number of references and a couple suggested there were eye bolts around the hatch above the coaming that canvas tarps could be lashed to. On some vessels metal bars with slots to fit over the rings held the canvas down, and wooden pegs were driven into the rings to force the bars tight against the canvas around the hatch.

 

I spent the day making very small ring bolts. They are made of 0.012 inch (0.3 mm) brass wire with 0.025 inch (0.64 mm) holes in the rings. After the loops were soldered closed they were blackened with Brass Black.

 

I needed 28 of these ring bolts and made 40. While handling them for soldering five disappeared into the void (12.5%). Another broke while I was inserting it into a 0.013 inch (0.33 mm) hole in the hatch. This was a significantly worse attrition rate than any I have had in past production of quantities of small objects, probably because these things were much smaller than other parts on the model.

 

But the real culprit was a pair of tweezers with tips that can suddenly twist to the side, launching parts into orbit. I need new tweezers!

 

Here are photos of the hatches in place on the model. This is the last detail on my list for the deck fittings before I start working on the rigging.

 

Edited November 30, 2023 by Dr PR

[John Ruy]

9 hours ago, Dr PR said:

While handling them for soldering five disappeared into the void (12.5%). Another broke while I was inserting it into a 0.013 inch (0.33 mm) hole in the hatch.

I’m with you Phil, seems like parts keeping getting smaller and then slip right from my fingers and disappear to be found months later.  
 

Again, impressive work. The details matter. 👍

 

John

[Dr PR]

John, Thanks!

[Dr PR]

I have only a few small details to report. I am preparing the masts for installation into the hull. For this I want to be sure I get all the necessary rigging points on the masts while they are still free to work with on the table.

 

On the main topmast (left below) I added the topmast shrouds and blocks for the main gaff topsail halliard near the truck and lower down the block for the main topmast staysail halliard. The main topmast stay will attach directly above the strap for the block. On the main top cap are blocks for the fore topsail yard braces, main top staysail sheet and fore course yard braces, and on the aft side of the mast itself is a block for the main gaff peak halliard.

 

 

The fore topmast (above right) is a bit more complex because of the square topsail rigging. Above the topmast stays near the truck are blocks port and starboard for the topsail yard lifts and the topsail buntlines. Below this is a block for the flying jib halliard. The flying jib stay will attach above the block strap. There is also a sheave for the topsail yard halliard on the port side. On the mast cap are blocks for the fore course yard lift and buntlines (port and starboard). On the aft side of the mast top are attachments for the main topmast stay, main topmast staysail downhaul block, and the peak halliard block.

 

I had a choice for placing the sheave for the topsail yard halliard. One method would be to install the sheave in a pocket cut into the topmast. I have done this is several other places, but these were near the ends of the jib boom and main boom. In these positions the spar will not be stressed significantly.

 

But cutting through the topmast below the attachment points for the shrouds and stays would create a weak point where the mast might be stressed. The option is to attach a sheave to the side of the mast with a cheek block.

 

Here you can see the cheek block on the left side of the mast (the halliard belays on the port side of the fife rail at the base of the mast). Above it are thumb cleats to support the flying jib halliard block and the flying jib stay.

 

It looks to me as if the flying jib halliard block is a bit too close to the mast. I may redo this to give it a long strap (strop). In this instance I have turned an eye into the strap but I think this is unnecessary. Looking at several references I see it was common for the standing part of the tackle to simply loop between the strap and the block. Lever says an eye in the standing part may be attached to the strap on the block with a short piece of rope. It will be simpler and neater to just splice an eye around the strap on the end of the standing part of the halliard.

Edited March 20 by Dr PR

[Dr PR]

I have been working on the fore course yard (spreader yard) and the fore topsail yard. For this I had to determine the position and types of rigging on each for rigging them to the fore mast before I install them. This lead to some problems trying to determine where all of the rigging should go on the fore mast, especially at the top. This sketch shows how much of this rigging is crowded around the fore top.

 

 

I count 23 blocks in the drawing on 30 lines, and there are 10 more lines that come down from the topsail and yard above and pass through fairleads on the aft crosstree on the way to the base of the mast! The fore stay, jib stay and preventer created problems.

 

These lines are normally shown looping around the lower mast just above the bolster on the trestletrees, lying over the shrouds. The lines would then lead down over the cheeks and would be seized together (or moused) in front of the mast. But because of the rake of the mast this would cause the forestay to rest on the fore course yard or very close to it. The jib stay and preventer would run in a similar way and could interfere with the truss tackle below the trestletrees. It was all very crowded around the fore course yard.

 

 

 

 

I  looked through Chapelle's "The Baltimore Clipper" and Marquardt's "The Global Schooner" to see if there were any examples where these stays were routed another way. I found six examples dating back into the late 1700s where the stays were looped behind the lower mast higher up in the head, and even looped over the top cap. (Millbrook 1797, Flying Fish 1806, Experiment 1812, Hornet 1831, Santiago 1833 and Vigilant 1848) There were cleats attached to the aft side of the mast to support the stays, and in some cases lashings around the masts.

 

I plan to loop the stays around the mast below the mast cap, just above the metal band for the main top stay. This way the fore stay will come down along the sides of the trestle trees behind the fore crosstree and will then be siezed together some distance in front of the fore course yard. The jib stay and preventer will come down between the trestletrees in front of the fore crosstree. The stays will not interfere with the other rigging in this area.

 

 

 

 

 

 

There were several other rigging questions that I needed to answer before proceeding.

 

 

 

 

The sling that supports the fore course yard loops around the top of the lower mast and lays on the shrouds. After studying several examples I decided to use the configuration shown. It is made up of two parts. The upper loop has a thimble seized in an eye above the spar. From this the two legs go up on either side of the cheeks. The shorter starboard leg has an eye spliced alongside the mast. The longer port leg wraps around behind the mast and has an eye spliced where it meets the starboard leg. These eyes are lashed together to complete the loop around the mast.

 

The lower part is  a loop with a thimble spliced into an eye at the upper part. The lower part is looped around the spar from the front and the bight brought up behind. The eye and thimble are pulled through the bight to close the loop. The loop passes between the sling cleats on the fore side of the yard near the center.

 

The eyes of the two parts are lashed together to support the spar. This configuration can be rigged in two parts, one around the mast at the top and one around the spar. Then when the spar is hoisted up into place the parts can be lashed together.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The fore gaff throat halliard has a similar strap to the upper part of the yard sling. It loops around the lower mast and is positioned over the yard sling with the eye and thimble hanging behind the mast and the two eyes lashed together on the port side.

 

The upper double block of the halliard tackle has a hook that passes through the thimble on the strap. The lower block of the tackle has a hook that catches a ring bolt on the upper side of the boom jaws.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The fore course yard trusses are somewhat speculative. Their function is to pull the yard back against the mast so it cannot swing while the vessel is rolling and pitching. When the yard is to be repositioned the trusses are loosened.

 

Many smaller vessels do not have trusses so it was a question whether they are necessary. They certainly do add to the clutter in the mast hounds area. But while I was designing the fore course yard I discovered that the topsail schooners had a yard equal to or greater than for the square rigged ships. Both Fincham and Rankine (naval designers of the late 1700s and early 1800s) used formulas that produced extra long and heavy yards. So I decided that the trusses might be necessary - and they will be interesting to rig!.

 

There are two ropes with eyes and thimbles at each end. One eye is laid on top of the yard with the rope looped behind and below the yard and back up and over. The parts are spliced together close to the eye on top of the yard. The other rope is looped around the yard in the same way. The loops are at the center of the yard between the sling cleats, on each side of the yard sling. Now the loose ends of the ropes are passed around behind the mast and then through the eye of the other rope and lead upwards. The second eye in each rope connects to the hook on a single sheave block. This is part of a luff tackle with the upper double block hooked to an eyebolt on the bottom of the trestletree. The fall of the tackle leads down and is belayed at the base of the mast. When the falls are tightened the tackle pulls the slack out of the truss loops to pull the yard against the mast.

 

Prior to about 1810 the ropes led down to the deck after passing through the eyes (which were on the aft side of the yard). The luff tackle was hooked to eye bolts on deck. But after 1810 the truss tackle was rearranged as shown here. There were other truss arrangements, including one that used a single rope. That might be more appropriate on a small vessel.

Edited January 10 by Dr PR

[Javelin]

Great job on this build Phil. Good to see an old project like this being finished, and with such great care! Showing something practical/operational like the anchor handling is always a plus in my book! 

Love the pose and face of the guy in post #212 

 

[Dr PR]

I am glad you are finishing Chaconia. I love all the piping and cables on that model.

 

You mention the "pose" of the fellow in the photos. It is mostly accidental. More "whatever happens" than "pose."

 

That thing has two small feet, but it will stand up on its own if the surface is horizontal (perpendicular to the Earth's gravitational attraction). However, the vessel's deck has camber, so the figure only wants to stand up on the centerline. To resolve this I cheat - I tilt the model slightly until the figure stands where I want it, and tilt the camera (picture) to compensate. PITA! I have resorted to a small patch of double sided tape that is hidden by the bulwarks.

[Dr PR]

A little progress. I have rigged the yards for the fore mast.

 

Fore course yard.

 

Some topsail schooners carry a simpler spreader yard for the topsail, but I have rigged this yard so it can carry the large square fore course sail. The upper blocks on the yardarms are for the fore course yard lifts and the topsail sheets. The brace pendants hang from the yardarms. The larger blocks at the center inside the sling cleats are for the topsail sheets. At the outboard ends of the sling cleats are the fore course clewline blocks. Farther out are blocks for fore course buntlines. The yard sling and trusses will be at the center between the sling cleats.

 

Normally the vessel would have raised just the fore staysail. But in good wind from astern the fore course could be raised. These two sails occupy some of the the same space forward of the fore mast so they wouldn't have been raised at the same time. The yard also has irons for studding sails.

 

Fore topsail yard.

 

The lower blocks on yardarms are for studding sail halliards. The upper blocks are for the topsail yard lifts, and the blocks near the center of the yard are for the topsail clewlines. The brace pendants hang from the yardarms.

 

Now I need to "train" the footropes (horses) to hang naturally with some shellac and weights.

 

Some of this rigging would have been very difficult if the yard was mounted on the mast, and with the mast mounted on the hull.

Edited December 19, 2023 by Dr PR

[Dr PR]

I have run into another problem with dimensions of parts for schooners versus large square rigged ships. My initial calculations for the size of the blocks for the gaff peak halliard and throat halliard was 5/16 inch (8 mm). I have calculated this using formulas from several authors and they all say the same thing.

 

 

But look at this photo. The 8 mm peak halliard block hanging from the band on the mast is ridiculously large. Its height is about the same as the diameter of the mast. I have looked at a number of period models and recent kits, and none have blocks this huge! I think my calculations are just wrong!

 

According to several sources the fore stay circumference is 1/2 the mast diameter (0.350 inch,  8.9 mm), or 0.175 inch (4.4  mm). The halliard size is 1/2 the fore stay size, or a circumference of 0.088 inch (2.2 mm) and diameter of 0.028 inch (0.7 mm). So far all sources agree. I will use 0.025 inch (0.0635 mm) rope.

 

But the block size is supposed to be about 12.6 times the rope diameter (4 x circumference), or 5/16 inch (8 mm). The block in the photo is an 8 mm block!

 

Lees Masting and Rigging says the height of blocks should be about 4x the rope circumference.  The circumference is 0.088 inch, so the block should be 4 x 0.088 inch = 0.352 inch  or (8.9 mm). This is even larger that what I have used!!

 

To look at it another way, for a 1:48 model 0.352 x 48 = 16.9 inches. Or 5/16 inch x 48 = 15 inches. Both seem too large. These calculations are all for large square rigged ships of the line, but schooners have lighter tophamper than square riggers.

 

 

Marquardt's The Global Schooner says the schooner throat halliard size is 0.4 x (not 0.5 x) the main stay circumference, or 0.175 x 0.4 = 0.07 inch (1.7 mm). This would give a block size about 0.28 inches (7.1 mm). 0.28 x 48 = 13.44 inches. This is  a lot closer to the 14 inch blocks listed in Marquardt's tables for many American schooners' peak and throat halliards. 14/48 = 0.29 inch (7.4 mm). I think I will use 7 mm blocks for the gaff halliards.

 

I have ordered some 7 mm single and double blocks. I'll have to stain them to match the other blocks, and then I can get on with rigging the gaffs.

Edited March 10 by Dr PR

[Nirvana]

Phil, even though we all like to strive for accurate scale items..... I am one of them, I realised it is very hard to accomplish such 

[John Ruy]

5 hours ago, Nirvana said:

Phil, even though we all like to strive for accurate scale items..... I am one of them, I realised it is very hard to accomplish such 

Yes, but it makes for a very interesting read. I must say, striving for perfection makes for a beautiful representation of a historically accurate model. 👍

[Dr PR]

Per and John,

 

I call myself a frustrated perfectionist. Although my goal is always perfection I have yet to achieve it. Maybe because I think achieving perfection is impossible! But it doesn't hurt to try.

 

My primary goal with this build was to learn about topsail schooners, and I am doing that! Almost all modeling information (spar dimensions, rope sizes, etc.) is for larger square rigged ships. I have encountered  "surprises" several times, like the difference in gaff halliard size calculations for ships and schooners, or mast diameter calculations. And in the end I learn about both schooners and ships!

 

Unfortunately, John, this model isn't historically accurate. I made mistakes when I first constructed the hull decades ago, and additional mistakes when I started up again five years ago this month. At least some of the details are probably historically accurate. But I have enjoyed the build immensely - and I am learning!

Edited January 2 by Dr PR

[Dr PR]

I have been reviewing all of the rigging and the belaying plan and making last minute additions and adjustments.  I discovered I have overlooked the main sail tack, and a place to belay it. I did have the fore sail tack attached to a luff tackle to a ringbolt at the base of the fore mast. But I had overlooked the tack for the main sail, and this caused a problem. The bell was in the way!

 

The tack of the gaff sail was sometimes attached to a luff tackle that hooked to a ring bolt at the base of the main mast. This allowed the tack to be pulled down to stretch the luff edge of the sail taut. But sometimes it was simply strapped to a ringbolt on the boom jaws. In this case just the weight of the boom might hold the sail down, but I have seen a (rare) reference to a tackle to haul the boom jaws down against the boom rest. In either case, the tackle must run down the aft side of the mast to a ring bolt on deck, and I had placed the ship's bell directly in the path of the tackle.

 

I had wanted to place the bell on the fo'c'sle because I have read that by the late 1700s this was where bells were being located. My earlier experiments with a belfry were an unsuccessful attempt to do this.

 

I found some photos and drawings of bell attachments on schooners of the late 1700s through the 1900s and smaller vessels often had a simple bracket for the bell, and it was often attached to knight heads or windlass supports.

 

I don't want the bell rising high where it might interfere with the forestay sail so I devised a simple bracket to mount the bell on the bitts securing the base of the bowsprit.

 

 

 

 

I did not intentionally "weather" the finish on the bell bracket. I have had frequent problems getting the blackening (Birchwood Casey Brass Black) to produce an even finish. The metal was washed with water and dish soap, then thoroughly rinsed. Then it was washed in acetone and then isopropanol, and the parts left for the alcohol to evaporate. After this it was left in warm vinegar for about ten minutes and washed in water. Then I actually left the bracket in the blackening solution for twice the time (10 minutes) I normally use. As before the results are blotchy. But it will do.

 

 

 

Now the aft side of the main mast is clear to allow the run of the main sail tack tackle (if I install one) or any other line that may pass there in the future!

 

 

 

I think I now have a complete rigging and belaying plan (but I have thought this before) so now maybe I can step the masts and start rigging!

Edited January 20 by Dr PR

[ERS Rich]

On 12/21/2023 at 11:47 AM, Dr PR said:

I call myself a frustrated perfectionist

On the learning curve!  And certainly a great effort.  

 

I’ve found that months after completing a ship, I notice something that can be done better next time.  

 

Good looking work so far, looking forward to your posts.

 

If you haven’t, check out Tom Lauria’s video on Youtube about creating a convincing impression.  Your ship does that….

 

-Rich

[Dr PR]

Rich,

 

Thanks! This build has been a learning experience, and I have had to change my plans several times as I discover new things. But I am sure the day after I think it is "finished" I will see something I did wrong!

Edited March 10 by Dr PR

[Dr PR]

I have started on the foremast shrouds. The first problem I encountered was how to rig the mast tackle. On larger vessels the burtoning rig was often attached to the topmast hounds, but on smaller vessels the tackle was on the lower mast top.

 

Darcy Lever's The Young Sea Officer's Sheet Anchor (left) shows several ways to rig the tackle. The two examples on the left (naval and merchant versions) show a cut splice around the mast. The center drawing shows the tackle pendant as the extension of one of the odd number shrouds. Petersson's Rigging Period Fore and Aft Craft (right) shows another arrangement for the mast tackle.

 

 

 

 

 

Lees' Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War, Marquardt's The Global Schooner and zu Mondfeld's Historic Ship Models all repeat versions of these designs. All say that warships had the tackle pendants individually spliced around the mast heads, but merchantmen tackle pendants often used the cut splice or were part of an odd shroud. The arrangement Petersson shows is also mentioned.

 

But none agree on the order the shrouds and tackles are placed on the masts. They all say the starboard forward shroud pair is placed first, and then the port forward shroud pair. But some imply that the mast tackle is put on before the shrouds, and others say they are the last to go on!

 

I have decided to use the arrangement shown in Petersson, and to put it on first. In this way the loop of rope around the mast will also serve as a "cushion" for the shroud ropes, and the tackle pendant will descend inboard of the shrouds. This is important because the tackle pendants and the associated runner and luff tackle rigs will be inboard of the shrouds and rat lines, and hook onto eyes in the channels.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I placed one twist of the rope around itself in front of the mast and added seizing on both sides of the mast. In all cases I apply a drop of white glue (school glue) to the seizing to secure the fastening. I use the ordinary white glue because it drys clear and virtually invisible. It can also be loosened with a drop of water to untie the seizing.

 

The tackle pendants are about 1/3 of the lower mast length between the deck (partners) and the hounds (trestletrees). This length varied with the period, and was sometimes half the mast length.

 

The deadeyes are rigged as shown in Lever's drawing at the top of the page at upper left. Several references were specific in saying the deadeyes were fastened to the shrouds with a throat seizing, as shown at left in this drawing from Lever, but with two seizings above the loop. They also specify this type of seizing for use on stays and other parts of the standing rigging - but don't say why.

 

I have noticed that simple round seizing (like the upper seizing in this drawing) but without the lower seizing around the loop) can slip, allowing the end of the rope to slide down and out of the seizing. This has happened to me a couple of times after I have finished the round seizing but didn't allow enough time for the glue to dry before putting strain on the lines.

 

But with the knot around the loop in the throat seizing this does not happen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This may be the "accurate" way to fasten deadeyes to the shrouds, but it is a pain in the posterior to tie that first seizing around the loop with the deadeye in the way! It would be a lot easier to just use the round seizing!

 

There is another detail to be noted on setting up the shrouds. They were made differently for cable laid rope (left hand spiral) and hawser laid rope (right hand spiral). Lees says English men of war always used cable laid rope for shrouds, so American vessels probably followed suit. Coincidentally, the 0.035 inch brown rope from Syren that I am using is cable laid (not all Syren rope is cable laid).

 

With cable laid shrouds the end of the shroud rope is on the aft side of the deadeye on the port side of the ship, and on the forward side of the deadeye on the starboard side of the ship. In this image you see the deadeyes from the starboard outboard view, so the inboard side of the port deadeye and the outboard side of the starboard deadeye are seen.

 

When the lanyards are rigged the standing end has a knot to prevent it from pulling through the hole in the deadeye. The lanyard is first pulled through from the inboard side of the deadeye through the hole shown in the drawing (forward on the port side and aft on the starboard side).

 

After the lanyard is run through all the holes in the deadeyes the loose end is fed through the gap between the upper deadeye and the rope loop (not shown in the drawing) then round the shrouds and back under itself. It is wound around the ropes a few times and then seized to the shroud ropes.

 

It will take me a while to finish rigging the shrouds to the two masts.

Edited March 10 by Dr PR