odd number of deadeyes per side

[jeff watts]

i may be being a bit  daft here but ive looked through the literature i have and cant see an obviuos answer so , perhaps someone can give me some advice ?  its my first build and im in the process of making up the lower shrouds on  my hms  victory kit , now the instructions are vague at best so im getting some tips from the rigging books which i have bought , which describe doing the shrouds in pairs on alternate sides from front to rear , now  the main mast has 11 large deadeyes on each side , so i cant make a pair from the last one , any ideas please?

[Bob Cleek]

Check your rigging books to determine exactly how it was done on the specific application on Victory to which you refer. There are several ways it was done. "Orphan" shrouds are rather common, actually.. 

[jeff watts]

thanks bob , i'll go have another read , hopefully theres something on the subject 

 

[druxey]

Basically, with odd numbers, the first shroud pair to go on goes up one side, splits with a cut splice over the mast head, and then down the other side. The rest go on in pairs to the same side alternately, starboard pair first, then port, etc.

[jeff watts]

 thats great  , i thought it may be something along those lines  , but wanted to be sure , now i can carry on without worrying whether i was doing it wrong ,  cheers 

[wefalck]

Instead of a splice, the single one may also be just lashed together as the double one: each side reaches over to other side, together forming a loop. The correct method would need to checked in period reference books.

Edited November 6, 2019 by wefalck

[jeff watts]

thanks wefalk, i will check the books i have to see what method is recommended 

[amateur]

To add on this, in the Netherlands it was not the first shrould going single, but the last one. This is a pic of a contemporeneous modell (1650, destroyed in WWIi in Berlin), showing the Dutch solution of that period  just a single rope, with a half-hitch around the masttop.

 

 

[wefalck]

Interesting. I would have thought that the double-shrouds would weigh down on the single ones and through friction secure them additionally, thus taking some of the strain from the lashings (which, incidentally would be double or triple, as for the lower end around dead-eyes).

[jeff watts]

im just giving an opinion here , but i would have thought that given the angle of the shroud  relative to the mast ,under strain there would be more pull on the rear shroud as the wind fills the sails , and so the sensible thing would to put the single shroud to the front ? i know thats irrelevent on a model 

[wefalck]

Of the single shrouds, one would go around the front of the mast and the other around the back.

 

It would be the art of the rigger and the mate/officer in charge to make sure that all shrouds are set in a way that they take up the strain relatively evenly distributed.

[allanyed]

You may want to check Longridge's Anatomy of Nelson's ships as he shows quite detailed of the shrouds.   I am traveling with no access to my books so cannot speak of Victory's time period, but for earlier periods, the order of dressing as given by Lees is  Pendant of the tackles, shrouds, swifter (this is the aft most unpaired shroud with deadeyes)  and stay.  He also describes use of an eye as mentioned by Wefalck, but again, it may not be contemporary to Victory.  The swifter did not receive ratlines in earlier periods but I don't know if that is the case for Victory.   

Allan

 

[jeff watts]

thanks  allan