How many riders?

[Bluto 1790]

In the plans/drawings (which aren't very many) I have for HMS Leopard there is only one 'mention' of riders.

Here's that 'mention' >>>

In none of the plans/drawings of any 50 gun ship that I've found on the internet is there any help with the number and locations of these internal hull riders.

 

So, what I'm asking is - - what would be the number, and approximate locations of the riders?  Particularly in the area of the main mast?

 

I'm considering doing a cross-section at a future date but would need a little more detailed info than already exists on the plans. 

[allanyed]

Jim

The Shipbuilder's Repository (1788) does not give the number of riders for a 50, but does give three for a 64.    The 1770 inboard profile drawing of the Portland class 50s, which includes Portland, Leopard, Jupiter, Adamant, Leander and Europa shows three and their locations.    https://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/81511.html

Allan

 

Edited December 16, 2019 by allanyed

[Bluto 1790]

Hello Allan, thanks for your response.

 

I've had a look at the link you posted and, as seems to be common with so many of these very old drawings, it's very faint and difficult to see things clearly.  So I brightened the image to try to make it clearer - - - but I'm still not sure how to positively identify the riders from the image.

I've reproduced it below and have inserted my own numbering 'system' hoping you (or anyone) can indicate the points at which the riders are located.  (It looks to me that there may be two at points 2 and 3 [abaft the mizzen mast step] on the drawing --- but I'm not at all sure ???) <<< and even if that's correct, where is the third one ???

The area I'm considering for a cross-section is from around number 7 (to include the aftmost capstans) to number 15 (to include the companionway from the main deck down to the upper deck), so if there are any riders in that section it would be good to know!

[druxey]

It appears that the floor riders are located at 10.8, 12.2, 13.5. 15.7 and 17.7. The futtock riders rise adjacent to these as high as the gun deck. (The Leopard illustration you posted confuses these as being single continuous items, which they are not!) The items at 2 and 3 are not riders but crutches. I strongly recommend you read a book on construction of the period such as Longridge's Anatomy of Nelson's Ships, Goodwin's The Sailing Man of War or Antscherl's The Fully Framed Model.

[Mark P]

Good Afternoon Bluto;

 

I agree with Druxey's comments, you should certainly read at least one of the books he mentions, and preferably at least the last two, if you need to understand riders somewhat better.

 

However, one comment is that the midship section you posted is taken from the book 'The 50-gun Ship', by Rif Winfield. If you have not got this, I would advise you to do so, as there are some further drawings in it which show the decks in isometric views, all very clearly drawn by the very talented John McKay. Unfortunately, the hold is not included in this series, but the view of the orlop does show the ends of the riders poking through. 

 

See below an excerpt from a draught of the Stirling Castle, a 64 gun ship, but the principle is the same.

 

Riders comprised floor riders, which straddle the keel; first futtock riders, which run alongside the previous ones, but started at the keel and stopped at the orlop deck beams; and second-futtock or breadth riders, which began at the end of the floor riders, and extended up to the gun-deck beams. 

 

In the draught, there is a pair behind/below each shot locker, although the forward one seems to have no floor rider, then again just aft of the midship station; just forward of station A and just forward of station E (the latter has no floor rider)

 

Note that although the 'X' marking the floor riders appears to cut into the keelson, this is a draughting convention. In reality, the floor riders were bent up over the keelson.

 

See also below a plate from Falconer's work, which shows the midship section and riders (starboard side is clearest) 

 

All the best,

 

Mark P

 

[allanyed]

The following is a higher resolution IB Profile of Vanguard 1748 that shows the floor and futtock riders more clearly.  You can save it and enlarge quite a bit.   This is from the earlier post on NMM hi res drawings on Wiki.     Hope it helps.

Allan

[Bluto 1790]

Druxey, Mark and Allan, thanks for the comments.

 

Mark, I assume the section plan you posted above is a view looking aft so that starboard will be on the Left-hand side?

My section plan in the opening post IS looking aft so is it standard practice to show these kind of views always looking aft? 

 

I have ordered a copy of 'Anatomy Of Nelson's Ships' from Abebooks.  (There were a few copies on their site that were reasonably priced -- and there were a few that were unreasonably priced ! )

[Mark P]

Good Evening Jim;

 

With a midship section without any other details showing it could be looking forward or aft, it would look the same. As viewed, I meant starboard to be the right hand side. There are no knees shown on that side to confuse the issue.

 

All the best,

 

Mark P

[Bluto 1790]

On 12/17/2019 at 1:34 PM, Mark P said:

Good Afternoon Bluto;

 

. . . . . one comment is that the midship section you posted is taken from the book 'The 50-gun Ship', by Rif Winfield. If you have not got this, I would advise you to do so, as there are some further drawings in it which show the decks in isometric views, all very clearly drawn by the very talented John McKay. Unfortunately, the hold is not included in this series, but the view of the orlop does show the ends of the riders poking through. 

 

Mark P

 

 

Hi Mark,

 

I do have the Rif Winfield book - - I used it and its plans to build my Leopard.  I must confess though that I didn't make much use of the drawing you refer to above as my model is a P. o. B. fully planked so I didn't include any internal details on the orlop deck as none of it would be visible.

I assume you're referring to the following drawing where (I think) I've highlighted the 5 midships riders?  >>>

Also, while I await the arrival of the book I've ordered, I'm trying to get an understanding of how the riders were configured.  I've re-posted your mid frame drawing and if I understand what I'm seeing, the riders look to be in 5 sections -- from just under lower deck level on port right down, over the keel and 'back up' to just under lower deck on starboard side?

I've attempted to identify them and indicate their extent and how they 'overlap' each other in green, red and blue.  Have I correctly identified them?

Edited December 19, 2019 by Bluto 1790

[Mark P]

Good Evening Jim;

 

Your coloured arrows are correct: green equals the floor rider; red is the first futtock rider and blue is the second futtock or breadth rider.

 

The coloured-in pieces on the orlop deck drawing are indeed the tops of the riders.

 

Another point which might be worth bringing to your attention is standard knees. These are knees which are 'upside-down', and are located on all the main gun-decks. They sit on the deck, and are fixed to the ship's side. On the left hand side of Falconer's midship section, you can just see two of them, one behind each of the guns. A 74 had something like 10 of these on each side on each deck. They were not fixed directly to the deck, but to a 'shoal', which was a 3 inch thick piece of plank laid over the deck, and it was on top of this that the standard was located. The shoal would often stop short of the ship's side so that any water on the deck could run along the waterways to the scuppers. Standards and shoals are rarely seen on contemporary models, nor are they shown on McKay's drawings of 'Leopard', but depending upon your desire for accuracy, you might wish to include some.

 

All the best,

 

Mark P

Edited December 18, 2019 by Mark P

[Bluto 1790]

Hello Mark,

 

Thank you for your comments and helpful info.

 

I'm not sure IF I'll actually go for a cross section but it would be a bit into the future. I've only ever built one ship model and learned a lot along the way.

If I do go ahead with the cross section it will be at a larger scale than my Leopard and while I'll want to build it as well and as accurately as possible I won't stress too much if it's not up to museum standard (which it won't be!).

[druxey]

'Shoal' is also sometimes spelled as 'sole'. I suppose it depended on the writer's degree of sobriety!

[Mark P]

Good Evening Jim;

 

Whichever you choose, I wish you happy building! And happy reading of your book when it arrives. 

 

Good Evening Druxey;

 

You are right, of course. Sole was more usual in the 18th century. I would just like to re-assure you that I am completely sober (hic!)  Only drunk from reading quite a few 17th century contracts, wherein 'shoal' is more customary. 

 

All the best,

 

Mark P