Rigging Question - HMS Ontario

[David Lester]

I'm not anywhere near the rigging stage of my HMS Ontario, but I've been looking over the plans, trying to iron out the many, many questions that are arising. Here is the first of what I anticipate will be many.

 

Maybe I'm revealing my ignorance by asking this, but I have not run across this before and I simply don't understand it.

 

Here is the diagram of the lower deadeyes on the main mast top:

 

 

 

 

It shows two bullseyes rigged together with the lower line appears to be wrapped underneath the deadeye.

 

Here's the mast at the mast top:

 

 

The deadeyes and shrouds appear to be rigged in the usual way. It also looks like the pair of bullseyes is behind the deadeyes,  (red arrows) but I don't understand what they are, nor where the line they are securing originates. It would seem that the line marked with the green arrow is the right line, but if I follow it up it just disappears in an indecipherable mass of black lines where the shrouds converge. Do these lines wrap around the mast in the same way as the shrouds?  I have never run across this before. Is this something unusual or am I just displaying my limited experience? In any case, I'm curious about what they are and how and where they originate. Can anyone shed any light? Many thanks,

David

[allanyed]

David,  Hopefully someone will have an answer, but I have never seen hearts  for shrouds with our without deadeyes as well.  I checked a few of my books and cannot even find where hearts alone for shrouds are used.    The first drawing you show has a label Version A.   Is the second labeled as Version B by chance?   As she was discovered in tact by Kennard and Scoville, perhaps this can be confirmed as accurate with some digging  into their research of the wreck.

 

 I am curious to see if anyone has knowledge of the use of these hearts in place of and/or in conjunction with the deadeyes.   Curious minds want to know.

 

Allan

[jwvolz]

David,

 

It should be the topgallant shrouds. They were set up with thimbles and lanyards in the top. This is the same way my Cruizer rigging was set up, based on the brig Irene book. The lower thimble is seized behind the lower deadeye. 

 

Rig the lanyard as you would for lower stays between hearts for example, reeving between the two thimbles. I cheated on mine and simply secured the topgallant shroud to a decent sized eyebolt behind the deadeyes. I figured there was no way I was going to be able to rig it back there otherwise with the other rigging in the way, and it is barely visible anyway.

 

I'd take a picture of my Cruizer rigging, but you'd never see it behind the topmast deadeyes/shrouds. 

[David Lester]

Hi Allan,

The difference between "version a" and "version b" is simply the way the deadeyes are attached to the mast top. Version a uses the photo etched part shown just to the right. Version b (which isn't shown here) omits it and uses a piece of wire instead. Both versions show both the deadeyes in front and the bullseyes behind.

 

The only thing I can think of, without really knowing, is that instead of the deadeyes being rigged in pairs, each is rigged individually, with the shroud running up from the deadeye, wrapped around the mast and down again to the bullseye behind. I don't know, I'm just guessing. In any case, I think I'll be leaving that detail off. Even if it is correct, I'm sure I would end up with a very cluttery mess if I include it.

 

The rigging plans for this kit are so vague and unclear, and as I am beginning to suspect so incorrect that I'm going to have to ignore them almost completely and rely on other sources. For example, there isn't a single belaying point indicated anywhere on the plans and there are at least two too many stays shown between the main and fore masts and two or three too many between the fore mast and bowsprit. I can't even imagine what these stays would be. They don't even show how they're supposed to be attached. It's like someone just took a pencil and drew lines at random and it's quite a mess.

 

I think I can find enough references for a brig rig to be accurate enough for my purposes (the only audience I have really is my wife and me,) but I don't know to what degree the fact that this is a snow brig changes things.

 

Anyway, I'll continue to scour the internet to see what I can find. Any all input is welcome and appreciated.

Many thanks,

David

[allanyed]

My fall back for any British ship is Lees'  Masting and Rigging.   Can hardly go wrong using his book.  I have seen it as low as $68 at Abe Books.  It has served me well for the 15 years or so that I have had it.   Lenarth Petersson's book Rigging Period Ship Models is cheaper ($33) but extremely limited compared to Lees' book.  Odd thing is that on Amazon, the hard cover for Petersson's book is about $33 but the paperback is $400 up to $651.  Very strange.

Allan

[realworkingsailor]

13 minutes ago, allanyed said:

Odd thing is that on Amazon, the hard cover for Petersson's book is about $33 but the paperback is $400 up to $651.  Very strange.

Allan

Check who the actual seller is. I’d bet it’s a third party scammer. From the same family of clowns who scoop up concert tickets and resell them at 1000% markups. 
 

Andy

[David Lester]

OK, I've got it now. Joe, your are right - they're the top gallant shrouds. It's just that the plans are so poorly drawn and components not identified that it's quite difficult to figure out what's what. You have to rely on your own knowledge and experience, (and of course, I seem to have to learn from scratch with each model! I even have to look up how to tie a clove hitch every time.) I may take your advice and substitute an eyebolt; I'll see how it goes when I get to that point.

 

Allan - thank you - I'll check out Lees' Masting and Rigging. It may be well worth the investment. I have the Petersson and while it's quite clearly drawn, every time I refer to it, it seems to illustrate something that I already know and skips over exactly what it is I'm looking for.

 

Many thanks,

David

[AON]

David

I just looked in TM+ROESOW and it was unclear... at least to me.

The Anatomy of Nelsons Ships, page 233, figure 163 is quite clear.

image attached.

[David Lester]

That's great - it's perfectly clear to me now.

Thanks,

David

[donrobinson]

Good to see you got an answer David. I hate it when you ask a question and it ends up the answer is right in front of you! LOL The question about the stays, are the second stays that you mention  not called the preventer stays?  Which were quite common on ships of that era. I believe most ships had these, at least the English ones. Lennarth Petersson shows these in his book.

[AON]

Here is another image.

I will see If I can find the other end of the shroud.

[AON]

Reading The Anatomy of Nelsons Ships (C.Nepean Longridge) page 233 and looking at the image in Rigging Period Ship Models - Square Rigged (Lennarth Petersson) page 11:

"The first pair is doubled in the usual manner, the third shroud goes over the mast head with an eye splice."

"Each shroud reeves through a hole in the outer end of the top mast cross trees, where it is served.  Inclined inwards, the shrouds pass between the topmast shrouds, and inside the topmast futtock stave."

"The top gallant shrouds are lashed to the first, third and fifth futtock plates on the fore and main masts, to the first and third on the mizzen."

[donrobinson]

Great investigative work! I can see these books are invaluable. Thanks