Young America 1853 by EdT - FINISHED - extreme clipper

[EdT]

Thanks for your comments, Jerry, and thanks for posting the diagram.  I am familiar with it.  I do have remaining questions about the use of tar.  Perhaps you could comment further on that.  My understanding is as follows:

 

Pine tar (aka Stockholm Tar, aka tar) is a viscous liquid obtained by decomposing pine wood under heat and pressure.  The term Stockholm Tar derives from the virtual monopoly held on this product by Sweden during the 17^th, 18^th, 19^th(?) centuries.  I suspect American ships sourced this from our own lush pine forests.  The material is a fairly viscous, sticky dark brown, fluid, slightly soluble in water.

 

All rope used in ship rigging was tarred as part of the rope making process, by dragging the hemp yarns through a trough of tar at or near its boiling point.  It would be a lot less viscous at this temperature and would penetrate the hemp strands.  The description of the process appears in Luce, Seamanship, 1868 p49.  He states that the absorption was 25%, which I take to mean the amount of increase in the rope's weight.  At any rate, all rope had a fairly high content of tar, whether standing or running.

 

Later, Luce discusses protection of standing rigging (p. 58) as follows: "Standing rigging is protected from the weather by covering it with a coating of blacking made of tar, whiskey, lampblack, litharge, and salt water."  I found this interesting for a couple reasons.  First, because a small amount of carbon black goes a long way, so the addition of it in the form of lamp black would certainly make standing rigging black – as opposed to the deep brown of tar alone.  Second is the use of litharge (lead oxide) in the recipe.  He doesn't say how much, but the purpose of this would be a thickener, like the lead in lead-based paints.  After "painting" this on standing rigging, and after evaporation of the water and "whiskey" I would expect this to harden into a tough rubbery layer.

 

So, my conclusion, based on Luce, perhaps incorrect, is that there are differences in what we think of as "tarring" of rigging.  We are then left to decide on how to represent this on models.

 

So, am I off base in thinking that lanyards might receive a different treatment than say, shrouds or stays?  I'd be genuinely interested in any further light you, or others, could shed on this.

Thanks,

 

Ed

 

[JerryTodd]

Lanyards and other "adjustment points" of that nature would definitely not be tarred with the coating Luce describes, mainly because it would prevent seeing any deterioration or damage on lines that wear most on the inside - like in the holes of the dead-eyes.

Pine tar protects the line, mainly from molds, and keeps it supple, while allowing any wear to be visible and dealt with before it becomes critical - but it would be tarred beyond what it received in it's manufacture, making it much darker than the rest of the running rigging.

[rwiederrich]

I have to find in my researched paperwork where I read that sailors who were given the job of tarring the rigging(called tar monkey's) would tar the shrouds and their lanyards...then wipe their hands on the cuffs of their uniforms.  I gotta dig that up. 

In like manner the lanyards were seized off when the shrouds were taught...giving the fixture a fixed or standing configuration...when in this *fixed* state the lanyards would then be *tarred* for weathering because rot would occur easily if nothing was done for protection. (*Tarred* is a generic term for whatever they used to preserve)

It is assumed(falsely IMO) the lanyards acted more like a block and tackle...moving with great frequency hauling the shrouds and backstays in and out as would be expected with a sail, causing modelers to use running rigging rope.....when in fact the deadeye and lanyard was the principal means to cinch and tighten the shrouds and backstays..securing the masts firmly(Like guy wires).  Well once done, unless tragedy struck(a fractured or sprung mast), the system was permanent and maintained that way.  This fact is evident in the larger Down Easters or windjammers made of iron.  Their turnbuckle secured cable shrouds were painted over or otherwise permanently protected from weather without regard for continual adjustment. (Periodic, yes, but continual..no)

 

There is much to be said on the subject and with that much personal referenced opinion as well.  All in all, the modelers eye on aesthetics leads them in one direction or the other.  

 

Rob

[wefalck]

Wire and natural fibre rigging obviously are rather different animals. Wire rigging, together with steel masts in the later days, can be probably considered as static.

 

To the contrary, hemp ropes, would change their length and elasticity as a function of wetness. It also stretches, although pre-streched by the riggers, when on the ship. So some degree of adjustment over time may be needed. In addition, the captain/mate may decide that adjustments say to the fall of the mast may be needed as a function of the actual load line in order to correct luffing or leeching behaviour of the ship. There would be also a difference in ship management when working up and down confined waters around the European coasts compared to running across to Cape Horn or similar, where the ship might be running on the same bow for days or weeks. Under such conditions the lee-shrouds etc. will become somewhat slack after time due to the streching of the wind-ward ones; if you then change tacks, the rigging would come over with a jerk that may lead to the breakage of masts or the former lee-shrouds etc.. For this reason the standing rigging has to be kept taught and then eased back into a new trim.

[Sailor1234567890]

I tend to agree that they were a more permanent fixture and once tensioned would not require much adjustment if any. If the mate or first Lieutenant (depending if it was a merchant or navy vessel) was a stickler for detail, the deadeyes would be adjusted from time to time by loosening the lanyards, cutting the throat seizing holding the shroud to the upper deadeye, adjusting the position of it and then re-lashing it in place before tensioning the lanyard again. All this to keep the deadeyes level. Once again though, this was a periodic event, not a regular thing.

[druxey]

Oh, dear. There has been much discussion, if not argument, about whether laniards were tarred or not. There are two distinct camps that seem to have entrenched and opposing views on this. My early models showed tarred laniards, but I'm now not entirely convinced of this. My recent models have had un-tarred ones which have come in for some criticism. My own jury is still out, as no-one seems to have found incontrovertible primary evidence. Personally, I still tend toward un-tarred, for the reasons others have cited above. But....

[EdT]

Okay, everyone.  Thanks for the input, but I guess its time to move on and I will try to make that transition with a new post today, if possible.  Thank you, Druxey, for your perspective on what I guess is "one of those" topics.  For what its worth, I share your view on this and am modeling accordingly.  In cases like this everyone needs to satisfy their own perspective.  I suggest if there is interest in continuing this discussion, that someone start a topic.

 

Thanks again.

 

Ed

[stm]

For what it is worth I corresponded with William Crothers concerning his plans and this subject was one of them. In one of his letters dated December 1992 he stated the following which I typed exactly and has some similarity to what Ed wrote:

 

William Crothers  - “All rigging was generally tarred with Stockholm tar which was a solution made from pine knots and was dark brown. This was a preservative. Standing rigging was further preserved with a solution containing lampblack, tar, whisky, litharge, salt, etc., hence the color – black. The lanyards, once set up, were part of the standing rigging and would not be replaced unless damaged. As permanent fixtures they would normally be blacked down.  However, some cases may have existed where it was not done – very sloppy ship-keeping.”

 

The last few words where somewhat of an emotional response and took it to mean that Mr. Crothers was not a big fan of ship yards omitting this practice. Ever since, I always used black line.

I am sure this topic will come up again when discussing ratlines.

Scott

[EdT]

Thank you for this input, Scott.

 

Ed

[EdT]

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 208 – Sheer Poles

 

Ok, lets get off the tar-baby.

 

Sheer poles were 1" diameter rods that were lashed across the shrouds just above the deadeyes and just below the futtock shrouds.  The purpose was to spread the shrouds evenly, to help keep them in a flat plane and to prevent twisting.  They apparently came into use around the end of the 18^th century.  They were assisted by wood staves lashed at intervals between the sheer poles and groups of ratlines.  The staves will be installed much later, with the ratlines, but the sheer poles are needed now.

 

The first picture shows a small diameter brass rod being served for use as a sheer pole.

 

 

The next picture shows this served rod spread across and lashed to the fore lower starboard shrouds just above the deadeyes. 

 

 

The rod will later be cut to length after touching the ends with a drop of CA to seal the serving to the rod.  Except for the first shroud, the lanyards are kept down, out of the way.  After final tension adjustment, the lanyards were brought up through the space above the deadeye and wrapped four turns around the shrouds, as seen in the next picture.

 

 

The four turns is arbitrary.  The lanyards were normally wrapped around until used up and were generally much less tidy than I tried to make these.  In the next picture the lanyards are finished off.

 

 

One additional turn was taken and a clove hitch on knotted the back sides.  A length of remaining lanyard was then secured to the inside of the shrouds with a small rope lashing.

 

The small sheer pole under the futtock shrouds is shown in the last picture.

 

 

Only three of the six lashings have been tied in the picture.  Note that there is no connection between the shrouds and futtock shrouds that pass between them.  This is different from earlier man-of-war practice.  The forestay may be seen in the top upper right corner of the photo.  It is the next item to be installed once the sheer poles are finished on each side.

 

Ed

 

[rwiederrich]

4 hours ago, wefalck said:

Wire and natural fibre rigging obviously are rather different animals. Wire rigging, together with steel masts in the later days, can be probably considered as static.

 

To the contrary, hemp ropes, would change their length and elasticity as a function of wetness. It also stretches, although pre-streched by the riggers, when on the ship. So some degree of adjustment over time may be needed. In addition, the captain/mate may decide that adjustments say to the fall of the mast may be needed as a function of the actual load line in order to correct luffing or leeching behaviour of the ship. There would be also a difference in ship management when working up and down confined waters around the European coasts compared to running across to Cape Horn or similar, where the ship might be running on the same bow for days or weeks. Under such conditions the lee-shrouds etc. will become somewhat slack after time due to the streching of the wind-ward ones; if you then change tacks, the rigging would come over with a jerk that may lead to the breakage of masts or the former lee-shrouds etc.. For this reason the standing rigging has to be kept taught and then eased back into a new trim.

Indeed...The comparison was not the material but the habit of securing the lanyards.  From what I gather, as I have stated..periodic adjustments were necessary.  You make the point that evenly placed deadeyes as seen on models was probably not the case in reality....since shroud and backstay shrinking was expected....thus an uneven arrangement of deadeyes.

 

Rob

 

[stm]

Ed you made the right choice in the color line used in the lanyard assembly. You can clearly follow the work to see how this is constructed. Plus we know it is historically accurate from the inputs provided earlier that these lines did vary in color based on how it was treated. I think it looks great.

 

I have been trying to get caught up with your book and this site. I am very impressed with the craftsmanship and knowledge required to create such a beautiful piece of art that mirrors how these ships were actually built. One thing I wanted to share is that the photo of the Constitution that Rob supplied earlier got my curiosity up. Darcy Lever’s Sheet Anchor was a major source in constructing the rigging for the Constitution. I was able to find the page that was used for the rigging in the photo. The thing that I wanted to bring to your attention was that this book was printed in 1819, nearly two hundred years ago, and is still used today.  What you are presently creating I am sure will equal that in years and beyond as source for historians and artist.

 

Reading the various inputs since inception of the project it is obvious that we all are perfectionist.  We always want to get it right and never take the wrong approach. This is understandable since we take a lot of pride in our work. I have found that over the years never and always do not apply to well to ship building from a by gone era. General standards of the day were not always practiced or rigorously enforced. As one leading artist told me you have to do your research and choice one.

 

Thank you for taking on this endeavor. It has been a great education for me, as well as the additional inputs from your followers. I am looking forward to the final product.

Sincere regards;

Scott

[EdT]

Thank you, Scott.  I appreciate your comments very much.  They are right on point as far as the recent discussion is concerned.  I agree that there are choices to be made and that there probably was no one way of doing things.  

 

Ed

[EdT]

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 209 Forestay

 

The forestay was a fairly simple job to install, but before getting into it, I should say a few words about my sequence.  I am sure there are many approaches to this, but my general plan is to work fore to aft, bottom up, so I will do the standing rigging on the lower masts, working aft, then either go on to the lower yards or topmasts – not decided yet.  Details on the lower shrouds like fairleads, staves and ratlines will be added later when convenient.

 

The first picture shows the installed forestay.

 

 

It is 10½" rope (like the lower shrouds), doubled around the masthead with a seized collar, secured with four seizings on each leg to bullseyes with iron straps shackled to eyebolts in the knightheads.  These were installed earlier.  The lower legs are seized together above the lower seizings.  The rope is served around the collar and at the lower ends and the upper part around the masthead is leathered.

 

The next picture shows the leathered collar bedded on the shrouds.

 

 

The next picture shows the extent of the upper serving and leathering and the upper seizing.

 

 

In the next picture the lower ends of the stay have been hauled up and clipped so the seizings can be put on.

 

 

 

The starboard seizing has been started in the picture.  The next picture shows the lower legs completed and the lower seizing installed to pull them together.

 

 

Finally, the completed stay from above.

 

 

There is quite a bit of work to do on the bowsprit, but because the forestay is secured at the knightheads, I can defer this until the fore topmast is being fitted.

 

Next, the main and mizzen lower mast rigging, but first I want to replace all those topmast backstay chains and channel deadeyes discussed in an earlier post.

 

Ed

[dvm27]

Sweet work it. I was surprised to see that the massive double stranded forestay starts and ends in two small thimbles and eye bolts. Wonder if they ever pulled out under stress?

[EdT]

Yes, I know what you mean, Greg.  My initial reaction to the seemingly small sizes of iron straps etc. was similar - and I'm kind of a nut on strength issues.  Some research and some arithmetic helped.  Based on some numbers in S.B. Luce, Seamanship, 1868, an 11" hemp rope of the time had a breaking strain of 64,000 lbs.  On rope of this size on the model I am using 24 gauge copper wire for straps and bolts.  At .020" diameter this converts to  just less than 1 1/2" at 1:72.  If my math is right (always questionable) iron rod of this diameter would have a tensile strength of about 90,000 lbs  (55 KPSI), about 1.5 times the strength of the rope itself.  So, not to worry.  I would assume the rope around the deadeye/bullseye would beak first.

 

I took the bolts through the knightheads (assume nuts), rather than into the tops as is shown on some drawings, because I thought bolting into the end grain would subject the knightheads to splitting.  I wasn't too crazy about main stay eyebolts in foremast bitts, but this was common.

 

Wait till we get to wire rigging sizes.

 

Ed

[wefalck]

I have a 1905 book on rigging that was written by the naval architect who build (among others) the 5-mastes-ship PREUSSEN. It gives the dimensions, breaking strains etc. of every bit of rigging. However, it was written at a time, when some form of materials testing already existed and the production processes for steels were quite well-controlled, so that qualities could be produced repeatedly with confidence. This meant the the margin of error was reasonably small and, therefore, safety margins could be reduced. I use this book as a guidance for minimum dimensions. Fifty years earlier they had to work with much larger safety margins, as metallurgical processes were less reliable and materials testing in its infancy. So with time parts become much more 'delicate'.

Too me the strap and eyebolt look a bit on the small side, actually. It is not only the static breaking strenght that counts, but also the dynamic strains, when on sea.

[druxey]

Please tell me that the leathering is painted paper or material, not scale leather!

[EdT]

Rest easy, Druxey.  The leathering was made with tissue - like the parcelling - then painted.  Very easy to do.

 

Ed

[druxey]

That is a relief, Ed! I had visions of you tanning mouse hides....

[EdT]

I hadn't thought of that .

[druxey]

Uh oh.

[Roger Pellett]

In the Crabtree collection at the Mariners Museum at Newport News, there is a model of a cave man polling or paddling a log raft.  The guy is wearing an animal hide garment that according to the museum is a tanned mouse skin.

 

Roger

[von stetina]

Hi Ed,

 

First class work as usual. It's fun catching up on your build after being away from things.

 

I found the standing rigging work on my Lightning model very enjoyable.  I swore my whole way through the running rigging. I'm about finished and glad of it. The air in my modeling room will be blue for years. The tiny .008 line needed for some things was a horror show.  Though this was my first ship model.....

 

Can't wait for the next model.

 

Bruce

[EdT]

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 210 - Mainstay

 

Once the main shrouds were installed the main stay was next.  Like the lower shrouds and the forestay, this was 10 ½" rope.  The first picture shows the main shrouds in place and tensioned, and the mainstay rigged so the served areas could be marked out.

 

 

The shackled bullseyes and eyebolts through the main deck beams were installed earlier.  In the next picture the stay has been served and leathered and is rigged to allow the glue on the leathering to dry in position before painting.

 

 

The stay is clamped where a collar seizing will be placed after the stay is secured at the fore ends.  In the next picture the first seizing at the lower port end has been tied.

 

 

The lower ends of the stay are served as well as the collar at the top.  In the next picture frapping turns to the first seizing on the port side are being made with the aid of a sewing needle.

 

 

The next picture shows the four seizings on each leg completed.

 

 

 

I was very pleased that the stay clears the chafing battens on the mast by about six inches and is just inside the sheet bitts, so I may not install the spreader that was used if needed to keep the stays outside the mast.  The smaller bullseyes inside and just aft of those for the main stay will anchor the main topmast stay and will hopefully fit as well as the first.

 

The last picture shows the completed main stay with the collar seizing applied below the top.

 

 

The sheer poles have yet to be installed on the main shrouds and the lanyards are still dangling loose.

 

 

Ed

[druxey]

Lovely work, Ed. Have you tried using curved needles used for suturing?

[BANYAN]

Very nice work Ed, that rigging is looking very tidy indeed.  I will be following closely from here as the HMCSS Victoria I am working on had many clipper ship elements so I am sure to pick up a few things

 

cheers

 

Pat

[albert]

Wonderful work Ed.

[EdT]

Thank you, everyone.

 

Yes Druxey, I actually prefer curved needles and am in the process of getting some new ones.  Can't find mine - except for some large ones.  They make this work much easier.

 

Ed

[EdT]

Found some #10 curved needles online - on the way.  Unfortunately shipyard will be closed for a couple weeks - converted to full size woodworking for some spring projects.

 

Ed