Young America by EdT - FINISHED - extreme clipper 1853

[Sailor1234567890]

Worm and parcel with the lay, turn and serve the other way. That's impressive at that scale. WOW!

[EdT]

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 206 – Lower Shrouds

 

The two gangs of lower fore shrouds were made in the last part and were ready for the deadeyes to be turned in.  I used the fixture shown in the first picture to position the shrouds at a uniform height and to hold things in place for putting on the seizings.

 

 

The fixture is made from a thin (1/32") sheet of hardwood.  It is drilled to allow the two lower lanyard holes in each deadeye to be threaded with wire to hold the parts in place.  Wire at the bottom of the fixture is used to anchor the fixture to the channel deadeye straps as shown below.

 

 

In the picture the first shroud pair on the port side has been seated over the first starboard pair, not shown, at the mast head.  Those two opposite shrouds were secured first.  The next picture shows the first port shroud wrapped around its deadeye and the throat seizing being put on.

 

 

 

The short end of this shroud will be forward on this (port) side – aft on the other side.  Some will no doubt observe that this is opposite the orientation on ships with cable-laid, i.e. left-handed, shrouds of the type used in, for example, the Royal Navy.  I might also note that looping the short end forward and in front of the standing shroud is the way the rope would naturally loop if twisted "with the lay" – another opposite with right-handed rope.  Twisting in this direction helped keep water out.  Stay tuned.  There is more of this minutiae later.

 

This first served shroud is the most difficult to fit due to its stiffness.  The next picture shows frapping turns being placed on the second seizing using a needle.

 

 

Alligator clips are most useful in holding rigging.  They are light, small, and grip tightly.  Note that some of my serving is unravelling in the picture because I cut it prematurely – before applying some glue.  The next picture shows the gang of six lower shrouds on the starboard side. 

 

 

The excess seizing threads have been clipped off and the rope ends, as well as the seizings, have been wetted with darkened glue.  The port side work is still in progress.  In the next picture, both fixtures have been detached from the channels and the lanyard has been reeved on the #1 shroud on the starboard side.

 

 

 

The lanyard is 5¼" rope, laid up from three strands of No. 60 linen thread and dyed with walnut extract stain.  The excess lanyard will be wound over the shroud and seized after all twelve shrouds are finally tensioned and the sheer poles lashed on.

 

Next time.

 

Ed

 

[druxey]

Superb, stuff, Ed!

[rwiederrich]

Wonderful work as usual Ed.

I don't know, it must be me,(This is NOT a criticism), but I never use a jig to hold the deadeyes or use wire to establish  equal distance for my lanyards.  I simply eyeball them...and I'm pretty darn close every time.

I'm also guessing they(riggers) never used a jig on the real ships...and I'm also confident, keeping the deadeyes precisely the same height wasn't a major esthetic requirement.  The seizing was used for synching up the tension of the shroud and they all stretched at different rates.  Irregularities were expected if not common....slight irregularities make the rigging more real-world credible...IMHO  On the other hand........a symmetrically rigged ship..is a smart ship.  Not to mention it probably makes for a simpler install for some.

 

Sorry for the rant.

 

Impeccable build.

 

Rob

[allanyed]

I don't care what type ship or era one is considering building, this log is worth its weight in gold just on techniques that can be learned.  Super job Ed,  and please accept another thank you for sharing so much.

 

Allan

 

[Jack12477]

6 minutes ago, allanyed said:

I don't care what type ship or era one is considering building, this log is worth its weight in gold just on techniques that can be learned.  Super job Ed,  and please accept another thank you for sharing so much.

 

Allan

 

I whole heartedly agree with Allan.  I'm silently following and learning much from your build.  Thanks.

[rwiederrich]

3 hours ago, Jack12477 said:

I whole heartedly agree with Allan.  I'm silently following and learning much from your build.  Thanks.

And I completely agree with Jack who whole heartedly agrees with Allen.

 

Rob

[Maury S]

More for us to try to achieve.  Lovely work.

Maury

[dvm27]

That jig is a keeper, Ed. Good stuff!

[EdT]

Thanks for the comments, guys.  I won't take too much credit for the deadeye jig.  The idea came from Longridge Anatomy (p. 229) when I was rigging Victory 10+ years ago.  I used wire vs. his pins.  Here's a link to that part of the Victory build log.

 

https://modelshipworld.com/index.php?/topic/316-hms-victory-by-edt-196-pob/&page=2

 

Ed

 

[Bill Tuttle]

Great job , Ed.  I have always been disturbed by the ridges left in larger rigging line after seizing but this is the first time I have seen a modelmaker add the parcelling.  Does a beautiful job and worth every second of the time it took.  Your work never ceases to amaze me.

 

 

[John Allen]

Ed,

Have to parrot what others have stated fantastic work.

[EdT]

Thanks, everyone.

 

 Bill, I don't want to deceive anyone on the parcelling.  I only parcelled over the serving around the masthead, not under any serving.  This does leave some profile of the rope strands through the serving, but parcelling - or worming and parcelling - under the serving would add too much diameter to the model rope.  The thread I am using is about 1" diameter at 1:72, thicker than full size serving, but not too far off considering that full size rope is wormed and parcelled first.  The lower shrouds on the model are 10 1/2" rope (3 1/2"  diameter) - the largest lines on the ship.  The actual unserved diameter is a little less than .045".  Larger rope would show more of the effect you describe and at larger scales. like 1:48 or larger, might benefit from worming and/or parcelling before serving - but this would be limited to a few very large lines.  For example, Victory's mainstay was 19" rope (6" diameter).

 

Ed

[Mirabell61]

Hi Ed,

I like the jig for positioning the deadeyes, all at exactly the same distances....

 

question : when lacing / tightening, the shrouds with the deadeyes do you have additional pulls-stress on the shrouds, or are these pre spanned to the deadeyes fixed to the jig. I can imagine that not all shrouds have exactly the same slackness (length) before and after spanning ?

 

Nils

[EdT]

Hi Nils, and thanks for your comment.

 

Your question may be answered in the next post, which I may get out today, but you will see that for "reeving" the deadeye lanyards, the lines are removed from the fixture.  The fixture only sets the length of the shrouds to the deadeyes, as was done in rigging the real ships by measurements from the actual masts or from drafts.  This was done after stretching.  The shrouds were then served,  doubled, the collar seizings put on, and the shrouds cut to length, allowing for increased length going aft.  The lower ends were sometimes served as well.  Deadeyes were then turned in and the shrouds placed over the masthead.  The use of the fixture I described  replaces only this part of the process.  Once the deaeyes are turned in, they are reeved individually and the shrouds are tensioned using the lanyards, once initially and again when the full gang is reeved.  This leaves them all at a pretty uniform height, as may be seen in photos of YA and other ships.  The iron sheer poles were then added and the excess lanyard wound around the shrouds and made fast.  This will be described in Part 207 shortly.

 

I may also add that I am using several sources of information on this, mainly documentation from the period on seamanship, mastmaking and rigging - both American and British.  These differ in some details but are otherwise pretty consistent - sometimes even word for word.  The differences lead me to believe that while practices were similar, there was variation, so I have used judgement on some things.

 

Ed

[Mirabell61]

On 4.4.2017 at 2:17 PM, EdT said:

Hi Nils, and thanks for your comment.

 

Your question may be answered in the next post, which I may get out today, but you will see that for "reeving" the deadeye lanyards, the lines are removed from the fixture.  The fixture only sets the length of the shrouds to the deadeyes, as was done in rigging the real ships by measurements from the actual masts or from drafts.  This was done after stretching.  The shrouds were then served,  doubled, the collar seizings put on, and the shrouds cut to length, allowing for increased length going aft.  The lower ends were sometimes served as well.  Deadeyes were then turned in and the shrouds placed over the masthead.  The use of the fixture I described  replaces only this part of the process.  Once the deaeyes are turned in, they are reeved individually and the shrouds are tensioned using the lanyards, once initially and again when the full gang is reeved.  This leaves them all at a pretty uniform height, as may be seen in photos of YA and other ships.  The iron sheer poles were then added and the excess lanyard wound around the shrouds and made fast.  This will be described in Part 207 shortly.

 

I may also add that I am using several sources of information on this, mainly documentation from the period on seamanship, mastmaking and rigging - both American and British.  These differ in some details but are otherwise pretty consistent - sometimes even word for word.  The differences lead me to believe that while practices were similar, there was variation, so I have used judgement on some things.

 

Ed

Thanks very much Ed,

a good explaination, and I see it is all well thought through, super rigging work, am looking forward to your next posts covering these details

 

Nils

[EdT]

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 207 – Reeving Deadeyes

 

The first picture shows deadeyes reeved on the two forward shrouds.  The other shrouds are left attached to the fixtures to avoid them getting out of order.

 

 

In the next picture the second shroud has been reeved on the port side.

 

 

Keen observers will note that the stop knot on the #1 starboard side is on the right side of the deadeye – viewed from the deck.  Alas, while this would be correct for left-handed shrouds, it is incorrect for my right-handed shrouds – a mistake I discovered only after reeving 10 shrouds.

 

In the next picture, those 10 have been redone and the two remaining shrouds completed – a few hours of avoidable rework.

 

 

 

The lanyards have been hauled up to tension the shrouds.  I stretched all this rope after laying it up.  Linen has very little stretch to it after this, so the deadeyes line up well after tensioning, as was the case in practice.

 

In practice, lanyards were hauled up using a tackle that was secured to the shroud some distance above the deadeye.  In earlier ships and perhaps in Naval ships of the time (?), tackles were hooked to burton pendants that went over the masthead before the shrouds.  Hence there are no burtons on the YA model.

 

 

The excess lanyard that is strewn about the deck will be trimmed off after it is wrapped around the shrouds and made fast.  This will be done after lashing on the iron sheer poles.  The next picture is a closer view

 

 

My dust problem is quite evident in this picture, but it would be premature to clean up at this stage, because I will make more dust when I replace the next two deadeyes and their chains to handle the larger topmast backstays.  This change was mentioned in an earlier post.

 

Finally, a view from above.

 

 

Next step is making and installing the iron sheer poles across the tops of the deadeyes and then winding up the lanyard excess.

 

Ed

[wefalck]

"My dust problem is quite evident in this picture, ..." - yes one tends to see much more dust in photographs than in real life

 

Apart from this problem with which we all battle, sharp work as ever

[albert]

Fantastic Ed very very wonderful work.

[stm]

Ed is the short end of the shroud supposed to be seized to the deadeye facing outward or inward towards the deck? It looks like it faces inboard on Crothers plan while yours is showing outboard. The larger drawing next to the General Notes on Crothers rigging plan gives that impression. Was actual practice either way?

 

Scott

[Bill Tuttle]

Ed,

 

Thanks for the additional clarification on the parcelling.  After I submitted the post I looked at it again and saw that it was only on the serving and then I remembered why I did not continue with my efforts to parcel shrouds.  It would add too much diameter.  I guess if you were really obsessive about it you could worm with some silk thread of the proper diameter and serve.  Would be a job that would take an incredible amount of effort with very little return.  Nevertheless, I will employ your idea on the servings where noticeable in the future.  The construction of this model is "beyond belief" and I will be following this build closely.  

[EdT]

A very interesting question, Scott.  In preparing to rig the model, I have vacillated back and forth on this and I will confess that I do not know the correct answer on how this was done - if there is one.  As with many things, practices may have been local.  After much consideration I decided, perhaps incorrectly, to cross the short end to the left, over the standing end of the shroud - when viewed from outside channel.  I am quite convinced that crossing the short end to the left is correct for right-hand laid shrouds that seem to have been universally used on american ships. But under or over?  That is the question.  So, what were my sources telling me?

 

First, Darcy Lever, Young Officer's Sheet Anchor, 1819 - a primary source on seamanship/practice: specifically states that the end is taken over the standing part.  The two diagrams show the standing part to the right and right/handed rope.  Because so many sources parrot Lever, or other Lever derivatives, I give this description high regard.

 

I am aware of the Thomas Hornsby detail on the Crothers drawing that you refer to that shows the short leg behind the standing part.

 

Kipping, 1864 London says, "the end of the shroud is taken underneath round the deadeye, inside standing, or masthead part."  No mention of right or left, but from other parts of the text I surmise the use of shroud-laid, ie left-handed rope.

 

S.B. Luce, Seamanship, 1868, New York, in his throat seizing diagram, shows the short leg taken over the standing leg to the left with right-handed rope - exactly like Lever.  However, in his description of turning in deadeyes he repeats Kipping word for word, indicating the opposite.  However, he says, "The principal caution is to keep the lay in the rope, as it prevents wet getting in."  He then goes on to quote Boyd's Naval Cadet Manual, which discusses the specific point (under/over) as this relates to the lay of the rope, describing the  tendency of the rope to naturally loop over the standing end if it is twisted to tighten the lay.  He then admits this is reasonable, but goes on to say " it is diametrically opposite to the method practiced by our seamen." That is to say, taken under the standing leg without any twisting.  He calls this "with the sun" but it seems to me both are with the sun, but one is over and the other under.  Am I confused or is Luce confused?  His two diagrams on deadeyes are ambiguous on the point.

 

Remember, Scott, you asked this question.

 

So, based on all the above, I took a short length of right-handed rope and twisted the left hand end.  If the lay is tightened, the left hand, short part, naturally loops over the standing end.  If the lays is loosened by the twist in the opposite direction the short end goes behind the standing leg.  Try it.  The opposite would of course be true for left-handed, shroud laid rope.  Based on all this, I decided to loop the short legs over to keep the lay of the rope tight, but I could easily be convinced that the opposite was done.

 

So, I would say:  Toss up.

 

Great question.  Thanks,

 

Ed

 

Later edit: substitute cable-laid for shroud laid in above text.

[rwiederrich]

Interesting read.  I gather from all this that in practice a left or right handed twisted shroud coupled with in in or out layed rope with left or right drawn lanyards could cause the shroud entire to twist..making the lanyards roll back over themselves...in essence twisting the entire arrangement.  I've seen it happen on models...so it is not unreasonable to imagine it happening in practice.

 

Acute observations.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Ed...here is an image of re-rigging the Connie...note: the tackle cinching up the lanyard(as you mention earlier).  One thing I want to point out is why so many folks model lanyards with tan line....Yes it was considered running rigging in a sense but it was also standing and needed weather treatment.  I have read where it was coated(as all standing rigging was ) in a thinned tar for protection.  They are replicating that here on the new Connie rigging......so then why not replicate the same practice on modeling the same?

Just wondering.

 

Rob(Avid follower)

[Geoff Matson]

Ed,

 

Your process of the serving and deadeyes is great. I am heavily into the rigging of my Constitution, and am amazed at the detail you develop. I will definitely give this this way of serving a go on my next model. 

[EdT]

Rob, I cannot comment on the historical authenticity of the restoration work on Constitution, nor can I corroborate your theory on twisting shrouds.  That issue has not come up in any references that I have, but...  

 

Later edit:  I found a reference to shroud twisting in James Lees Masting, and Rigging...  He does not cite the cause but says that sheer poles were intoduced in the 1800's to prevent shroud twisting.

 

 

[rwiederrich]

Thanks Ed...yes I read that reference on sheer poles myself.  I have a reference somewhere else that makes additional mentioning of sheer poles for shroud twisting and distancing control/prevention.

I'll have to find the reference for tarring the lanyards.

 

Superb work.

 

Rob

[BANYAN]

Great info and discussion on rigging here Ed and et al.  This is what is so great about this site; and thanks for hosting the discussion in your thread/log Ed.

 

cheers

 

Pat

[wefalck]

On the topic of tarring lanyards - just thinking and without references: the lanyards need to be protected, but at the same time need to move reasonably well, so that adjustments can be made, when at see. So, something like impregnating with Stockholm Tar is more likely than a thickish coat of pitch, as found elsewhere on the standing rigging. There has also been the practice of shrouding the deadeyes and lanyard with canvas, when at sea. I have seen this on one or two old models and photographs, but otherwise this seems to be a neglected subject. Not sure to what extend and when exactly it was practised. As it looks a bit messy and covers one of the characteristic features of the rigging, it is rarely, if ever seen on modern models.

[JerryTodd]

The set-up for "adjusting" lanyards is perfectly capable of overcoming whatever "tar" they might have put on them.  The odds are Stockholm Tar was used, but something was used, no passage making ship is going wandering about with bare lanyards.  Yes, the system shown is from a Navy manual where there's enough crew to send the mast through the bottom of the ship, but the system's the same outside the Navy as well.