Endeavour by Bill97 - OcCre - 1/54

[Bill97]

Ian here is an additional picture of the crossjack from the Endeavour AOTS book and the number legend. It only shows a sling, lift, horses, stirrups, braces, and a truss. 🤷

[Ian_Grant]

Lower yards are not readily lowered, normally, except by jeers which your AOTS diagram does not show.

 

As for lower lifts, they have to run forward of the shrouds,no choice (they can't run through them).  When the lower yard is braced round, the windward end will be further forward and its lift goes nowhere near the shrouds; on the other hand the leeward yard end will be abaft the mast and they'd have to slacken that lift to prevent it twanging against the forward shroud. I expect the only time both lifts are nice and taut is at anchor when the yards are squared for appearances, or maybe when running before the wind.

[Bill97]

Thanks Ian. My lifts do not run through the shrouds but twang (your great word) up against them. What I think I am going to do is put an eyebolt nearer the front of the top in the area where my tweezer is pointing and run the lift to it. The AOTS has the eyebolt under the top. Your opinion of this. 

Edited February 17 by Bill97

[Bill97]

Ok Ian this what I ended up with. What do you think?  Not tied down yet

[Ian_Grant]

Looks fine to me Bill. Blind leading the blind.

[alpayed]

Hi Guys.

It was vary rare to have a sail bent to the crossjack yard so it was never raised or lowered.

The crossjack yard did not carry Jeers. Only slings.

It would appear that the Crossjack yard used a Jeer block for the slings. It simply took the weight of the yard.

The Endeavour was right in the time of changes to the slings. AOTS book is correct for that time.

Just after this period the sling was similar to the fore and main slings without the block.

 

In this period there was a change in the lifts also. (Lees says 1805)

Instead of having a span around the cap it was attached to eye bolts closer to the fore part of the cap.

Endeavour probably had a span around the cap.

Keep in mind that the weight of the yard was taken mostly by the sling. The lifts were used to trim either end of the yard up.

When close hauled the end needing to be lifted (because it is being pulled downwards by the brace, weather leech and tack) and is forward and the lift pendent would clear the shrouds. 

The other end (touching the shroud) would be slack.

Hope this helps.

Regards

Allan

[Bill97]

Thanks Alan. I am reading through your comment a couple times for clarification and understanding. As you see in my comments the lifts were pressed tight against the first shroud with the crossjack squared. I moved the anchor point on the cap forward just a bit so the lifts barely miss touching the shrouds when taut. This anchor point is nearer where the top mast passes through the cap and less  wood thickness but I guess since they really did not carry weight this would be OK. 

Allan I am also curious while I have your attention, the Endeavour AOTS do s not show lifts for the topgallant yards. This is correct?

Ian we can both pick up some tips from Allan. 
Thanks both of you for your help. 

[alpayed]

The word lift can be a bit misleading. The halyards did the lifting. The lifts were there to hold the yard level when sailing. one side would not usually have tension on it. The side with tension would normally be the side of the yard rotated forward. (close hauled)

In this case it would then be clear of the shroud. the other side being slack. They were mainly to take the weight of the yard when lowered.

Harland notes that the lee lift (the one pointing backwards) rubbed on the foremost shroud and caused chaffing.

This is probably why a few years later the lifts were shifted to eye bolts on the fore part of the cap.

Although Lees states after 1805 I think the practice of using eye bolts in the cap probably occurred on some ships long before it became common practice.

 

On a ship like Endeavour there would not have been lifts on the topgallant yards.

The sail was often bent to the yard on deck before sending aloft.

Regards

Allan

 

[Bill97]

Thanks so much again Allan. I have never displayed one of my models this way but in cases where I have the sails unfurled I should have the yards rotated forward one side or the other, not squared?  As I glance around my “ship yard” I see all my ships have the yards squared, regardless of sail display and the lifts on both sides taut. This is not correct. Moving forward I should do that differently on future builds. On my current build, the Endeavour, I have all the sails furled and the yards squared. Should all the lifts be somewhat slack or taut?

[alpayed]

That's an interesting question. I guess the purpose of the model is to display all of the details of the ship in question.  Mission accomplished. To show actual function you would need to build a dioarma. They are an entirely different type of model.

You have produced a model featuring all of the details of the Endeavour and done really good job of it. It's time to sit back and enjoy the feeling of achievement. Well done.

Kind regards Allan.

[Bill97]

Allan I do enjoy a diorama. Here is my Heller Soleil Royal in a diorama. But as I look at it now, for authentic I should have had the yards turned a bit. 

[Bill97]

Slings, lifts, tyes, etc. installed at this point of the running rigging using a combination of OcCre instructions and the Endeavour AOTS. Thanks Ian and Allan for your advice.

[Bill97]

Well, as is often the case in my builds, I go two steps forward and and then one step back. I did the fore and main yard lifts following the OcCre instructions (photo 1).  Then looking through the AOTS for something else I discovered I had rigged them incorrectly (Photo 2). The OcCre instructions shows the lift coming back down to the end of the yard a second time and passing through the block that will be used for the sheets. The AOTS shows what I expect is the correct way. Removing the lifts and doing them correctly. 

[Bill97]

Marc you have any idea why the MSW site does this. I knew you didn’t react to my post 7 times in a 5 minute period 😀.  This happens from time to time. 

[Ian_Grant]

Marc's a speed reader; he read 7 of your posts in 7 minutes. 😏

[Bill97]

Oh that explains it! Thanks Ian 😀

[Bill97]

Ok gentlemen I need your help once again. I am looking at the rigging of the spritsail. In particular I am looking at line #7 in the first photo (spritsail course sheet) and trying to determine the belay points of both ends of this line. I have scoured the Endeavour AOTS and the OcCre instructions. Photo 2 from the AOTS shows one end of it tying off at point 12 on the side. I can’t find anything showing where the other end of the line ties off. In my other builds I checked both ends of the sheet are located near each other. On my Victory one end is secure and the other end passes through a hole in the bulwark where it then tied off to a cleat on the inside of the bulwark. 

[Bill97]

1 year anniversary today of the day I started my OcCre Endeavour. Will also be the day officially shown on my medical record that I lost my mind!  🤪

Rigging this beauty in accordance with the AOTS is a job not meant for the faint of heart. All those ropes will be tied down to their appropriate location. This is just the fire mast and the bowsprit. 

[Bill97]

Ian a general rigging question my friend. My plan at this point is not to add the staysails. I have seen several photos of the Endeavour replica and other square sail tall ships with out the staysail rigged. I assume this was often an option employed depending on conditions. My question is about what is done with the rigging lines that would be used on these sails?  Are they somehow attached to the sail when it is set and the ropes then dropped to the belay points. Or are the ropes always there just not attached to the staysails?  Similar question about the bowlines on the square sails. If I have them furled would they bowlines still be attached to the sail only extending from the end of the rolled up sail and still going to the belay points?  

[Ian_Grant]

Hi Bill. Good questions. I don't have definitive answers. I'll give you my impressions as formed by what little I know of seamanship. Two cents worth. Perhaps someone with more knowledge can correct me....

 

For the bowlines, I would expect that if in harbour, they would be removed to enhance a neat "harbour furl" of the sails. If at sea on a long blue-water voyage with the trade winds, perhaps not rigged either. If at sea in varying wind areas, then rigged.

 

Staysails? We would have the halyards, downhauls, and sheets to deal with. If a staysail was not bent, I would expect that the halyard and downhaul would be left in place if at sea as above. Obviously the sheets would be absent as they only attach to the sail. I'd guess the halyard and downhaul ends would be attached to each other or else both attached to a convenient point at the foot of the stay, If one wanted to bend the sail, one would haul it up to the foot of its stay and attach it by its hanks; then attach the halyard and downhaul to the head of the sail before hoisting it up. The "tack" would be a simple length of rope from the foot of the sail to a fixed point at the foot of the stay.

 

I believe the common thing to do on a model is either omit everything, or rig the halyard and downhaul as one continuous piece of thread or optionally as two pieces with their ends joined at a representative knot.

 

I looked in "Harland" and "Lees" for more info, but Lees is detailed in rig and short in explanations. Harland has staysail tidbits scattered throughout but nothing as detailed as what you ask, that I could find. Staysails always seem to be an afterthought in books; for instance Harland has an entire chapter on studding sails but no section on staysails. Even Longridge as you may recall lacks his usual detail when it comes to staysails.

 

Yours will be a beautiful model either way.

 

Regards,

Ian

Edited Sunday at 03:26 AM by Ian_Grant

[Bill97]

Thanks my friend. I am going with omit everything then. Just the sails I have furled to the yards. Still have to add the angled one on the back connected to the mizzen mast (forget right now what it is called). 

[Ian_Grant]

"Spanker" or "Driver". 😉

[Bill97]

Spent some time adding cleats to the shrouds. OcCre has the lines going down to the center “thing”. AOTS has some of the rigging lines going to cleats attached to shrouds. 

Edited Saturday at 06:21 PM by Bill97

[Hubac's Historian]

On 2/21/2025 at 12:01 PM, Bill97 said:

Marc you have any idea why the MSW site does this. I knew you didn’t react to my post 7 times in a 5 minute period 😀.  This happens from time to time. 

I suppose my phone/identity has been busier than I’ve been - that’s alarming on several fronts.

 

Of course I am following the build, Bill, but not on that moment-to-moment degree.

 

I have to figure out how to put that shadow-energy to work for me 🤔😀

[Bill97]

Same here my friend. 😀

Have a fantastic weekend. Hope your dad is doing well. 

[Bill97]

Hey Allan, or anyone who might know.  How is this thing rigged?  In the AOTS this is the only diagram and reference to it. The OcCre instructions only show how to make it and where ti put it. No explanation in either as to what it is and what it is used for. It is called a Fish Davit. It is constructed in such a way that it can pivot inboard or outboard as in the photo.  I have it made and installed on my ship but don’t know for sure what to do with it now. My other ships have a pair of davits used for the boats that are stationary. On the Endeavour there is just this one on each side.  I cannot find reference to show where the thimble in the end of line 5 (short pendant with fish-hook) goes. 

[Kenchington]

A fish davit is used when fishing an anchor and has nothing to do with the ship's boats. In the era you are modelling, it did not pivot anywhere but it was kept stowed away until needed, when it was placed as you have shown. To explain a bit further:

 

When weighing anchor, the capstan's pull on the cable brings the anchor's ring to the hawse hole. Then the cat block (lower block on the tackle at the cathead) is hook to the anchor's ring and the anchor lifted clear of the water, until suspended beneath the cathead. However, to secure the anchor for sea, it is necessary to lift its flukes until the shank is horizontal -- the step known as "fishing" the anchor. That lift is by the fish tackle, which leads to the foremast head (maybe fore topmast head: I haven't checked). There would be much trouble if such a huge strain came onto a rope that was dragged across the rail of the ship, so the fish tackle needs to be pushed outboard a bit and passed over a sheave. And that is the function of the fish davit.

 

Trevor

[Bill97]

Thanks Trevor. So if I have my anchors weighed (is that the correct way to say it) I should have the fish tackle employed?  I should rig the large hook into the ring of the anchor and then take the rope up to either the foremast or fore top mast head?  I am assuming there would be the occasion where a rigging line would lay across the top of it as in my photo?  The two lines are the spritsail clew (sail furled causes clew to be more inboard) and the fore course sail tack. Or I expect the tack may pass under it since it would be stationary unlike the spritsail clew that would move with the sail unfurled. 

[alpayed]

This may helpanchor stowage_1.pdfanchor stowage_1.pdfanchor stowage_2.pdfanchor stowage_4-1.pdf

[Kenchington]

I don't think there is any one right answer, Bill. Any ship has a lot of small, movable gear that is usually stowed away and so not shown in a model. The fish davit is one of the few big things that got moved away when not in immediate use. One answer would be to put it in its stowed position. You could show it in use but that would move your model towards being a diorama, rather than a formalized display of the ship. Or you could have it rigged but not in use. Your choice.

 

To me, "weighing anchor" is the whole process of getting an anchor up off the seabed. There are a number of possible end-points of that process:

 

1: It's not often seen in models or paintings but lightly manned merchant vessels might hold an anchor on its cable, just under the hawsehole or at the forefoot, with the stock and ring awash -- at some height where it won't be banging the hull. That saves the effort of going further, while keeping the anchor ready for immediate use. Good for times when shifting berths within a protected anchorage or if creeping along the edge of a sandbank.

 

2: Next up is to hook the cat block into the anchor's ring and lift it to hang vertically below the cathead. In the image you just posted, you have the cattackle rigged for that, though the anchor has been moved into the third option.

 

3: Third choice is to bring the fish tackle into use. IIRC its hook goes around the shank of the anchor but slides as the shank comes horizontal, until the hook ends up caught under one of the flukes. (Later anchors could have a "gravity band" at their centre of gravity. A fish block hooked there would lift without the sliding.) I have never heard of an anchor being left suspended by cat and fish tackles but perhaps it happened sometimes. More often, once the shank was horizontal and the anchor up sufficiently, a lashing was passed and the fish davit and tackle cleared away. That would leave the anchor much as you have it.

 

In the era you are modelling, ships would carry their bower anchors "on the bows" like that, at least when "in soundings" (over a bottom of less than 100 fathoms depth) or at risk of running onto some steep-sided island somewhere.

 

4: Later, there was a preference for getting the flukes and shank up on deck, where they could lie flat, while the stock remained outboard (and vertical). That way, the anchors were not banging around as the ship was tossed around in waves.

 

5: Some anchors were brought aboard and stowed entirely on deck. That was especially the smaller ones (stream and kedge) but, in earlier times, also the outsized sheet anchor -- too heavy to trouble with except in dire emergency. Stowing that aboard meant disassembling the stock, until iron anchors with folding stocks became accepted in the larger sizes. By the 19th century, ships bound on long voyages could bring their bower anchors aboard also, once clear of any risk of running onto beach, sandbank, reef or rock.

 

6: Then there had been a time when anchors and cables were unreliable and a ship might carry a half-dozen of each. To keep weight low down, some of the spare anchors might be lain on the ballast in the hold.

 

You get to choose among those on artistic grounds, with nobody to criticize your choice. All are historically valid, at least for some ships and some times. If you want to get more specific, you could go in search of a log or journal of Endeavour's voyage and see what was done at some point in time.

 

 

Trevor