rigging in front of yard arms?

[paul ron]

im scratch building the 1851 flying fish clipper and was wondering if its taboo to have rigging running over the front of the yardarms below? i have been looking at a ship at south street nyc, the wavertree a bark, and see ropes passing over the arm below. its hard to see which lines they are from street level. to me it doesnt make sense to do that because it will be under the sails attached to that arm. behind the arm seems a more logical route.

 

what do you guys think?

[Jaager]

Sails are not attached to yard arms.  They are attached to yards.  The arms are the sections at the end of the larger yards with a step down diameter. 

 

Yardarms have popular notice because naval vessels attached the hangman's rope there for executions.  A body hanging from a line at the yardarm would be over water, not the deck.  The poo and **** would not foul the deck.

 

Running rigging from higher yards and sails in front a lower yard would impede that yard's ability to swing and pinch the sail.

It would no matter on a museum ship that is essentially a statue.  It would require some special occasion for such a ship to even have enough manpower to set and furl even one sail - it seems to me.

[barkeater]

Amazing some of the **** you learn here.😁

[Dr PR]

Buntlines were rigged in front of the yard.

 

The lines attached to the bolt rope at the foot of the sail. From there they ran up the front of the sail to blocks or thimbles attached to the front of the yard. After passing through the block/thimble the line passed over the yard to another block fastened under the top, above and behind the yard. From there the line ran down to the deck.

 

There were several variations with different types and numbers of blocks. But I think in all cases the buntlines ran up the forward side of the sail and yard.

[allanyed]

In addition to Phil's post, the leech lines were also run up the front of the sail.  I looked at the drawings on page 72 of The Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War by James Lees and there is one drawing that appears to have a mistake.  See below.

Allan

[paul ron]

ok so rewording... the yard's arm is the end of a yard, got it.

 

so what lines are running straight down the front central area of yards i see on the south street nyc ship wavertree? as stated before, i thought running rigging (aside bunts n leeches that are suposed to be infront of sails) shouldnt run over the front of yards? 

 

btw the wavertree has no sails, nor is it fully rigged or even has the associated hardware for bunts n leeches... it barely has any rigging except esentials... its a stripped down rust bucket tourists dump money into just to walk the deck. but i do see ropes over the front of the yards. isnt that taboo?

 

my clipper and the wavertree are not ships of war. 

 

better?

 

 

 

 

Edited May 19 by paul ron

[Gregory]

2 hours ago, paul ron said:

but i do see ropes over the front of the yards. isnt that taboo?

 

It depends on which lines they are.

 

 

When it comes to rigging there is really no such thing as "taboo", it is either right or wrong.

 

The rigging is what ships of war and clippers have most in common as far as function goes, and it is not that different.

 

The rigging is part of a machine.  The components have to be in the place they belong in order for the machine to work.

If it is not a working machine, then there could be any number of out of place elements.

[Roger Pellett]

One of people who rigged Wavertree used to be a MSW member.  He went by the name of Jersey City Frankie.  He has not posted for several years but if you are interested you should be able to find a series of his posts about rigging her.  Use the Search function.

The clippers, and Wavertree, were tramps.  Unlike the packets that sailed to England from New York, they didn’t sail on fixed schedules.  When in port they would advertise for cargos and sail when full. Stays in port could be lengthy depending on economic conditions.  It was, therefore, common to strike sails and rigging not required to handle yards below.  Sails and rigging were expensive and subject to damage by the elements.  Labor was cheap.

 

 

Re; The rust bucket comment: Visiting New York sometime between 2015 and 2019 I made a point of visiting South Street Seaport.  To say the least, I was disappointed.  Exhibits in what is supposed to be the museum itself were minimal.  I thought that Wavertree was nicely restored but I don’t recall being able to visit other ships.  Unless something dramatic has happened in the last five years, New York still lacks a first class museum dealing with it’s important maritime heritage.

 

Roger

Edited May 19 by Roger Pellett

[paul ron]

but was rigging over the front of yards done and what could they be? ... again, besides bunts n leeches that are suposed to run on the fore side of sails. the rigging im seeing would definately foul with sails over it.

 

the south street museum has evolved into a yuppie tourist trap. at night its just a large space of loud music and younginz drinking... hardly anything left of the maratime theme with expensive coffee shops n over priced restauraunts occupying the old run down buildings. i see lots of gutting of buildings only to turn them into bars or commercial space for clothes n chochkies... not restorations. hardly a sign of the old fish market left too.

 

the Wavertree replaced the Peking... the former rust bucket in that space. tons of money poured into that one too and was scrapped not long ago. those black holes in the water make alot of money, hardly any of it makes it to the cause from what i see as a regular down there. come back in 10 years and nothing will change other than coffee shops n bars junk shops and another rust bucket with new names. its an embarrasment for a city as big with such rich maratine history n so many vistors. 

 

ill look up jersey frankie. 

 

 

 

[Roger Pellett]

Paul,  My thoughts exactly.  I believe that Peking was not scrapped but was sent to Hamburg, Germany and restored.

 

Roger

[Gregory]

1 hour ago, paul ron said:

but was rigging over the front of yards done and what could they be? ...

I think we would nee to see a picture to make an informed response.

 

I googled up quite a few images with " wavertree ship new york ",  and I really didn't see anything that looked out of place.

Edited May 19 by Gregory

[allanyed]

2 hours ago, Roger Pellett said:

Unless something dramatic has happened in the last five years, New York still lacks a first class museum dealing with it’s important maritime heritage.

While not a museum, the New York Yacht Club has a LOT of schooner models that are exquisite.  It has been some years so things may have changed but I stopped by and told them about a model I was building and asked if I could visit even though I was not a member.  They took me to the room with all the models and left me alone to sketch away.  At that time, no photography was allowed, but I suspect with everyone having a cell phone that may have changed.  Definitely worth a try if schooners and racing yachts are of interest.  I just checked the web and found the following:

The New York Yacht Club offers tours of the Model Room at the New York City club house and the exterior grounds of Harbour Court in Newport, RI are open to the public on the last Tuesday of each month, with the exception of August and December in New York, and January, August and December at Harbour Court.

Allan

[paul ron]

when i go to South Street this week, ill try to get a picture if i have time between ferries.

 

[Roger Pellett]

Allan,  Thanks!
 

I’ve been to the New York Yacht Club’s Model Room.  SNAME (The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers) has their annual meeting every fall.  I’ve never been a SNAME member but the University of Michigan’s Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Department always has an event for their alumni during the week that SNAME meets.  One year SNAME was meeting in New York and Michigan had their event in the model room.  I used that opportunity to make a sales call nearby and drove into the city.  As can be imagined, it’s a fabulous collection.

 

Roger

[rwiederrich]

On 5/18/2024 at 10:46 AM, paul ron said:

im scratch building the 1851 flying fish clipper and was wondering if its taboo to have rigging running over the front of the yardarms below? i have been looking at a ship at south street nyc, the wavertree a bark, and see ropes passing over the arm below. its hard to see which lines they are from street level. to me it doesnt make sense to do that because it will be under the sails attached to that arm. behind the arm seems a more logical route.

 

what do you guys think?

Bunt line and gaskets were used over the front of yards and sails.  Gaskets were used to secure sails during their furling.

These images of my scratch built Clipper Glory of the Seas....shows this.

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

1 hour ago, rwiederrich said:

Bunt line and gaskets were used over the front of yards and sails.  Gaskets were used to secure sails during their furling.

These images of my scratch built Clipper Glory of the Seas....shows this.

  'Just saw an antique nautical painting where a clipper's furled sails had the 'ears' relatively close to the mast ... and other photos show them close to the yard ends, as well as near the middle.  Is this due to where the blocks for the clew lines happen to be placed under the yard?  (given that there were variations in how individual ships were rigged)  

[rwiederrich]

Johnny...it has to do if the sail is rigged military style...with the clews to the mast or commercial with them rigged as you see on the Glory of the Seas.  There is a name for both, but I can't recall them off the top of my head at this time.

 

It is true that the rigging on commercial vessels as a matter of the captains, or owner's preference.

 

Rob

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

22 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

Johnny...it has to do if the sail is rigged military style...with the clews to the mast or commercial with them rigged as you see on the Glory of the Seas.  There is a name for both, but I can't recall them off the top of my head at this time.

 

It is true that the rigging on commercial vessels as a matter of the captains, or owner's preference.

 

Rob

  Thanks.  I forgot about 'clews to the mast', and a portion of a photo of the painting (seem's the Admiral took it after I stared at the artwork) is pasted below.  

 

  I'm tempted to go back and buy the restored painting, as it was about 2' x 3' and priced at $145.

Edited May 28 by Snug Harbor Johnny

[rwiederrich]

Indeed....clewed to the mast simply meant you furled the sails up close to the mast and when they unfurled the clews would fall and be pulled outward.  this tended to make the sails bunch up at the parrel point.

However commercial ships generally used the other furling method which furled the sail directly up, leaving the clew as presented in this image.   the sail would fall and the clews would be in place outboard.  I suspected that if you were an ole Navy man...you'd furl clews  to the mast......

 

From my research it appears that clewing to the mast on commercial ships was done mostly before the double topsail was introduced...as depicted in the image you presented.

 

Rob 

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

2 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Indeed....clewed to the mast simply meant you furled the sails up close to the mast and when they unfurled the clews would fall and be pulled outward.  this tended to make the sails bunch up at the parrel point.

However commercial ships generally used the other furling method which furled the sail directly up, leaving the clew as presented in this image.   the sail would fall and the clews would be in place outboard.  I suspected that if you were an ole Navy man...you'd furl clews  to the mast......

 

From my research it appears that clewing to the mast on commercial ships was done mostly before the double topsail was introduced...as depicted in the image you presented.

 

Rob 

  Looking at the portion of the picture the Admiral took, I can see that there IS bunching at the parrel points.  Now (looking at the entire image taken) the steam frigate appears to be a Navy ship (white stripe with dark gun ports) that is flying the American flag from the spanker boom.  I've tried to expand the image of the flag - and the resolution only goes so far, but there is either a 5x6 or a 5x7 array - corresponding to 30 or 35 states, respectively ... another reason to go back and have a close look at the original.  (Note to Paul: this does seem to connect with the thread topic of rigging in front of the yard, so I hope it is of interest.)

  Wisconsin was the 30th state admitted in 1848, and Nevada the 36th in 1864 (ignoring states thought to be in rebellion at the time), so that might be the 'envelope' for the time depicted in the painting.  I'll have to do research on this type of Navy ship build then (having the domes under which there are a paddle wheels).  She flies a 'courtesy' flag on a fore mast back stay that is a "Red Duster" for Canada (a red flag with the union jack in the top corner), and also a blue pennant I need to get better detail on.  In the background are fishing schooners such as seen in the 1937 B&W film 'Captains Courageous', so my guess is that the Navy ship is in fishing grounds off Newfoundland ... ?

 

  The composition stands out as an 'action shot' - not the 'typical' sort where an owner's named ship is represented.  I'm not about to let this rest, unless the item is gone by the time we can get back there.