Venetian Carrack or Cocha by woodrat - FINISHED - 1/64

[druxey]

Now that is a milestone of progress! Looks great, Dick. My only concern is lowering and raising the spar past the wooldings. One would need to loosen the parrel lines considerably, I would think.

[woodrat]

2 hours ago, druxey said:

Now that is a milestone of progress! Looks great, Dick. My only concern is lowering and raising the spar past the wooldings. One would need to loosen the parrel lines considerably, I would think.

Indeed so, which is the clever part of parrels. The wooden bearings ride over the ropes like an all-terrain vehicle. 

Thanks for all the likes.

Carl you wont have to wait long.

Dick

[Louie da fly]

Dick, every time I think it can't get any better you come up with something new and amazing!

 

Really looking forward to seeing her spread her wings.

 

Steven

 

PS: Thanks for the comment on the dromon

Edited August 18, 2017 by Louie da fly

[woodrat]

See how the mains'l sets...........

 

 

 

 

 

Dick

Edited August 20, 2017 by woodrat

[CaptainSteve]

WoW !! I'd always considered those crazily billowing sails in medieval paintings to be mere artistic licence. But your research and work has shown the truth behind the myths.

Outstanding work, Dick.

Edited August 20, 2017 by CaptainSteve

[cog]

Magnificent DIck. It exceeds my expectations ... far!

[druxey]

Well done, Dick. Impressive!

[woodrat]

Thanks Carl and Druxey. Now to the mysteries of the mediterranean lateen rig. As the ship is running before the wind, should the mizzen be furled? Some illustrations show the mizzen yard turned almost horizontal for running.

But this may be because the vessel has the wind slightly on its quarter and the mizzen is being used for steering. Sailors please help.

Others show it furled.

 

 

Dick

Edited August 21, 2017 by woodrat

[cog]

On the last image you can see part of a storm wall(?) So the ship might be entering harbour ... less sail ... whilst the other one seems to be at sea (no speed restrictions?) Just a thought ...

[Roger Pellett]

That mainsail is basically a spinnaker that is only going to take the ship one way- downwind.  The mizzen could only be there to balance the rig on some points of sail.

 

Going directly downwind, the ship would sail well without the mizzen and by furling it you would minimize the risk of an unintended gybe.  Bearing up to sail on a broad reach the mizzen could be set to give the helmsman some control.  On any higher point of sail, anchor and wait for more favorable wind.

 

These ships must of been extremely dangerous to sail in any kind of blow with the danger of rounding up and capsizing ever present.

 

 

Roger

[woodrat]

Thanks Roger and Carl. That clears it up for me. I will furl the mizzen and foresail in the interests of safety!

Cheers

Dick

[shipmodel]

Hi Dick - 

 

I am thoroughly enjoying your build and especially your solution to the problem of the billowed mainsail and bonnets.  I think you have done about as well as possible in the scale that you are using.

 

However, I think you may have mounted it a bit too low.  Using the colored illustration that you provided, doesn't it seem that the vertical trench in the mainsail is caused by it billowing against the mainstay?  This is what I have seen in other illustrations.  You could lift the yard up the mast until you get this configuration, which would also give the bonnets more room.  Or I could be completely off base on this . . . LOL

 

Whatever you decide, it is a beautiful model.

 

Dan 

[Mark Pearse]

Hi Dick

 

Amazing work, & the sails are beautifully done.

 

I'm not familiar with these vessels but I have some sailing experience. The lateen sails on these pictures are very different in size, it looks to me that the larger stern sail in the painting would screen the main sail but also tend to make steering the vessel more difficult because it's large - the relationship between the sails looks different in the ink drawing. Regarding the general use of these sails, I would think that if you were entering a harbour, you would most definitely have the stern sail up, as that sail in particular would give you the ability to round up into the breeze to slow down or stop. On a different note, the mainsail shape is very interesting, they have a huge upwards billow that doesn't really increase the forwards thrust much - it's possible that the upward billow on the mainsail is intentional to help counteract the tendency of the bows to bury into the water, which would make the boat harder to steer & slower. Why they might need to do this I'm not sure, but the hull shape doesn't look to have as much forwards buoyancy as your more classic square rigged vessel, the buoyancy would counteract the downwards effect. An unrelated example might be helpful to see this - in early Sydney skiffs their spinnakers were set in a way partly to give lift & keep the bows up downwind - the situation is very different, but the size of the billow itself doesn't add power, but it changes the direction of the thrust. See below, a 6 foot skiff (copy of a type from early 1900s) - very very different, but maybe there's a connection....in the photo it's really easy to see how they are trying to stop the downwards effect on the bows.

 

Mark

 

[woodrat]

Thanks, Dan. The median "trench" in the mainsail is caused by a lanyard attached to a median boltrope in the sail  (you can see two of these lanyards passing around the mainmast, one to the base of the mainsail and one to the lower bonnet). The purpose of these is to pull the centre of the sail in so as to prevent contact with the mainstay (note the wrappings, probably of leather or old sailcloth on the mainstay) and consequent abrasion of the sail. I have deliberately set the yard low as, in many illustrations, the sail billows upwards from the yard as a spinnaker would (please see Mark's valuable comments in the previous post in this regard).

 

Mark, thank you for the sailing explanation. I had not thought that forward buoyancy would be so important. I think you are right. Your pic of the Sydney skiff shows the upward billowing of the spinnaker nicely.

Cheers

Dick

[kees de mol]

Sails look very nice on this beautifull modell

[Louie da fly]

Lovely work, Dick.

 

Steven

[shipmodel]

Dick - 

 

I see what you mean.  It makes more sense than having the sail chafe against the mainstay.  I am no sailor, and did not realize that spinnaker type sails billow so far upward.  Thanks for adding to my knowledge.

 

Looking forward to the completion of this lovely work.

 

Dan

 

 

[Mark Pearse]

a possible additional reason for the central sheeting of the mainsail is that with such a huge & powerful sail, the third restraint would reduce the load on each by spreading the same load between three points instead of two. Maybe you can also control the sail more easily as well.

[woodrat]

I have done a bit of pondering over the last several weeks while working on the lateen mizzen. It just does not seem right! The more I look at the model and the Zorzi Trombetta illustrations, the more I believe that this vessel should have ONE mast. Based on venetian contemporary illustrations (L R Martin: The Art and Archeology of venetian ships and boats fig 158 page 186) It would appear that only about 40% of seagoing merchant vessels in the Venetian fleet in 1445 had more than one mast. Also, looking at the forecastle in the Trombetta drawing,

I cannot see how a foremast is practicable. As this illustration shows no masts and another carrack from the same book shows a single mast,

I feel I should depict this nave as a single master.

 

Later in the fifteenth century, mixed rig 3 masters became more usual

Dick

Edited November 22, 2017 by woodrat

[cog]

"I have done a bit of pondering over the last several weeks" looks more like months. It has been reather silent, Dick.

With regards to your masting problem: If you feel the evidence is thus, limit yourself to a single mast, or if you have multiple installed, pretend it's from a later aera ...

[Louie da fly]

Well, perhaps you're right, Dick. I've collected quite a few contemporary pictures of single masted (and two-masted) "proto-carracks" and though as a general rule the single-masters seem to be somewhat more basic (with less superstructure, for example), there are plenty of exceptions - three-masters with simple superstructure and single-masters with the whole box and dice. And enough from this part of the century - and later - showing what are obviously meant to be cutting edge ships (such as the invasion fleet at Rhodes) with only a single mast. (Note, wherever I've been able, I've included the date and place of the picture in its title - you can see it by hovering the cursor over the picture).

 

 

 

Regarding the impracticality of the foremast, I'm not sure where the problem lies, but it seems to me that many foremasts of the time were thin and short and seem to be a bit of an afterthought. As I think you mentioned earlier in this build log, some of them were very far forward - so far forward that they must have been founded on the stempost rather than the keel.

 

 

 

 

 

One at least is shown off-centre

 

Others were thick and stumpy,

 

 

and yet others quite respectable masts in their own right.

 

 

Obviously, the date of the representation is important - presumably the later the picture the more likely the ship is likely to have a foremast, and the more likely it is to be fairly substantial. And a lot of these pictures are several decades after your own representation. However, I think the further north you go, the more behind the times the ships are likely to be - Venice was at the cutting edge of ship design at the time. So a later picture from, say, Flanders, is likely to show what was common decades earlier in Venice.

 

However, consider also that in 1445 at the time of your model, there were quite a decent number of three masters (40% is still quite a few) and that it seems unlikely that the Doge of Venice, who could easily afford the maritime equivalent of a Rolls Royce would content himself with a Corolla, particularly at a time when one's prestige was so dependent on a conspicuous display of wealth.

 

Anyhow, this is all just for your consideration. I'm sure you'll work out something you're happy with and for us all to admire.

 

Steven

 

Edited November 26, 2017 by Louie da fly

[mtaylor]

Steven,

On those foremasts... perhaps they were used more for steering than "sail power" much like the spritsail on the forward end of the bowsprit of around the 1600's such as on Wasa/Vasa and others of that era?

[Louie da fly]

Yes, that makes sense. Perhaps only later did they start thinking of the extra masts in terms of providing extra power rather than just aid in steering. Certainly, as the fore and mizzen masts and sails got bigger the main course got smaller, providing a more balanced play of forces (though that's not necessarily cause and effect).

 

But then how did they mount those slim foremasts (apparently) on the stempost, without the mast just ripping out in the first big blow?

 

Steven

Edited November 26, 2017 by Louie da fly

[mtaylor]

14 minutes ago, Louie da fly said:

 

 

But then how did they mount those slim foremasts (apparently) on the stempost, without the mast just ripping out in the first big blow?

 

Steven

Short answer.. lots of ropes going to the forestays.   Have a look at any of the Vasa builds and other vessels from that era.  

[woodrat]

As I am part way through the building of the mizzen, I will persist and see what it turns out as. Thanks for the new pics, Steven, What was the provenance of the last pic, the four-master? It has a colonnaded covered walkway from the forecastle to the waist like the nave of Michael of Rhodes (a single-master by the way! He died in 1445). It also has at least two extra masts for what appear to be some sort of studdingsails!! Weird. Was it some sort of fanciful dream-ship? Or an experiment?

the nave of Michael of Rhodes

As you imply, I doubt Zorzi Trombetta would have sketched a humble coaster rather than a stately argosy of the Doge with all the bells and whistles.

Dick

[Louie da fly]

Dick, I got it from Pinterest, a source that is both valuable and occasionally extremely frustrating for its lack of attributions. It is ascribed to Gregorio Dati, a Florentine merchant and diarist who lived from 1363 to 1436, (wikipedia entry at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorio_Dati ) and is apparently held in the New York Public Library, Spencer Collection MS MA 110. It is only vaguely dated (c.1400, which seems to be definitely too early). It could be an illustration from one of his books, but seems definitely later than when they were written.

 

Regarding the strange "stunsails", the have me flummoxed. A very pretty picture, but I have no idea what connection it has with reality.

 

There are several navi tonde (I think that's the plural) with only a single extra mast - the Reixach carrack has a mizzen but no foremast and the picture with the blue tent (above) and the picture immediately above it both show carracks with a foremast but no mizzen.

 

I think you're right to do the mizzen at the very least. As far as I can recall, you built the upper works on the assumption that they'd have to make room for a mizzen mast.

 

It's a beautiful build, I'm really looking forward to seeing her complete.

 

Steven

[woodrat]

Apologies for being AWOL. I have been working on the mizzen rig and hope to finish it soon. The mizzen yard is almost as long as the mainyard but not so heavy. I have made the sail using Silkspan. I stained the Silskpan with tea. The sail structure was imitated using pencil to imitate stitching, overlaid with narrow Silkspan strips. The glue was artists matte varnish. Bolt ropes were glued on with wood glue. The sail was shaped and "doped" with the varnish to stiffen it. I have also had to rethink the half deck. More to come ............

 

 

 

 

the mainsail from below

 

 

Merry Xmas all

Dick

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 19, 2017 by woodrat

[druxey]

And the season's greetings to you as well, Dick. I look forward to seeing how you solve the half deck issue.

[Louie da fly]

Good to see you back, Dick. The mizzen sail looks very good. Do you find the silkspan easy to work with? It seems to be the only fabric fine enough to simulate sails properly, and I've been thinking of using it myself when the time comes..

 

Merry Christmas to you and yours.

 

Steven

[woodrat]

14 hours ago, Louie da fly said:

 Do you find the silkspan easy to work with? It seems to be the only fabric fine enough to simulate sails properly

 

Steven

I am still learning to use it. The thin Silkspan which I used can be delicate and should be carefully cut ( I use a guarded razor blade). When wet it can tear easily. But the thin Silkspan really hangs well. Artists medium or matte varnish is a good adhesive and resists subsequent rewetting. I like the appearance of seams produced by Silkspan strips pasted over pencilled dashed lines. Silkspan is bright white and I find that cold tea produces a nice canvas like appearance. The staining should follow the application of the seams as this produces a slight bulging of the "strips" of sailcloth between the seams (if that makes sense).

 

21 hours ago, druxey said:

 I look forward to seeing how you solve the half deck issue.

My previous deck over the accommodation in the half deck did not allow crew access to the shrouds. Some illustrations seem to show this as completely decked over right out to the sides but this cannot be so if the shrouds are inboard.

I have a cunning plan which will work and is shown in the above picture

 

Dick