Furled , unfurled or no sails -Preference

[Bill97]

On my OcCre Endeavour I am going with all the sails furled on the yards with a lot of the rigging (clew, sheet, and tack) attached along with the buntlines rolled up with the sail. All the lines I am adding are tied at the appropriate belay point. My curiosity is the staysails. I see a number of photos of ships in this configuration. What comes of the rigging lines for the stay sails if the sail is not rigged to the stay?  Are they just not there?  I am trying to imagine the crew setting the stay sails including the rigging. How did they do it?

[paul ron]

it sure does get crowded with a full complement of rigging. ive got a similar problem with bunt lines on a clipper, flying fish 1851 1:96.

 

im not putting sails on, but i am trying to put her in a state of readyness, with no sails. i can belay the bunts to their pins, but what to do with the lines at the blocks on the yards? i decided on a solution of putting a bundle at each block so if sails were to be put up, the bunts are ready to be tied on.

 

so im watching for your solution because ill be where you are soon with the same question.  🤔

Edited Friday at 01:22 PM by paul ron

[Kenchington]

5 hours ago, Bill97 said:

My curiosity is the staysails. I see a number of photos of ships in this configuration. What comes of the rigging lines for the stay sails if the sail is not rigged to the stay?  Are they just not there?  I am trying to imagine the crew setting the stay sails including the rigging. How did they do it?

 

Short answer is "it depends". Depends for one thing on how long it will be before the sail is set again. Then there is a difference between a staysail properly so called, meaning one with its luff attached (by hanks or lacing) to one of the permanent stays of the standing rigging, and a sail set "flying", with no attachment to the standing rigging.

 

If the staysail is hanked or laced to a stay, it would only be removed as a maintenance task, not in setting and furling sail during a voyage. Harland ("Seamanship in the Age of Sail") says that the quick way was to release one end of the stay, pass it through the hanks, then re-attach and tighten the stay -- not something to be done at sea if you can avoid it. The alternative is to cut the lashings of all the hanks, then bring hanks and sail to the stay and replace the lashings. That can be a long job. (Been there, done that ... or rather assisted the sailmaker as he did it, perched on the tip of Stad Amsterdam's jibboom.) So a staysail would not normally be removed from the stay and all of its running gear would remain attached, with the ends belayed as normal.

 

Sails set flying (like the original "flying jibs", before that came to mean just the most forward headsail) would normally be brought down and stowed somewhere safe when not set, unless there was an intention to set them again soon. What were left were the halliard, a running stay that supplemented the sail's luff rope in bearing the various loads, a downhaul, sheets (with blocks and pendants) and (according to Harland) a "clewrope" for controlling the sail's clew until the sheets were attached. The clewrope would presumably be stowed somewhere convenient when not in immediate use, whether the sail was set or not. I'll guess that the normal thing for the others was to fasten their ends somewhere convenient, such as the bowsprit cap for a flying jib's gear (saving the need to send a man out on the jibboom), then hauled taut and belayed as normal. However, if it was expected that the sail would not be needed again for some time, all of its running rigging was most likely unrove, coiled up and stowed away safely. When needed again, a man would be sent aloft with a heaving line. Once at the halliard block, say, he would lower the weighted end of the heaving line to the deck (ensuring that it fell into the appropriate gaps amongst other rigging -- which might need other men to guide the end as it went down, such as through the lubber hole in the top). On deck, the halliard could be bent on and then hauled up to the block, rove through and its end passed down once more (again through the right gaps). It the gear to be sent aloft was too heavy for one man to haul up, he went up with a gantline and its block, rigged that, passed both ends down to the deck and as many as needed could then haul the weight aloft.

 

If that all sounds like a lot of work, remember that the jibboom would have been run in when the flying jib's running gear was unrove, so another bunch of men would be hauling the heel rope, passing a fid, setting up shrouds (if any) and more. Handling a square-rigger is a lot of work and more so with earlier rigs. (Much of the evolution of rigs was to allow ship-handling with less labour and hence less labour cost!)

 

 

But how to represent that at scale? That's the model-maker's choice!

 

 

Trevor

 

P.S.: Those who rely on Harland's book (and I do), might be interested in one snippet: John H. hold me that, when he wrote it, he had never been to sea under square rig. He worked entirely from contemporary written accounts!

Edited Friday at 05:55 PM by Kenchington

[Bill97]

Thank you Trevor. That is interesting and helpful. So are you saying I should set the stay sails and the jib to their stay and have the furled as well instead of leaving them off the ship?

[Bill97]

Paul have you been over to my Endeavour build to see how this turns out?

[Kenchington]

It is not for me (or anyone else) to tell you what you should do. Unless you aim for a waterline model, set in a diorama (with a full crew on board, along with the cow, pigs, chickens and everything else carried on a long voyage!), ship models are always stylized reproductions that necessarily leave out a lot of detail. What you include and what you don't are artistic choices.

 

However, you have done such a nice job of furling the squaresails (with the clews showing properly, "pig's ear" fashion, beside the bunt!) that my choice, if it was mine to make (which it isn't) would be to show the fore-and-aft canvas furled also. I would leave off any sails set flying, as they would never be furled at full-size (just tied down with stops, if there was a temporary need to have them down before re-setting). But I can't say how the staysails and mizzen would have been furled on your ship. I vaguely remember reading that the staysails with knocks (where the leading edge has a vertical bit after leaving the stay) were furled into a tube-like form, hanging where the knock would be when the sail was set.

 

Don't rely on my memories, though. Take a long look at contemporary paintings of ships and see how the sails were presented.

 

And one final point, while I'm writing, though you may be well aware of it already:

 

The idea behind any furl is to have the sail present a smooth, hard surface, so that there are no edges for the wind to get hold of and shake to pieces. You pick on one part of the sail to make a "skin", fold everything else into that (everything you can get in, maybe with clew blocks etc. outside), beat it all down hard (literally pound it with a fist, in the case of double-ought storm canvas on a big ship), then tie it in place with the gaskets. With a sail fastened to a yard or boom, the skin has to be made of the piece nearest to the spar -- the head of a squaresail or foot of a Bermudan, for example. There's a bit more choice with a staysail. I tend to use the foot but a staysail with a knock might better be furled inside the leading edge of the knock.

 

Trevor

[Bill97]

Thanks again Trevor. A lot of good information and advice. I know it is probably silly on my part but ever since I became a MSW member sharing my builds I try to be conscious of some accuracy. I envision posting photos of my build and a much more knowledgeable member saying t themselves “that is wrong, a ship would never be rigged like that”.  Ian has been my go to for advice for several years. Appreciate all the help and advice you guys share. I know my furled sails need to have the “skin” pulled up tight over the cloth and I should adjust mine accordingly. 
 

By the way whenever I have a comment on my build from someone I had not seen before I like to check their profile to see where they live. Love your part of Canada. Been to Halifax a number of times. Especially like Peggy’s Cove. 

Edited Saturday at 04:20 AM by Bill97

[Ab Hoving]

I'm not sure if I understood the mainstream of this thread. Sails on a static model look unnatural? I beg you pardon?

In my humble opinion sails and flags are the few items that can bring life into a model. A picture says more than a thousand words:

 

Model ship building is too nice a hobby to be frustrated by rules, laws and frozen opinions. Make what you like. It's the pleasure in building what it is all about.

[Bill97]

Ab are these photos of some of your builds?  Absolutely beautiful!

[Ab Hoving]

They are @Bill97,

I just show them to prove that there are no limitations in model building than the ones other people in their wisdom try to convince you of.

By the way in case you didn't know, the models are all made of paper and card and the flags are from tissue paper (but the sails are of course made of very thin linen).

[Bill97]

Did not know that Ab. That is fascinating. How are you able together the paint so nice. I thought they were wood. 

[Ab Hoving]

Haha, here come the commercials:

\https://seawatchbooks.com/products/dutch-17th-century-ship-models-in-paper

And I did a tutorial on this forum here:

Enjoy!

[Bill97]

Very impressive Ab. I will definitely read through your tutorial. Glad to be on the receiving end of your advice. 

[Kenchington]

17 hours ago, Bill97 said:

Love your part of Canada. Been to Halifax a number of times. Especially like Peggy’s Cove. 

Thank you, Bill! It's my share of paradise, though it will be easier to enjoy when the ice breaks in the harbour and opens some liquid water ...