August 18Aug 18 Hi again all, another challenge for the more experienced and/or knowledgeable of you.John Fincham (1854), page 322, writes that the crank of the yardarm irons fitted to the fore and main topsail yards were made to ship and unship. This is confirmed by Lees page 14 who writes that from 1834, the outer were detachable (but see later comment).In HMCSS Victoria, this would definitely have had to be done before hoisting the yard. I am assuming this meanty the strap (including the ferrule ) and hoops would remain in place, and only the crank and fixed ring being unshipped. Was this simply to make stowage easier, as once rigged and the yard hoisted they would remain in place until the yard was lowered to the deck again. The real question though; how was the crank secured in place? The hoops and a bolt kept the strap in place, but if the crank and ring were unshipped and shipped was it a simple slip fit? This would just beg for it to eventually fall out?None of the contemporary authors nor internet searches has elicited an explanation as to why, or to how this was done. However, Lees does take a different approach showing on page 16 that only vertical part of the crank and the ring were detachable (makes more sense). The crank vertical arm was held in place with a forelock (key/pin).I would greatly appreciate if there is any other information on the subject please.cheersPat If at first you fail, try again, and then again ...
August 20Aug 20 Sorry, can't help. It's sometimes amazing how little we know about the operation of parts we all seem to know so well. EberhardMember and past president: Arbeitskreis historischer Schiffbau e.V. (https://www.arbeitskreis-historischer-schiffbau.de); Member: Association des Amis du Musée de la Marine (https://www.aamm.fr)My Web-Sites: https://www.maritima-et-mechanika.org and https://www.imago-orbis.org
August 21Aug 21 Author Thanks for looking in Eberhard. I think, based on the limited info I have found that the best interpretation is that Fincham was a little ambiguous in his writing and was actually saying the same as Lees. Lees illustrates that it was only the outer, vertical part of the crank (with the boom ring attached) that could be detached. This makes sense as to the construction/arrangement; but; I have yet to find a reason, other than making stowage a little easier when the yard was struck, why they would do this.cheersPat If at first you fail, try again, and then again ...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.