Jolly Roger Rigging and/or Spar Lift line Positions?

Modeling Subjects Ships
1

Hello everyone,

Being newly returned to ship modeling after quite a long time, I have learned quite a bit from many of you here. Hat’s off to the knowledgable experts here, I am truely enjoying my visits.

I’m currently working on two ship models, The Lindberg Sandpiper and Jolly Roger. As mentioned in a previous post of mine, I’m setting the Jolly Roger aside while I work on the little Sandpiper.

However, I’m still piddling with the Lindberg Frigate - I’m building the JR as an American Frigate. With that in mind, I’ve turned my attention on researching the rigging.

As any of you that have built the JR know (& I found out recently!) the rigging instructions for the JR are a cruelty joke, they are horribly indistinct. At 1/130 scale this nice little kit cry’s out to be more accurately rigged. I’ve purchased a number of sailing ship kits in the last month (8 to be exact) for a variety of reasons, one of which is to see what other instructions have on rigging.

Because I’m building the JR as an American frigate, I’ve opted to follow, as much as possible, the rigging for the Constitution. Wheither the Constitution’s rigging is exact for the frigate I’m building is really immaterial, I’m just using it as a basic guide.

The spar arrangements on the JR & Constitution differ in the number of spars per mast - amoung other ways, but the spars are what I’m concentrating for now. The instructions show that rigging the Constitution (1/96 & 1/120) show the lower yard & topsail yard lifts tie off to the pin rails on the spar deck. The topgallant and royal yards tie off to the masttop deadeyes. The JR has only 3 yards per mast so only 1 will tie off to the mast-top dead-eyes - no real problem there.

However, the pinrails for the JR are small - pin availability for all of the lift lines, not to mention the sheet & clew lines, will be scarce. Would it be feasable to tie off the lower yard lift lines to the bulwark pins where available or perhaps install some cleats? Or am I just over thinking it?

And - are there any other lines that would need to be added, other than what I’ve mentioned, that would have to tie off to the pinrails?

I’m using the smallest blocks from the 1/96 Constitution for both the lift lines, braces and the sheet & clew lines - they look much better than the lumps of oval plastic that Lindberg supplies with the kit.

I am also contemplating using an extra set of the 1/96 Constitution ratlines cut down to fit this kit. I’ve read on several post on this forum that many of you dislike the preformed ratlines, but I really don’t like the Lindberg injected ratlines for this kit and I don’t feel up to trying to tackle hand tying a scratch set of ratlines either. Still up in the air on it for now.

I’m REALLY new to rigging and it started out as massively confusing. I’m just now getting to my normal standard confused state - so I am getting better.

I don’t really know what I’m doing, just trying to get my first rigging job done as correctly as I’m able to at this point in my ship modeling. One step at a time & one line at a time. I’ve got a 1/150(?)(22") Constitution I’d like to tackle after these two.

I’m hoping this rambling post makes sense, I appreciate any & all comments.

Thanks,

Adrian A.

2

I’m in a bit of a rush so forgive me if my reply seems off-hand. It really isn’t intedned that way.

The ‘Jolly Rodger’ is a re-pop of the mid 18th century ‘La Flore’ and whilst I think those in the know suggest it doesn’t represent a particular ship (just a design study) it looks quite nice representation of a French 8-pounder frigate to me.

The model from which the kit is based resides in the French Maritime Museum, and the museum sells a set of plans (very reasonbly priced in my opinion) from which you could rig the model quite accurately. http://www.aamm.fr/boutique/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=65&products_id=219

Other observations;

i) Spar dimensions and rigging details were rarely recorded in a diagramatic form in the period you are interested in. So most of what you see will be a reconstruction (usually very well informed reconstructions!) Tables can be used to calculate spar dimensions, but I would imagine the La Fore kit probably got them about right and I certainly would never be comitted enough to check the for myself!!

ii) I think you will be bound to run in to trouble if you use any other model (excepting of course contemporary models of similar vessels) to guide your rigging. Plastic kits often have very simplified rigging diagrams and you will be perpetuating mistakes of other manufacturers (some of which are frankly very daft indeed!).

ii) USS Constitution is almost a half-century younger than the ship represented in the 'Jolly Rodger’ kit. Following the rigging plan of the Constituion when rigging your frigate would inctroduce a good number of prochronisms to your model!

iii) The mid eighteenth century rigging practice is best described in literature in 'Eighteenth century rigs and rigging’ by Marquardt. It is very expensive to purchase second-hand but a library may be able to get it to you. Failing that, near-contemporary works on rigging can be found online- David Steel’s ‘Elements and pracrtice of rigging and seamanship’ 1794 might be of some interest as an example readily available online. http://www.hnsa.org/doc/steel/index.htm As I said above though- be careful with this though or you risk introducing all sorts of chronological anomolies to your model!

iv) finally, when rigging small scale models, I personally follow the mantra ‘less is more’. If it cannot be cleanly represented in small scale, or there is some uncertainty as to how it would fit- leave it off! This is just my personal approach.

v)

3

Thanks for the reply billyboy, I appreciate it.

I’m somewhat familiar with the original La Flore boxing of the kit. It’s actually what convinced me to get a couple of the Jolly Roger Kits. I was looking for a decent scale small frigate and it fit the bill pretty well.

i - I’m satisfied with the spar dimensions, I’m nowhere near knowledgable enough to contest what the spars in the kit scaled out to. So, I’ll use what I have - it’s really just a ‘starter’ kit to try to help me get my feet wet & my butt back in gear.

ii - I agree in essence, however when I look at how Lindberg suggest I rig the ship, i realize just how daft the instructions actually are. The truth is, again, I’m not knowledgeable enough with rigging.

ii - Ditto the Constitution rigging. I realize the time frame difference. But where I’m at right now, the difference between the Lindberg rigging and the Revell Constitution rigging - I have to lean more to the Constitution rigging for more authenticity - albeit it’s from a slightly different era.

iii - Loved the link for hnsa - I bookmarked it and will be checking it out in more depth as I go.

iv - Less is more is something I’ve come across here before & I’m guessing at some point (probably sooner rather than later) I’ll adopt it as my own also. I realize that I’ll probably not be able to do some of what I’d like with this build, but as long as I keep moving forward, I’ll take it in stride.

Thnaks again for your response, I appreciate it.

Adrian A.

4

I don’t think that the rigging plans are terrible. I used what came with the kit and the outcome seemed pretty good. I posted a link for reference so you can see how the rigging turned out.

/forums/t/97579.aspx?PageIndex=3

5

Nice build enemeink, the weathering comes off as particularly grundy - I like it, it seems to fit the pirate aspect.

Your build was one of the builds I checked out when I was starting on my build, there are several others that I checked out also. One of the other builds I referenced was done as the La Flore, and yet another was in the process of being converted into the HMS Surprise.

Your rigging looks great, it’s looks apparent to me that it wasn’t your first rigging job. (And, if it is your first rigging job, your did a fantastic first job!)

That’s where my trouble with the Lindberg rigging plan began - this IS my first rigging job. I found that on my copy of the instructions, the rigging plan was hazy & indistinct at best. And, unfortunately for me at least, I needed to know where all those lines started and then went to. I do have to admit that I am understanding it a bit more as I study the progression and steps on the other sets of plans that I have.

But, all things considered, compared to four other sets of instructions with rigging details that I have, it is by far, the least accurate and ‘user friendly’ rigging instructions in my meager stash.

Thanks for your reply, I appreciate all of the input I can get.

Adrian A.