In this storage the shells would have not be loaded with powder - there in the store room would be only iron
But they had a very big weight so not easy to handle if you have to climb....... gun balls have some wheight, but such shells are heavy
HMS GRANADO - bomb vessel - 1742
But they had a very big weight so not easy to handle if you have to climb....... gun balls have some wheight, but such shells are heavy
Very true. For water and food, my concern was for when crossing the ocean. It could then be difficult to transfer such items while at sea. However, at that time, bombs would not be required and could be left on the tender, for supply later.
Also true, and I did mention that. I'm just surprised that the Thunder was equipped with more solid shot (in addition to bombs) than a standard warship would have been. It seems not at all necessary.
Here, I think I would disagree, because:
- The model at the Royal Museums Greenwich shows messenger cables.
- The CAF model includes messenger cables in the instructions and sheaves for them.
- Logically, I think it is very difficult to "push" a heavy 105mm diameter rope from the windlass to the center hatch. The windlass certainly couldn't "push" the rope, and I'm not sure seamen could manhandle it 25' to the hatch. Although it is true that the portion of the rope under the hatch would tend to pull it, and sailors do have to manhandle it into its coiled position on the cable tier. I also question whether that heavy of rope could wrap securely around the approx. 21" diameter windlass without causing damage. A messenger cable with its nippers would easily pull it along. Just my thoughts.
Are you saying that shells loaded with powder would never be stored in the shell room? I thought that was the primary reason for the shell room (other than making use of an available storage area). Per Goodwin, the crew loaded sufficient bomb shells for the day's bombardment before dusk; surely these would then be stored in the shell room, no? if not, where could the be safely secured?
Not being exactly sure of how a messenger cable operates, I believe I was confusing a viol for a messenger. As you know (and I didn't) a messenger goes around the main capstan near the center of the ship, and pulls the anchor cable back using nippers. A voil cable goes around a windlass or capstan near the bow of the ship, attaches near the center to the main mast or other sturdy structure using a large viol block, and pulls the cable back using nippers in the same way. The RMG model shows a viol, not a messenger, as do the CAF drawings. So you are correct, Uwe, no messenger cable, but I think it should have the similar viol. I just didn't know the difference. Which is clearly shown in Brian Lavery's The Arming and Fitting of English Ships of War, 1600-1815.
you are correct with the anchor cable and the messenger cable(s) - I have to check first before I start to post based on my general knowledge.
This is one part of the Granado, which I did not study before
learning every day something new ....
BTW: I do not have the Laverys book by hand now, so maybe you can post the part of the book here?
This is one part of the Granado, which I did not study before
learning every day something new ....
BTW: I do not have the Laverys book by hand now, so maybe you can post the part of the book here?
Interesting
Sure:
The top diagram is what I believe the Granado should have. A fore capstan is shown instead of the windlass further forward on the Granado, but the operation would be the same. Per Lavery, the Viol came into normal use by the 1670s, due to the larger anchor rope size. The messenger began to be used in the 1730s to 1740s, when the main capstan became double, and ships with viols began to be converted to messengers, provided they had a central capstan, in the later 1740s, with most all larger ships converted by the 1790s.
Speaking of anchors and ropes, Uwe could you tell me about the anchor rope included with the CAF Granado kit? Is it the correct size (about 2.2mm diameter) and good quality? And if so, how many meters are included with the kit? If I completely model the large anchor cable on the ship, I will need around 23 meters of it.
Very interesting. That contradicts Goodwin's description of shell loading, but perhaps they did either or both, depending on the circumstances.
Making notes and thinking about the ship and the model, I wonder why the Granado does not have a stern lantern? I was thinking all ships of this size would have one or more. And the sailor manning the tiller also did not have a compass (in the form of a binnacle)? The forecastle deck of this ship/model just seems so bare of any detail, so I'm looking for things that perhaps should be there, but have not been shown. And I still question the ability of the sailor(s) manning the tiller to do that in a storm with a slippery deck, nothing to hold on to but the tiller, no indication of direction, no real handrails to the side on the deck, no protection from any elements. Not a job I'd want to have!
An arrangement like the HMS Royal Caroline, a binnacle as well as strips to help the helmsman:
Or La Coureur, a binnacle as well as a rope to help steady the helm:
would make a lot of sense to me, and provide nice detail. Of course, that doesn't mean they're accurate.
Sorry, this may well be out of bounds for this topic, as it's not known for the Granado, but rather for other ships. Although wondering why something is not on the Granado my be valid.
Or La Coureur, a binnacle as well as a rope to help steady the helm:
would make a lot of sense to me, and provide nice detail. Of course, that doesn't mean they're accurate.
Sorry, this may well be out of bounds for this topic, as it's not known for the Granado, but rather for other ships. Although wondering why something is not on the Granado my be valid.
I notice that the La Salamandre bomb vessel has an aft lantern, what appears to be two single binnacles, as well as protection above for the helmsman. And this section (possibly La Salamandre) shows that as well:
La Salandre was built in 1758, Granado in 1742, so maybe they learned some things to incorporate?
La Salandre was built in 1758, Granado in 1742, so maybe they learned some things to incorporate?
The firehearth is located in the bow of the ship, but the bread room is located in the extreme aft. Would the bread room have its own oven? Larger ships like the Bonhomme Richard have bread ovens, but that wouldn't fit on this ship.
You have to be careful here.
English ships had no bread oven - they stored their bread or cookies called biscuits (or hard tack) in the bread room just from the beginning of their journey - means after some weeks sailing, they ate weeks old bread.
The french had usually a bread oven on board, so the cook made regular fresh bread - so every morning they had their fresh buguette for brackfast
Granado - english vessel -> breadroom full with hard tack
Bonhomme Richard or Salamandre - french vessels -> bread oven
The ship's biscuit
The ship’s biscuit was an important part of the sailor's sea diet before the introduction of canned foods.
Not all smaller ships in the english navy had a latern at the stern - usually it was important for other vessels in a fleet or ships group to know where the ship(s) are.
F.e. the two masted Speedwell sloop, a Cruizer class, had also no latern - see the contemporary model in the NMM
I can imagine, that they were hanging a removable smaller latern at the flagpole or in the rigging of the mizzen mast if necessary
BTW: The Speedwell is also a good example to show the problematic with the location of the helmsman
The idea with an additional binnacle is good and it will look interesting on such a model.
But where you would locate it ? Maybe between the figures 2 and 4 ...
These binnacles were removable and were fixed with some ropes at the deck - during heavy seas or when they would be not necessary, they would have been dismantled and stored under deck
Alternative, and I am pretty sure, that each captain had one, was the use of a mariner compass like this one date 1776
or this steering compass 1766
Steering compass
The first major improvement to the mariner's compass came in the mid-18th century with the work of Dr Gowin Knight. In 1745 he invented a method of making strongly magnetic steel bars, and then developed a steel compass needle which retained its magnetism for much longer than the old soft iron kind. George Adams, the London instrument maker, was employed as agent for Knight's compasses and this example has the signature 'Gowin Knight 1180' on the back of the card.
Mariner's compass | Royal Museums Greenwich
Steering compass | Royal Museums Greenwich
What I wanted to say, is that a binnacle is not a must - but a nice and interesting add-on
This photo of the HMBV Granado 1742 is shown on modelwarships.com:
Of course I know it isn't the "real" Granado, but then the photo doesn't really look like a model, either. And the design is quite similar to the Granado. Wonder what it's really a photo of?
Of course I know it isn't the "real" Granado, but then the photo doesn't really look like a model, either. And the design is quite similar to the Granado. Wonder what it's really a photo of?
To me, it is a well-made diorama and the ship is a model (not sure what ship). The background sky is the photo! If you look closely, you will see the main sail is blown in the opposite direction as the staysail and the gaff. There is not a single crew member or passenger on the deck... if it is a real ship, it is a ghost one
