It could work like that; the loads from the shrouds being diverted into resulting vertical loads to the chain plates and the resulting horizontal loads into the wales and from there into the hull...
Actually Ed, I believe the chain plates are angled with the shrouds. When you are looking at the ship from this oblique angle, and not straight from the sides, the inward bend of the chain wales as they pass over the channel tricks your eye into thinking they are vertical. I have noticed this effect from gazing at my last model. The vertical angle when observed from a position in front of the channel, perpendicular to the hull, removes the distortion caused by the athwart ship angle, and there is a subtle but detectable angle in each chain plate which keeps it parallel with the shroud in that plane. Here is another visual clue. If the chain plates were indeed vertical, then the last segment of the chain plate assembly, the plate that is anchored to the hull by two bolts, would be in perfect vertical alignment with the edge of the gun ports. Even in the photo below, you can see this is not the case. Look at those plates on the extreme right, and the extreme left. They are not parallel to each other, or the lines of the adjacent gun ports. The sweeping change in the vertical angles of the chain plates are subtle, but they are there.
From these pictures it really hard to tell, since the photo's are not taken exactly normal to the hull, plus the hull is curving inward. I'm inclined to say that the lower portion of the chainplates seems to be relatively parallel to one another, supporting the idea of these chainplates being vertical. But still, this picture could be really misguiding...Actually Ed, I believe the chain plates are angled with the shrouds. When you are looking at the ship from this oblique angle, and not straight from the sides, the inward bend of the chain wales as they pass over the channel tricks your eye into thinking they are vertical. I have noticed this effect from gazing at my last model. The vertical angle when observed from a position in front of the channel, perpendicular to the hull, removes the distortion caused by the athwart ship angle, and there is a subtle but detectable angle in each chain plate which keeps it parallel with the shroud in that plane. Here is another clue. If the chain plates were indeed vertical, then the last segment of the chain plate assembly, the plate that is anchored to the hull by two bolts, would be in perfect vertical alignment with the edge of the gun ports. Even in the photo below, you can see this is not the case. Look at those plates on the extreme right, and the extreme left. They are not parallel to each other, or the lines of the adjacent gun ports. The sweeping change in the vertical angles of the chain plates are subtle, but they are there.
Just don't stare too long, or your brain may explode.
View attachment 288999
PS: Also take note that the spacing of the shrouds is not even, but that which allows the chain plates to be anchored between the gun ports. The gun ports determine where the shrouds can go.
The inboard angle of the chain plates messes with you eyes from this viewing angle. That's why you have to draw from other clues in the photo to see answer our original question. If you have a model, try looking at the chain plates from different angles, and you'll see what I mean.
I withdraw any comment I made on the orientation of the chain plates. I did look into it a bit further (USA Constitution and Wasa) and lo and behold, not a single shred of evidence for vertically oriented chainplates. My apologies for any confusion I might have caused.
.....am I am here, seeing that and doing that....
Now that is a 'stage', I love it, Paul. I have a similar setup however it never fails when going in for close work my hand will block critical light. I would think one of those dental lights attached to something looking like a jeweler's loop glasses would be what you would use.
For that matter, don't tell any lady she's old. That's good for a severe coach sentence...
I think @Peter Voogt has something like that. Maybe he can be of some help.
Perhaps Johan has this in mind: By the build of my Lee I used a digital camera that can enlarge between 60x and 250x. With built-in lighting:
Hi Paul
