VOC SPIEGELRETOURSCHIP BATAVIA 1628 - KOLDERSTOK 1:72

[PT-2]

We do whatever we need to do Rich!

Yes and at an older age we are not embarrassed or shamed in doing so unlike the overconfidence of youth. Rich

 

[Kurt Konrath]

The sticky "notes to self" are also good for what not to do's!

Which at our age can be just as important, like keep fingers away from router blade openings! ask me how I know , or maybe you don't want to know.

 

[Heinrich]

Hello Everyone. On to cannon-rigging.

The drawing.



In theory, this is how a 36-pounder Dutch cannon of the 17th century was rigged. I obtained this picture from Modelbouwforum on one of the many builds of the Zeven Provincien, but I have no idea from which build anymore! So I do apologize sincerely to the artist.



And in practice this is what they looks like mounted on Arjen Spiek's majestic Zeven Provincien. This picture is particularly helpful as I will also have three cannons per side with the lifeboat in the middle.

BUT ... the Haarlem's deck is considerably narrower than that of the Zeven Provincien! At this point, this looks like an impossible task to find the space to rig them like that.(even though I would dearly like to). Hmmmm ...

 

[PT-2]

Hello Everyone. On to cannon-rigging.

The drawing.

View attachment 253574

In theory, this is how a 36-pounder Dutch cannon of the 17th century was rigged. I obtained this picture from Modelbouwforum on one of the many builds of the Zeven Provincien, but I have no idea from which build anymore! So I do apologize sincerely to the artist.

View attachment 253575

And in practice this is what they looks like mounted on Arjen Spiek's majestic Zeven Provincien. This picture is particularly helpful as I will also have three cannons per side with the lifeboat in the middle.

BUT ... the Haarlem's deck is considerably narrower than that of the Zeven Provincien! At this point, this looks like an impossible task to find the space to rig them like that.(even though I would dearly like to). Hmmmm ...

An interesting factor to ponder with these pounders is that at that size they were around 5,000 lbs static not to mention the kinetic energy of the recoil. Hard to use the prys to work the breech ends for any angle firing which then would require an angled tackle arrangement. Smoke, noise, splinters flying and blood everywhere. All luck of the moment if the gun crews survived or not. And then having to right the gun carrages that were blown onto their sides and tangled in the tackle. Glad to have not been aboard although your model is enticing when the action is disregarded. Nicely done. Rich (PT-2)

 

[Heinrich]

@PT-2 Hi Rich. Noooo ... I haven't done anything. The picture is an example of what SHOULD be done - and - just like you have so aptly described the chaos of a naval battle on deck, so I am dreading it to find the space to fit everything that needs to be fitted. In the Haarlem's case it's not only the conventional rigging that is a nightmare to me - it's also the rigging of the cannons. Those blocks are miniscule!

 

[PT-2]

@PT-2 Hi Rich. Noooo ... I haven't done anything. The picture is an example of what SHOULD be done - and - just like you have so aptly described the chaos of a naval battle on deck, so I am dreading it to find the space to fit everything that needs to be fitted. In the Haarlem's case it's not only the conventional rigging that is a nightmare to me - it's also the rigging of the cannons. Those blocks are miniscule!

You may able to "Shanghi" a smaller crew for those mini tasks Rich

 

[Heinrich]

The Admiral to the rescue! ... hopefully ...

 

[PT-2]

The Admiral to the rescue! ... hopefully ...

Happy crew aboard!!! rich

 

[Steef66]

Less is more. I had an discussion on my blog about witch ropes where attached. Those on the back where only attached when positioning the canon or get it out position to clean or test. Because when firering, the canon will roll over these ropes. Something you want to avoid.

 

[Stevedownunder]

Hello Everyone. On to cannon-rigging.

The drawing.

View attachment 253574

In theory, this is how a 36-pounder Dutch cannon of the 17th century was rigged. I obtained this picture from Modelbouwforum on one of the many builds of the Zeven Provincien, but I have no idea from which build anymore! So I do apologize sincerely to the artist.

View attachment 253575

And in practice this is what they looks like mounted on Arjen Spiek's majestic Zeven Provincien. This picture is particularly helpful as I will also have three cannons per side with the lifeboat in the middle.

BUT ... the Haarlem's deck is considerably narrower than that of the Zeven Provincien! At this point, this looks like an impossible task to find the space to rig them like that.(even though I would dearly like to). Hmmmm ...

Hi Heinrich,
The guns look really complex, to my un trained eye I think they would be a nightmare to "work" in action.
Love the technical drawing.
I agree with Steef66, that's where the artistic interpretation comes in.

Cheers,
Stephen.

 

[Steef66]

I will give you some picture of my research

Mondfeld wrote a book about "Schiffsgeschütze" (shiparmory) and there he explained this



The translation is: "the recoil threw the gun back, where it was caught in the loading position by the troot brail." So these ropes on the side and back where not attached when in fire position. The cannon will run over them and destroy these ropes.
This was not for all the gunnery a written law. The big gus where to heavy to rol back enough to reload. They needed help after fire, to go back enough, to reload. These rope where only attached to roll the gun back to reload, positioning or for maintenance.

In Ketting he shows the cannons like this.



That's no help at all and if he got this from the model, I don't know. But In my decision it helps me to attach no ropes at all. Because it looks so messy.



A decision I made to keep the beautiful cherry wood of the deck visible.

Another picture I found on the www was this one


I love this one, it looks really cleaned up.

I hope these pictures and info will help you in your search how to make it your way.

 

[Heinrich]

@Steef66

@Stevedownunder

Hi Stephan and Stephen (There is poetic justice to you gentlemen's names )

You are both so right. The picture that I posted shows a specific configuration in a specific situation. One will have to start with the rigging and simply make a call when it gets messy or cumbersome. I fully agree with both the "less is more" and "artistic interpretation" on the part of the builder.

I will proceed with caution ...

 

[Heinrich]

@Steef66

Thank you so much for the pictures and the information Stephan.

I have a question for you about the last color picture that you posted. Is that picture from a Dutch ship?

I will tell you why I ask - I have never seen the rope looped around the breech (at the back of the cannon) on a Dutch ship. On French and British ships, it is a common sight, but was it also the case on a Dutch ship? I would really appreciate your feedback on this.

 

[Steef66]

I have a question for you about the last color picture that you posted. Is that picture from a Dutch ship?

I have no idea. I just found it in my search. maybe English.
I have seen pictures where the rope was looped around the wheel axle.

 

[Steef66]

In the picture of ketting you can see another thing. The cannon is hold in horizontal position by a piece of wood under the breech. And not with the wig. So these drawings show the guns in a resting position.

 

[Heinrich]

Thank you very much for the info Stephan! It all adds to the intrigue.

 

[dockattner]

Hello Heinrich,

As I am presently in canon rigging Gehenna (an eternity of torment) I thought I would weigh in. According to Fred Hocker at the Vasamuseet the outhaul rigging was used as the inhaul rigging simply by changing the hook from the bulwark to a point located behind the canon. This means inhaul and outhaul rigging for my 1628 Dutch-built ship were one in the same. To that end I have chosen to only include one or the other. NOTE: I have not done you any favors. The space is so compressed that it is virtually impossible (at least for this modeler) to get it right. Best of luck to you!

 

[Heinrich]

@dockattner Hi Paul. It is great to see you back here and your input is much appreciated. Now what makes matters worse for me is that the Batavia which obviously is the base for the build did not have any cannons on the exposed deck. So, yours truly is trying to fit something into a space for which it was never intended. A glutton for punishment ...or ... plain stupid? !

 

[Dean62]

@dockattner Hi Paul. It is great to see you back here and your input is much appreciated. Now what makes matters worse for me is that the Batavia which obviously is the base for the build did not have any cannons on the exposed deck. So, yours truly is trying to fit something into a space for which it was never intended. A glutton for punishment ...or ... plain stupid? !

For the reason of "limited space", I would leave off the lines in the back. As mentioned, those were used to pull it back to do initial loading.
Then the ones on the side were used to pull it into the firing position, and to aim (they could tension one side more than the other to angle the cannon), and then removed when firing. The biggest rope (breech line) was for recoil and stopped the cannon at the reload position. Thus the rear lines were not needed, similar to a semi automatic (once a round is chambered).
So you have to ask yourself what you want to present in your build, as it could be in any of the 3 presentations:
Only breech line (combat - ready to fire position)
Breech line and side tackle (combat ready position - loaded, but not ready to fire)
All lines and tackle ( not combat ready - presentation position)

 

[Heinrich]

@Dean62 Exactly Dean! That is the call that I would have to make - given normal space, I would probably go for the "presentation" position, but ultimately all will be dictated by the space available - or rather, the lack thereof.