H.M.S. Prince -The Final Modification/ Rex Stewart

It is not surprising to find builders frustrated when it comes to rigging. In my forty-plus years as a professional, this was (and is) one of the principle subjects many have been at odds with. Not just with themselves, but with other professionals and hobbyists.

Many will argue that 'sailing' ships are not attractive with sails because it 'hides' rigging. Yet one of the main factors for this system remains to be the 'sails'! And there is a method for bringing out the best in any model once the science is studied and worked upon. It doesn't happen overnight...And for those who claim they have expertise with this after building a few pieces; well that assessment is void.

Another argument/debate that comes to mind is the theory that ships were built without blueprints. That shipwrights calculated 'everything' in their head. That is sheer foolishness -and not to be embraced by anyone with commonsense. However, this is part of the maritime circles that continue this 'theory'.

Blueprints are the essence of the builder. Without them nothing is accomplished.

History, unfortunately has a universal way of hiding truth and I realize that the only viable way to discover (truth) is to divorce the politics and focus on the purity of research. Real answers are found when biases are quelled. One of the reasons I produce some of the most exciting models today is primarily due to sound doctrine and research from the sources I investigate. 

In this image, the rigging is not obscured by the sails...

Nor in this image.

Below, I show the dynamics of sail setting -where the variations bring realism to the subject. It's in this artificial form that my viewers (and collectors) find the perfect balance. However, this is predicated on research as to how ships appeared in wind under full and/or partial sail. 

With this focus in mind, I return back to rigging tables -exploring areas of rig that I found questionable relative to belay systems; especially at the quarter and mizzen decks. There seem to be much confusion in these two areas

There exist no drawings and/or paintings that clearly defines this. And of the contemporary work(s) I reviewed, I wasn't able to acquire correct fall lines that were compatible to the ship's design. That alone, pushed me to rewrite the script concerning their true location(s) from a logical stance. Of course I tossed 'debates' to the wind because those were distractions which was based on "cognitive dissonance". And of such I have, nor take no part.

In this image I am resizing the plastic lateen sail which I will later customize from treated paper. I am also locating the various rigging points on this sail to transfer to the custom sail so that the lines will fall accurately to the belays pins on deck. Much of my concern are on the brail system, as I have not found any satisfactory model showing this to be compatible to the Prince design. There had to be leeway and room for hauling up this large sail so not to conflict with the large topsail above it.

Percival Marshall's 1937 plan is the best reference that makes any sense to this perculiar design of the poop and quarter decks. From his perspective, it made sense that the forward brails would lead from the spar to the last shroud and down to the belay pin rail 'within' the ship -not on the actual top rail as seen on many contemporary models. Builders are not taking the time to assess scale to embrace this truth. Percival , being notably famous for his engineering proved this finding to be correct...and it is shown on my model, in kind.

This waterline view show the lateen sail set in a swift breeze with the forward brails leading through the blocks and connecting with the blocks on the last shroud. Notice that there are no pins on any of the rail area at the main mast to the stern area where the ensign is flying.

Port stern profile showing the brail leads to the main shroud. The lateen mizzen sheets also fall to the pin rail within the quarter deck bulwarks (away from the guns). Based on scale, it would be impossible for crew to reach and effectively secure these lines to pins on top of the bulwark. However, at the forecastle such was possible as I have shown in prior images.

Before rigging is complete, gallery windows are prioritized; especially since some lines will conflict with gold leaf in those areas where shrouds, sheets, lanyards and braces are located. Not to mention the backstays and halyard tackles.

Here the gallery windows are displayed in good order -placed and readdressed with gold leaf. 

As aforementioned, lines should not conflict with each other -leading through and around the tops down to their proper pins without fouling (as shown in this image). Also, based on the railing system (and scale)...notice the pinrails at the companionway before the stairs. The lines are clean and fall there without fouling. Furthermore the scale of the bulwark rails are too high for any crew member to actually secure a line. In Admiralty models much of this is ignored -or was never considered, being that the primary focus was on the structure of the ship. This is conclusive based on the many profile drawings stored in museum archives. None show total belay processes (of any kind) from that era.

Even when VASA was raised, there were no factual documentation(s) conclusive to her rigging...None. Every aspect of rigging was actually explored in the 19th century and pieced together by scholars who visited various museums/libraries to obtain 'limited' data. These facts can be validated by another contemporary builder in his quotation below:

This builder place emphasis on the PRINCE model at the Science Museum in England. From his perspective it is worthy; but from a rigger's point of view, one has to question the findings... And, I duly agree from a curatorial view, misguided information should not be passed on to any generation seeking truth. It's wrong.

Below are the final images of the PRINCE which conclude this build. There will always be PRINCE models which will differ in presentation. No one model can claim accuracy; that's a fallacy. However, each model has its place because of its reputation -and this piece is no different. I just brought it to another level based on my experience and research. So now, I provide you, the viewer, these finale images.

 

As a professional, I take my work seriously which is shown in each and every model I produce. I take no shortcuts, but rather place as much detail possible in these work(s). This model is no exception.

For those who appreciate and seek this type of art, I can be reached at Caseships@yahoo.com or by phone 1-774-757-7137.

Thanks for viewing!