| Ft. | Ins. | |
| Length of the keel | 127 | 0 |
| Breadth within the plank | 46 | 2 |
| Depth in the hold from the breadth to the upper edge of the keel | 18 | 9 |
| Keel and dead rising | 2 | 6 |
| Draught of water from the breadth to the lower edge of the keel | 21 | 3 |
| The swimming line from the bottom of the keel | 18 | 9 |
| The flat of the floor | 13 | 0 |
| Rake of the stem | 38 | 0 |
| Rake of the post | 8 | 0 |
| Height of the Tuck at the fashion piece | 16 | 0 |
| Breadth of the Transome | 28 | 0 |
| Height of the way forward | 14 | 0 |
| Distance of the ports | 10 | 0 |
| Ports upon the lower tier, square | 2 | 8 |
| Ports upon the second tier, square | 2 | 6 |
| Ports upon the third tier, round or square | 2 | 4 |
| Distance of the ports from the swimming line with four months victuals at | 5 | 0 |
| With six months victuals at | 4 | 6 |
| The first deck from plank to plank | 7 | 0 |
| The second deck | 7 | 3 |
| The third deck | 7 | 3 |
All the decks flush fore and aft, and the half deck, quarter deck and forecastle according to the plot.
| Ton and Tonnage | |
| 1. This ship by the depth in hold will be | 1466 |
| 2. By the draught in water | 1661 |
| 3. By the mean breadth, which is the truest of all | 1836 |
Your Maty will be pleased to be informed that after mature debate we have likewise agreed upon the rules to be proportioned to each sweep of the midship bend, and where the bend is to be placed, and likewise of the rules to be held in her narrowing and rising lines, which we all pray may be only imparted to your Maty.
| Robert Mansell. | J. Pennington. | J. Wells. |
| Phineas Pett. |
This is endorsed in the King's handwriting: 'Dimensions resolved on for the Great Ship, 7 of April 1635.' It is of interest to note, as evidencing the jealous way in which the fundamentals of the design were kept secret, that the Committee proposed to impart the details of the midship bend[162] and of the narrowing and rising lines,[163] which together formed the key to the actual form of the hull, to the King alone.
Ten days later Pennington appears to have put in a proposal that slightly modified this design, increasing the draught of water by nine inches, the beam by four inches, the flat of the floor by one foot, and the tonnage by 56 or 48 tons, but decreasing the keel length by one foot. His scheme of dimensions, which is endorsed in the King's handwriting as 'Dimensions of Pennington's Model for the Great Ship, 17 April 1635,'[164] seems, from the fact that the tonnage is quoted in the contemporary lists[165] as 1522 tons, to have been the one finally adopted, though with slight modification. It runs as follows:
| Ft. | Ins. | |
| Length by the keel | 126 | 0 |
| Breadth at the beam | 46 | 6 |
| Breadth at the Transome | 28 | 0 |
| Breadth of the Floor | 14 | 0 |
| Breadth from the water | 2 | 0 |
| Draught of water | 19 | 6 |
| Ports from the water | 5 | 0 |
| Ports asunder 9ft., some more | 9 | 0 |
| Ports from the deck | 2 | 0 |
| Distance between the decks from plank to plank | 7 | 6 |
| Rake of the Stem | 37 | 6 |
| Rake of the Post | 9 | 0 |
| Height of the Tuck | 17 | 0 |
| Depth in hold from the seeling to the lower edge of the beam | 17 | 0 |
| Sweep at the runghead | 11 | 0 |
| Sweep at the right of the mould | 31 | 0 |
| Sweep between the water line and the breadth | 10 | 0 |
| Sweep above the breadth | 14 | 0 |
| Burden in tons and tonnage by the old rule | 1522 | |
| New rule | 1884 | |
The outstanding interest of this 'model' lies in the fact that it is the only instance in which the sweeps of the mould are given. Before we can proceed to construct from it the midship section, we are met with the difficulty that the depth from greatest breadth to keel is not given, but in the first model this was equal to the draught, viz. 18 feet 9 inches, and since this was increased by 9 inches, we may fairly assume that the 'depth' in Pennington's model would be about 19 feet 6 inches, and in fact we have this dimension given in a contemporary list as 19 feet 4 inches. If, taking this figure, we now attempt to plot the section, it will be found that the sweeps will not reconcile, the radius of the futtock sweep, 31 feet, being too great by about 6 feet. The mistake appears to lie in the height of the 'breadth from the water' (i.e. the height of the greatest breadth above the 'swimming line'), given as 2 feet. In the first model this was 2 feet 6 inches, and, as it is not probable that it would be less in the deeper ship, we may take this to have been 3 feet, and not 2 feet. On this assumption we can proceed to construct the curve of the midship section as in the drawing annexed. In this drawing we have: