Jump to content
MORE HANDBOOKS ARE ON THEIR WAY! We will let you know when they get here. ×

rwiederrich

NRG Member
  • Posts

    5,502
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by rwiederrich

  1. Apart from the missing white paneling on her aft cabin(I'm assuming it is). Your build is as accurate as I have seen of CS as she flew the British ensign. Great job. Now the challenge is maintaining such accuracy in her masting/rigging. Rob
  2. Many of those inaccuracies can be contributed to the time frame the model is being replicated....Prior to the Portuguese's extensive remodeling and addition of the aft poop cabin access doorway/hatch and relocation of her forecastle rail.....she appeared much like the Revell representation. I can only assume Campbell's depiction covered or excluded some of these modifications. When she nearly capsized and was demasted...she underwent still more mods. Some are and are not replicated in other places. And the worst issue, is that sometimes these mods criss-cross. Some are found on models depicting mods that were NOT available at the time others were. I found these poor historically accurate inconsistencies on many models of CS...not to mention in paintings....evidenced, while researching my own build of the Great Republic. Miss-matching mods with the era they did not appear in. This is why it is so important the modeler does their homework when attempting to model a vessel at a particular time frame of its history. Beautiful rendition...indeed. Rob
  3. Personally....I would make accommodations for the deadeyes to be slightly inboard to allow you clear and ample access to thread them. As previously mentioned here or elsewhere...good clearance from the rail is beneficial. They are more closely aligned with the belaying pins anyway. Rob
  4. Druxey....Your point is well made. Being somewhat of an optician...I've built many large telescope mirrors and worked on objectives. Optical aberrations are notorious for creating all manner of image *shifts*. Such as Chromatic aberrations(Glass index issues).....Coma....astigmatic...spherical....to name a few. And lens objectives of cameras of the period are not devoid of such aberrations. And in fact are more apt to induce them...causing the illusions we are confronting. Hence the caution we are taking when compiling all the known factors that can contribute too and can greatly interfere with, the date we are trying to factualize. Rob
  5. Rich the Gentleman's name is Russ and he lives on Bainbridge Island. Good luck..... I've already emailed him....introduced myself and proceeded to explain the situation we are facing. Your definition mimics that of my own... called, *Forced perspective*. In essence I attempted to explain to him this phenomenon, and how we are compensating. He agreed(when talking to Mike) that 7 or possibly more degrees should be fine...and even said that McKay used language like *I just want it that way*. So there is no real architectural reason it could not be the degree/angle we agreed upon...from our mathematically derived reasons. He nicely explained to Mike the very process I used to come up with my numbers. Now it's your turn to bring your side of the *science* to the table. Your skills of description will be employed fully...and we are very excited you're on it.... Rob
  6. It ain't impossible. All the lower main deadeyes on my Glory build are at a maximum 2mm (Sometimes a single mm), from the bulwarks resting on their channel. The jig slips into the outer hole(outside) of the deadeye with ample room to secure it. Once the shroud is stropped to the upper deadeye...place the jig into the two side holes in the deadeye and secure your shroud to the mast. (The jig holds the deadeye in the exact location as all the others). Once done, simply slip off the jig and begin rigging the lanyard. And that begins with you cutting the appropriate length of line, tying a knot into one end and starting with the shroud deadeye threading through the first hole in the deadeye, pulling snug to secure the knot in the hole....then thread through the channel deadeye, back up to the top center hole in the shroud deadeye...back down to the bottom(outer) hole of the channel deadeye...and so forth till you've laced the lanyard and the two deadeyes together. Bring your last bit of line up from the channel deadeye and strop it to the back of the shroud, just atop of the shroud deadeye.....DONE. Now, since you are so close to the bulwark....I recommend, you place an extremely tiny drop of CA on the tip of the lanyard line...to stiffen it so it will easily do through the deadeye holes and not fray(Don't let the drop ball). NOW you'll probably have to use very thin tweezers to retrieve the line from behind the deadeye once you passed it through the channel/pin rail deadeye. This can be snug....this is why I recommend very thin tweezers. It's all doable....I know....because I'm doing it right now on my build. You can do it. Good luck. Hope this helps. Rob
  7. I kept it simple and made a wire jig and rigged the lanyards on the model...easy
  8. Or the *carriage house*..... If you are inclined. Rob
  9. Clippers are my specialty, though it was a short Era.....much design principles we have today came out of it. Rob
  10. Hopefully the goal of your visits here at MSW is to acquire ship knowledge as well as the skills to model them. You've come to the right place for all things *Ship*. You're doing a great job thus far. Rob
  11. I'm sorry to let you down...but neither of those ships were ever *Clippers*. They were full rigged ships(though the Star of India was reduced to a Bark, and is currently). The Balclutha was an iron hulled(same as the Star) ocean carriers(Or Windjammers). Neither were classified as *clippers*. The True clipper era lasted from around 1848 to 1869...Around 20 years...and they were generally built of wood(American) and composite...wood and iron frames(British). Americans built large ones, (1700~4555 hundred tons), compared to (900~ 1200 tons) for the British. Iron hulled ships(and wood hulled) with high cargo capacity that came after the clippers...were known as the DownEasters...(Or Windjammers), clipper looking, but much larger cargo capacity and shallower deadrise....resulting in a flatter bottom. *Extreme* clippers held the fastest records, do to their sharp entry and exits and extreme use of canvass. Speed was a true clippers goal...NOT cargo capacity. Hope this helps? Rob
  12. Great job Bruma.....Definitely. Just like you, I opted to build all my yards(with furled sails) for the main mast of Glory at once too. I just focused as you did. We followed nearly the same process, with slight differences. Now all you need do is mount them and rig them.....Riiiight.....I make it sound so simple and easy. You did a fine exceptional job. Painting them black I suppose? Great build. Rob
  13. Not sure why this fitting out image was taken to be her sheer and bow/stern form? So many other images show better proportions and more like what we built.
  14. Thanks Bruma. I wanted something different then full set sails and the typical loosely furled sails. I opted for the way they stored them when in port for a time. Tight, clean and symmetrical. Shipshape. The impression any good captain wanted to leave viewers of his ship in port. Rob(It is my way to do something different)
  15. There we go…….all the yards are finished…… now onto the shrouds to finish them up before I mount the yards on the mast. Rob
  16. Pat …… I completely agree. Is would be so nice to have a second set of eyes and a homework buddy. Thanks for the fine compliment Here is the sky sail and yard getting ready for bunt blocks and some gaskets and a final weathering. Rob
  17. Spent some time finishing up the main mast yards. Here are the completed royal and the top gallant. I’m in the throes of finishing the sky sail and yard. Once these yards are complete I will go back to the mast and begin finishing the top shrouds and the topgallant ones too. Thanks Rich for your continual work with Mike and the logistics of the article process. Rob
×
×
  • Create New...