rwiederrich

Sorry bro…..I missed it apparently. High forecastle ladders on the outside edges, with several companion way entrances just inside of them and a couple windows might do the trick. Rob

What I’m talking about is the companion way entry. From 5 ft to 3 ft below

Rich, I have not seen you concept . Where is it?

Rich, I think we need to mimic the companion ways like that are found on this Thermopylae model Rob

Buttersworth got her bow all wrong. How is that even possible? Rob

Actually, Rich, these images are perfect. I can see clearly her curves and the true sharpness of her stern post It clearly shows me her sterns roundness and it’s angle of insertion into the curve’s leading too her shallow dead rise. I can make these work for me. Remember, I’m highly visual, and I learned my comparative interpretation skills making telescope mirrors for years. Staghound was surly a vary sharp design, not full and robust, like Glory of the Seas. Her belly is shallow and thin, though she has depth to her hull. Like McLean said, her exit is as sharp as her entry. Thanks for asking for these images. Rob

Rick....she's looking amazing....love your mast work. Everything so clean and sharp. So nice. Rob

I know we agreed that McLean made a mistake when he said the forecastle was the height of the main rail...but what if he was correct? What if the topgallant deck was at the main rail and the entry to the forecastle deck was, (As it is with the aft cabin), set 3 ft below. And the crew accessed it via a companionway as Crothers depicted in his book I quoted earlier? The patent windless still would fit. The reason I am readdressing it is...if McLean was wrong on this matter...and on several other issues...HOW then can we conclude he wasn't wrong on many other issues? And if we are to conclude his first hand knowledge was derived from actually getting his info from McKay's yard...then we must also conclude his observation of the forecastle must also be correct...and that we are missing something. That something, I feel, can be found in Crothers depictions of what I am describing. The low topgallant forecastle deck was at the main rail....there was a companionway entry midship that led down to the forecastle deck...where the patent windless was. I'll find the picture from Crothers and post it later. Wresting with this issue, I concluded that we need to look at this more objectively. We can't assume because we know how it was done on Glory of the Seas, that McKay did the same for his first clipper. I truly doubt it. Crothers says, the low topgallant forecastle was just as prevalent as the high. And to disregard McLean's observation on this...means every other observation he made is suspect. Personally, I don't want to go there, I trust his highly informed observations. If we are to conclude they were *Highly* informed. Staghound had either a high topgallant...which its deck level was at the monkey rail(our current stance), or she had a low topgallant forecastle, which its deck level was at the main rail. Lowering her ceiling height....but if the forecastle deck was recessed 3ft below...as is the main cabin aft...then there is ample room for the patent windless and working space for the crew. Rob

Perfect Rich….looks spot on fantastic. I needed the aft companion way measurements, cus it’s the next thing I’m building. It will have a slanted roof and windows on the sides. Kinda like that of Flying Clouds. Again, super job. Rob

Finished the skylight. Rob

Thanks Rich...I thought so. It will look bold once I finish off the top section in white.

I was going to suggest that. Not sure the exact size of the standard WC.....so some experimenting will need to happen. Just like every aspect of this vessel...we need to evaluate the realities to the speculative. We know the forecastles true height...and we know she had a patent windless...requiring working room.....and we know she had a forward hatch and its requirements. Now to fit it all in and make it look nice....(said...while pointing at you)....😃 Rob

Inside the forecastle....there might have been troughs for the chain to ride in and to keep the area dry for crewmen's work and off duty doings. But that is within the forecastle.....I think the exterior would be similar to the drawing above....with a straight deck edge, with WC's on either side just under the edge and further back is the bulkhead/wall. Doors on either side with possibly a larger service door in the middle for access to the patent windless. The external would look similar to Glory of the Seas....but without a windless exposed in the middle. The spacing would have to be adjusted to compensate. Chapelle's drawing shows the WC's outside the deck on either side...extending past the forward hatch. If the WC's are pushed back on either side to accommodate the forward hatch...it seriously shortens the forecastle space. duncan McLean says her topgallant forecastle is at the level of the main rail....but Chapelle shows it at the monkey rail. Crothers says...both high and low topgallant forecastles were equally used....BUT this ship has a patent Windless...which means she had to be as high as the monkey rail...despite what McLean says. Thoughts? Rob

I added the mahogany top Rob

Do you think these examples of Star of Empire , Chariot of Fame will be close to Staghound ? Rob

Water closets were routinely placed outside the forecastle and on port and starboard sides. Note Crothers notes on these two clippers.

This excerpt from Crothers book, American built packets and freighters of the 1850s. Crothers says……

I suspect her deck was flush with the monkey rail.....NOT the main rail. Remember...no expense was too much. McKay had an open checkbook from the owners. This revelation changes a lot of things forward on her design. She also had private heads/houses port and starboard as depicted. This particular drawing was a depiction for iron hulls...but to reconcile the patent windless, one needs to make adjustments. Rob

Just as a reminder....Staghound HAD a patent windless. I suspect she actually had a full height forecastle. Note what Campbell says about the full height forecastle....they were used when a patent windless was used....😲

There must be some significance in Staghound having a *Topgallant Forecastle*...described by Duncan. I need to research and ponder this a bit more. Knowing what we now know about her patent windless. Rob

I thought about that....but redundancy wasn't a thing at the time...and the patent windless had built in hand driven ability...when the hubs were disconnected. Seams like a lot of expense to have the state of the art and a wooden standard aboard together. Duncan may have noted that if he hadn't been openly clear she had the state of the art patent windless. Emphasizing its superiority and modernness. Further thoughts? Rob

Rich....time to put on your thinking cap....(again). If Staghound had a patent windless beneath her forecastle capstan....... then we need to reconfigure her forecastle front. She will not have an open front FC like so many of her sisters. No need for a windless hand crank mechanism on her forecastle either. Her chain would enter through the howes holes...go aft to her new patent windless and then from there directly down into her chain holding spaces. No need for the chain to run across the deck and enter through chain ports just forward of her main cabin. Her forecastle can be weather tight in a word, and be decorated such as the portico in style and grace.. What input do you have on this idea...based on the facts of her windless issue? Rob

Thanks, If we could find any images of any of the packet ships McKay built earlier…..we might find he used varnished woods on his exteriors of such fixtures. I think it adds depth and contrast. Rob

That will be included in the thin mahogany veneer that will be put on top. (Not yet shown). Not finished with it yet. I’ve decided to use a varnished mahogany top for sitting, instead of painting it white. I had, honey do, things to take care of today…..so work was put on hold. Rob

I thought strongly about just doubling up the 6ft design……but the skylight had too be bigger, that is why I chose the 10ft design. In choosing that, I permitted myself some artistic license, to use the same design, but gave the sitting ledge all the way around….on all four sides. And more openness to the lower house body. The main difference between this vessel and Glory of the Seas, is that, Glory was recorded on film. So we had a standard we HAD to meet. We couldn’t do any less. As long as we keep to the eyewitness account of Duncan McLean…… we’re golden. Just look at the fun we had playing with the portico. Is it right, is it wrong……? It’s an 8x8 portico with doors on either side, with a 4ft recess. Done deal. What we do and did next was a result of logic and typical practice. As we understand it. Rob