rwiederrich
-
Posts
5,310 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by rwiederrich
-
Rick, You're very welcome. After 50 years of building clippers....I figured it out.😁 Your model is looking just wonderful...well done. Yes...another thing I learned, is to preplan and execute a lot of things far before you actually have to rig or do them. Fully *blocking* your yards and masts is a must. Nothing worse, then having to try to put a block or eyebolt in a tight spot. So much pre-thought is required. It's like playing chess...you have to think 4~5 moves ahead.....or more. You're doing fine work. Rob
- 308 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- Flying Fish
- Model Shipways
- (and 1 more)
-
Thanks Rick. I'm not so much about the process...but about the final look and finish. Paint covers a multitude of sin. It doesn't matter what the woodwork looks like...so long as the finish is smooth, contouring and replicates the true hull form. Once I get the wood laid....I'll begin to form with wood Bondo....then I will begin to refer to the images Rich provided of the McKay half hull model....and finalize her shape. Rob
-
Well getting back on track. I began the planking on the Staghound. Before anyone starts to freak out…… remember, I’m a hack model builder. I rarely do thing the typical way. As is my habit…..with Great Republic, Glory of the Seas, I use thin milled planks. Similar to veneer. I lay them along the contour, when all is dry, I sand, fill and paint. Many sessions of filler will be employed I think. Since some discrepancies are in the bulkheads. First session. Rob
-
Thanks Trevor...you've been most engaging. Rob
-
True..the main course is more difficult. Since the clews are not hard pressed to a yard...they tend to fold inward as the sail is filled and the main tack retract back and in. Ummmm...This image and your red lined don't seam to apply? Rob
-
Yep...I'm fully aware of these drawings. I don't agree. I see, you too disagree with them. You didn't model the skylights on the main cabin, as he depicts. See, this is the entire point Rich and I are so adamant about the Staghound and FC forecastle and stem/hood issues. Our conclusions are in opposition to what is commonly (as you put it), accepted. Rob
-
This I understand, that is why I included it in my post. I wasn't questioning the storage. I understand the use of the capstan...but I mentioned the use of the *double* action type that is used in conjunction with the windless. That kind was used on both the Staghound and FC. You didn't address that issue. I'm impressed you scratch built the model . Did you ever finish it with masts/yards/rigging? Rob
-
I tried to attain that with my Great Republic.
-
Some things to question. First: you have built a very beautiful model here Scott. Is she scratch or from a kit? I see you have the patent ventilator and the straight pipe ventilator within the stanchions and planksheer. What I do question is, why on earth would the chain be ladled across the open deck, to be a tripping hazard, and destructive to the deck? From what I gathered, and which makes greater sense, is to run the chain straight down from the patented windless (as outlined elsewhere), and guide the chain in a chain trough (as would be expected in the forecastle)...down to the chain hold? It is said, no scientific application was speared, and the utmost attention was paid to her construction. I see you have added the double action patented capstan....but what function does it perform if not coupled to the patented windless below? Rob
-
The patent double action capstan on the forecastle deck has a purpose....it was used to operate the windless below....which was also reversible. One tumbler on the capstan operated one side of the windless below and the other the other side. Gearing allowed for turning clockwise to operate the starboard anchor , and counterclockwise on the other tumbler (On the capstan) to operate the port anchor. When McKay built Staghound he had an open checkbook...and he spared no expense...it was clear she had a patent windless similar to the ones I have posted earlier...UNDER her *Upper* topgallant deck, in a weather free enclosed forecastle. It is said FC was built in like manner. Rob
-
I hope you see what I am getting at Scott. It is clear the topgallant forecastles of Staghound and FC were most likely recessed, to provide the room for the patent windless, that was driven by the double action capstan on her upper deck. Creating a *spacious*, *airy*, well ventilated and Illuminated space for a full watch of crew to live and work. With this in mind...the howes hole structures are needing relocation, lower in the hull....thus making it cleared and with ample room, to apply the *navel hood* as I've suggested. One correction leads to another, which leads to another. Rob
-
Interesting. Not one image I provided of clippers bows have these *external* wooden hoods. They do, however all have cast iron howes holes that would in tent do the same thing. Rob
-
Did you notice the poor placement of the howes hole on the MFA model? It is far too high...when incorporated with the internal structures of the forecastle floor. On tis model, the planksheer is just above the Howes hole. Not functional. Rob
-
I just pointed that error out to Scott, concerning the model he posted an image of. Rob
-
Wonder why the modeler omitted the wings? That howes hole is just under the planksheer. Too high for the entry point of the chain, if the topgallant forecastle was recessed 3ft. If the Howes hole were placed lower, harmonizing with the interior structures..there is ample room for a *Hood* as we've suggested. Rob
-
That's painful to look at....not to mention fails to follow McLeans description. Interesting though.....thanks for posting it. Rob
-
And I mentioned that definition...then is falls upon the imagination to some how include the figurehead abreast both a blunt planksheer and Hood end. That mental gymnastics feat will be interesting. I wonder...wouldn't you have done this earlier....prior to drawing your plan? Looking forward to your representation. Rob
-
I'm still chewing on this... If McLean says, ""where the line of the planksheer and the carved work on the navel hoods terminate, she has the full figure of an angel on the wing". Terminate...? that means the two intersect and become one. Or they simply end. If the plank sheer on McKay's drawing (both McKay's), is at least 3~4 ft above the so called *Navel Hood*, which Scott claims is slightly above or around the Howes Holes. for them to bisect...they must protrude beyond the hull. If not...then by both of those drawings the figurehead must be right up against the stem at the line of the strakes. For that is where the planksheer and hood terminates on their drawings. However, if one were to follow the McLean description and use the Glory profile....the description makes far more sense. Rob
-
Was he measuring that from amidships...or the entire length from stern to stem? I know he said, *About 3ft*...Staghound had a 2.5ft sheer. Rob
-
I know you did...and you are right in saying the 3ft drop made sense. But your drawings do not mimic this, thus it can be assumed by them that use them, you do feel it is enough. Even though you did show remorse in having to alter a completed model to demonstrate your senses. Rob
-
I suppose so Scott....and structural engineering as well. If McLean never gave the exact dimensions of the aft portico on FC...how did you determine its measurements? How did you determine, that 5ft was ample room for a full watch of crew with a patent windless in the middle in the forecastle? It goes beyond just reading english, it entails interpreting intent and coupling that with historical evidence. Some would call it the scientific method. Rob
-
Well...you and Scott both have claimed the hood end terminates with the feet of the angel. But McLean's description says nothing about the Angels feet...... " work on the navel hoods terminate, she has the full figure of an angel". It simply states a full figure of an angel is present. Using McLean's own lack of clarity on describing many carving and structural details.....It could easily be determined that at the termination of the hood...or in (proximity)...cuz no other place is possible......the figurehead is mounted. If we were to follow his description literally. The unreinforced stem would have to protrude at least 7ft (the length of the figurehead) beyond the cutwater to accommodate and support it. The angel could not be fully supported by its feet alone. It had to be supported by its back. Which makes the understanding of the hood coming up forward and over the figurehead more plausible. Such as we see in Glory. Rob
-
Then you are forced to explain why the figurehead is not back by the howes holes..... On Glory the termination of this structure is above the figureheads shoulders. Close enough to meat the description. Since McLean is not very exact on many of his trim descriptions, and he uses terms such as, *Somewhat, about and some*. He even fails to give the aft portico dimensions on FC. A structure that had to be calculated from other known dimensions. All this being said. Apart from the exact depictions made by McLean....it can be reasonably devised, as I and Rich have done.....a Hood of some kind existed on Staghound, FC SS, and most likely all of McKay's clippers, and they were similar to that on Glory of the Seas. Rob
-
PS: Note....Or could it be that the lower half of this structure...the 3 lobed molding, that rests approximately above the howes hole....IS the Hood (In part), and its upper portion that extends to the planksheer and forward to the figurehead is the mystery part. But as a whole, is described as the Hood. Regardless...the term might have dual meanings. Rob
-
McLean refers to this structure that extends *PAST* the owes hole as, "Her hood ends are bolted alternately from either side, through each other and the stem, so that the loss of her cutwater would not affect her safety or cause a leak". The Howes holes are nowhere near the cutwater.....but looking at Glory, you can easily identify this McLean description for FC. Earlier in his description he says, "where the line of the planksheer and the carved work on the navel hoods terminate, she has the full figure of an angel". Again, the planksheer is roughly at the level of the deck (nowhere near the howes holes). Following Glory again, you can see this structures termination point is no where hear the howes hole. Its out by the figurehead. IF the Navel hood was specific to the howes holes and structurally tied to it, for cable alignment purposes. How then does McLean on several occasions state the Hood has carvings upon it and it terminates at the figurehead, and is structurally supportive of the cutwater and stem? Rob
Our Emblem ®
