rwiederrich
-
Posts
5,083 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by rwiederrich
-
It would probably be no more then sending a book and that is well within my budget(since money isn't an issue for me). 20 bucks is a great price too. If I was to know how much it would cost in total....I'd pay for your laser costs for your bulkheads for the service. Something to think about....it would be much appreciated. Rob
-
Man Vlad that was fast. I wish I could get my 1/96 frames laser cut....I just don't know anyone around here who does that kinda work. Looks like you'll have your version build before me. Fantastic news...can't wait to see them Rob
-
No problem Rich...I didn't notice...however, Star of Empire and Chariot of Fame were both 2050 tons OM From my sources And Glory was as you stated, 2102 tons OM. 4 to 7ft sheere can easily be compensated for in the line drawings. Plus the keel to waterline on the Star and Chariot seams quite different then that of Glory.
-
And the Glory of the Seas was only 50 tons heavier
-
I can't wait to see. Thanks for the reissue of the drawings...I will be able to cut the bulkheads out from them. However the aft keel section didn't come out all the way...the fantail portion failed to print in your drawing...I guess I'll have to make it up as I go. I will use the bulkhead distancing from each keel frame and fashion my own keel frame. I see you are building this as if it were a production model of the Flying Fish. Same design in bulkheads and framing as well as the bulwark build up. I don't have the ability to laser cut my bulkheads..so I will cut them out by hand as I did all my other models. Things are getting exciting now. I'll probably build this 1/96 version hull from balsa and then use hardwoods for the deck houses and other fittings. Rob
-
Your doing a wonderful job on her. McKay spent his own money on 3 vessels...the Sovereign of the Seas, the Great Republic and the His last clipper Glory of the Seas. He knew he has something and he bet his own money on it.... No other ship builder ever did that. Following your build. Rob
-
It's becoming more and more apparent, McKay probably used one of his *other* clipper designs when building Glory. These examples you bring forth are compelling. Glory is more like Star of Empire and Chariot of Fame and even Flying Fish then previously admitted. She has a rounded stern not elliptical and her entry is far sharper then previously thought. Interesting. Rob
- 3,560 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- clipper
- hull model
- (and 2 more)
-
You are doing a great job Rich...I appreciate your attention to detail as we draw closer to the best hull possible for Glory. Rob
-
Hey Vladimir....is it possible for you to darken the bulkhead drawing lines...on the series you sent me? They are so light they are hardly useable. I love then though...in 1/96...thanks again. Rob
-
One other note Rich....it is very hard to reconcile what some paintings depict to what photos depict. This image of her on Endolyne is hard to reconcile with your view she had a more sweeping stem. I'm thinking. It's not a perfect image but it is enough of a profile to make the determination her stem was more vertical then sweeping. I know this subject is contestable at a personal level, but what we have discovered using math and angles of her bow on her ways, surely demonstrates her slight stem inclination. Irregardless of slight photographic, viewpoint and diminish line distortions. Of course...we are also entering the realm of personal preference...and if you so desire to model your version based upon a more sweeping prow(regardless of anyone else's opinion), that is your modelers privilege. NOT to say that is where we have come! Rob
- 3,560 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- clipper
- hull model
- (and 2 more)
-
Interesting.....but could not most of that deck and keel difference be made up in the poop overhang? Plus, this Stag Hound stem looks pretty vertical at the cutwater. Similar to Glory...don't you think? Rob
- 3,560 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- clipper
- hull model
- (and 2 more)
-
Wonderful...you have translated her into drawings very well. I can see how you designed her similar to the Flying fish design. With amidships open so you can add the bulwarks later. Interesting. Love it. Rob
- 3,560 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- clipper
- hull model
- (and 2 more)
-
Please do Vladimir.......I'm assuming it will be in 1/96.....? Beautiful drawings by the way...... Rob
-
Michael...as usual I am totally impressed with your metal work....... Your project is moving along smoothly. What craftmanship. Rob
-
Indeed. If she could have been able to go home she might have had a good chance of surviving...such as the Cutty Sark. Which by the way is a tiny little thing compared to Glory. I agree...from my own research the waterways were rounded on their deck edge....possibly only beveled...but not square. I've decided to not complete my version of Glory, but fabricate her replacement from the plans and drawings we come up with from these pages. I just can't look at her fondly knowing all the blatant errors I made. For my skill level at the time and my knowledge of her, I think I did just fine. But it's like looking back at my first painting in second grade and wanting to display it as by best. I'll keep it simple and stay 1/96. Rob
- 3,560 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- clipper
- hull model
- (and 2 more)
-
It's all about deduction...from what we DO know. Check out the images I posted in post #705 Rob
-
As seen on the Glory...you can identify the main rail and pin rail and the monkey rail....18" above. Notice the waterway below and the deck.
.jpg.4c2c91f4611c54ec723a97c83ea5147e.jpg)
(3).jpg.eb4201e57aac831d20eacfad9a35e182.jpg)
.jpg.81c2f4f918ba0b4e0b740b735127a596.jpg)
- 3,560 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- clipper
- hull model
- (and 2 more)
-
Again...I think, 6ft might have been a generality, or was based off the waterway...not the deck itself. Here is a simple picture showing the structures of the bulwark on a typical wooden clipper. The waterway *Steps* up the bulwark from the deck level. the main rail ends at the pin rail and the monkey rail sits on top of that. From what images we have of Glory's bulwarks..it appears she uses this similar design...where as, some clipper designs, added the pin rail below the rail cap....placing the pin rail lower to the deck...but images show the pin rail high, or at the main rail level(probably part of the main rail cap) on Glory. And the extra height(18") extends up to the monkey rail. If you measure the bulwark from the outside of the hull...the molding trim or planksheer is above the internal deck. Because it rests ON the waterway....and again, the lower channel rests BELOW that, bolting into hull frames and the waterway. So you can't get an accurate bulwark height from externally unless you know these internal structures. So if McClean says the main rail is 5ft...is that from the deck level or the waterway? From the deck...coupled with the 18" extension to the monkey rail makes 6.5ft. If on the other hand he claims the bulwark is only 6ft...then he must be excluding the addition of the waterway Rob
.jpg.13ce035f94fd56ec8f234ec1fdf19466.jpg)
-
I would tend to agree. However, we have to look at the main deck from several perspectives. Look at the image you just posted for Vladimir....Now I told you that the distance from the top molding of the naval hood to the top of the forecastle rail is 6ft...but do not be confused...for the top moldings(Of the naval hood) are the planksheer. This sits on top of the waterways...the waterways sits on top of the main deck beams. Now...follow the planksheer down the hull to just before the foremast channels. Now... the lower channel sits just beneath the planksheer...but that is NOT the deck level. The channel bolts firmly into the massive waterways and the hull frames. Now if you recall the position of the waterways internally...and know that the deck is bolted to the deck timbers...and also knowing that the massive waterways 12"~16" was roughly 9"~13" above them(accounting for a 3" deck plank). You can then see that at this point and back to(amidships)..the bulwarks was 6.5 ft high. Compensating for diminishing perspective...I calculated the 6ft distance at the aft end of the forecastle rail to the top molding of the planksheer....then immediately took that measurement and laid it against the top of the monkey rail at the channel point and projected down and sure enough, I came up with roughly 6.5ft to the deck. The image of the fishermen on Glory's deck is a good source of info. One man is standing next to the main pump and you can see his head is way below the flywheel top edge....and we know the flywheel was below the monkey rail. So if you deduce that his head is far below the wheel and that the wheel is below the rail.....what conclusion can one make that the rail is at least 6.5 ft. Based upon all the other info we have. Hope this helps. Rob
-
No actually..the 6ft measurement came from the distance from the top molding of the naval hood to the top of the forecastle rail. THAT is 6ft. However, as the forecastle deck moves aft and terminates the main deck is 6.5 ft below the main monkey rail. I think I explained that in a later post. Rob
-
Rich...your *eyeball* guesses where pretty close. A 6ft bulwark can't be looked over easily by a standing 6ft person. Eyeballs are at least 4" lower on your face then the top of your head which is where we measure our height. However, the planksheer is above the level of the main deck and if you look at that image I posted of her at pier side with the large cutaway in her bulwark to access the main deck...you can see men standing there who are easily not available to look over the rail....since the average height would be roughly 5/8 ~ 5/10. Now is that 6ft measured from deck or from atop the waterways, which could be 12" higher? You also caused me to think a bit harder about the bulwarks and my 6ft measurement is only taken for the forecastle rail...after the rail drops off just prior to the foremast it could be lower. The planksheer or covering board sits on top of the 12~16 waterway. The deck is below that..so a standing man could still not peer over the rail...even if the bulwark was only 5ft atop the planksheer and waterways. Add the 18" to the monkey rail and you have your 6.5ft bulwark...not counting the planksheer and waterway. The 6ft monkey rail at the forecastle is irrelevant to the main bulwark, because the main deck is fashioned lower within the hull. The forecastle decking raises to the level of the main monkey rail...that is why there is that step-up rail fore the foremast . Understand? Rob
-
If you removed the naval hood and the scroll work/figurehead...it's pretty close comparison even though the Hyde has a bit more sheere aft the main mast. That girl sat low in the water when she was loaded and trim. Rob
-
Thanks for removing the #9.5's Hey from this image she is looking a lot more like the Henry B. Hyde(A downEaster)...when you follow her copper line as she was designed just below her outer bobstay
- 3,560 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- clipper
- hull model
- (and 2 more)
-
Several things: As we know the rail is 6ft from the top of the naval hood... The first fairlead fitting(notch) in the rail is 9ft from the rail beak or at its origination at the jibboom. There is 6ft between centers of the forward and aft fairlead fittings and from my calculations...4 ft to the center of the cathead timber from the center of the aft fairlead fitting. We are very close Rich. However I validated my measurements against the known 7.5ft of the figurehead...just to make sure. I verified the forward fairlead fitting distance from the jibboom by using the San Francisco image. Rob
Our Emblem ®
