ClipperFan

@rwiederrich how I arrived at the original main mast height of 210' is by using the following process: 88' main mast to top, add 14' for hounds = 102' add 51' for topmost but subtract 14' for hounds since it's offset down to the top = 37' + 9 & 1/2' for hounds = 46 & 1/2' + 102' = 148 & 1/2' then add 28' topgallant - 9.5' for 2nd offset down of hounds to trestle tree = 167' + 19' royal, 15' skysail + 9' pole = 210'. I used the same formula for both fore and mizzen masts. As for "Main Mast to Truck 166" I figure that takes in the pole too, however if it means to the skysail mast top, then 9' would be added to 166' for 175.' I'm just not that familiar with "truck" to know the exact meaning of the word. I do know each masthead was fit with golden tops which would have lightning rods above that. *update: according to a Google term search "Deck to Truck" measurement is to the top of the flag pole halliard. A screenshot shows that Great Republic had a Deck to Truck height of 216'.

@rwiederrich Rob Aug 1, 2024 post #268 includes the entire Nov 18, 1896 4 page letter from Cornelius McKay to Captain Arthur H Clark included with delivery of his unique 1850 Stag Hound builder's model and as of yet undiscovered scale plans. On the last handwritten page, last entry reads: "Main Mast Deck to Truck 166." Using mast specs I calculated the total main mast spar heights as 210'. Subtracting 166' results in 44' below deck. Using that same standard, fore mast comes to 146' and mizzen mast is 129'. For convenience, I've attached a screen shot of my notes too.

@Sailor1234567890 There were short ladders going down 3 feet to windlass, dual heads and crew quarters below. Adding 4 feet 9 & 1/2" to height brings this space up to nearly 8 feet before reducing it again for ship's structures. After carefully reading a description of the Stag Hound forecastle accommodations in the Boston Daily Atlas article, Rob and I determined that this had to be the only sensible arrangement since there's simply no other way to safely provide crew quarters in this area of the ship. I just took a day sail on the Mystic Schooner Argia and had an opportunity to take her companion ladder below. The ladder was so steep as to be nearly vertical. The safest way down was to descend facing forward.

Rob, This entirely new interpretation of an authentic McKay forecastle bulkhead will most certainly raise some eyebrows. From a nautical engineering aspect this makes so much more sense. Placing a new patented windlass below improves weight balance, provides sensible working room for unit maintenance and better weather ability. Meanwhile, closing off an aft forecastle bulkhead is the only logical way to create a safe space to serve as crew accommodations. This also emphasizes a greater difference in substantially larger American clipper design capabilities as compared to much smaller British ones. Incidentally, a description of Webb built New York extreme clipper Challenge has an identical forecastle arrangement for their crew as well. Rob your inclusion of foul weather shutters is a nice touch. Besides, answering questions before asked they provide a nice focus of interest. Painting them the same light blue of your waterways might also help them stand out as well.

Rob, Another factor I missed in my sketch is the substantial inward rake of the ship's hull which also would affect workable items such as ladders, companions and windows. As for future possible projects, I now have trued out the following sheer, body and deck profiles: McKay twin packets Star of Empire & Chariot of Fame clippers Stag Hound, Flying Cloud, Flying Fish, Sovereign of the Seas, James Baines, Lightning, Great Republic, Donald McKay, Mystic, Connecticut clipper Andrew Jackson (Belle Hoxie) and Rockland Maine Red Jacket. Currently for obvious reasons, my total fous is on Stag Hound but all the others have been digitally corrected so that vertical and horizontal lines have been reconciled as accurately as possible.

Rob, When it comes to deck width specifics, we really only know of two: her widest beam amidships was 40 feet and at 8 feet from the stern, her poop deck was only 24 & 1/2 foot wide. Other internal dimensions are a 13 foot wide central cabin with a 12 foot wide captain's cabin on her starboard side below the aft poop deck. Thinking that ship's layouts are usually balanced I figured the opposite port side first mate's cabin would also be 12 feet wide. That would total 37 feet beam at 44 feet from her stern. If my pure conjecture is correct, in 63 & 1/2 feet, she's only 3 feet wider. That's since her widest beam of 40 feet is 107 & 1/2 amidships. Of course, the first mate's cabin could be smaller and that could make the poop deck narrower. I don't know exactly where a 27' beam was derived from for the foreward bulkhead, just that it was the approximate dimension we arrived at for me to work with. It does drive home necessity of getting more specific deck dimensions to allow for effective scaling. It's precisely why I'm endeavoring to get more exact dimensions from sources available.

Rob, Beautiful clean installation. However, it brings up a different concern. We were working on the expectation that this area was 27' wide. Your build however implies a far narrower space, possibly a third less. Maybe 18-20' ?

@Jared these characters look quite authentic in their sailor garb. By the time they're painted, they will look really cool.

Rob, I'm amazed how delicately your canine figurehead completes your clipper Stag Hound bow. It's reminiscent of the old fashioned lions rampant on English ships of war. Congratulations on having the first replica to accurately capture the Stag Hound prow in her full original configuration.

@Kenchington Cornelius McKay, son of Donald wrote about the authenticity of his hand crafted 1:48th scale (4' 8 & 1/2") Stag Hound model in his letter to Captain Arthur H Clark when he turned this beauty over to him. His instructions were to add 4" bottom and 5" wales planking. He included that the keel should also be added. It was built in two sections and had a depth of 30" (not 39"). Cornelius also said this builders model was crafted from the vessel's molding lines as they were taken off the lofting floor. Besides this documentation, Hall in his exhaustive lists of specs for many if not all of McKay's clippers confirmed that Stag Hound had a lower keel of 30". These two documents are sufficient proof of her 30" lower keel.

Rob, I agree that there's no revising your Stag Hound build as far as she's gotten. That was not my intention at all. She's beautiful and impressive as she sits. This exercise is more for @Luis Felipe and any other person who wants to model her in the future. In addition, using Hall diagrams and other historic sources, I'm amassing a plan library of McKay vesselss including twin packets Star of Empire and Chariot of Fame, clippers Flying Cloud, Flying Fish, Sovereign of the Seas, James Baines, Lightning & Donald McKay.

Rob, to quote a term from my favorite SciFi media... you're proceeding at "warp speed." Beautiful progress. When both hulls are compared, it's clear why 1869 Glory of the Seas is referred to as a medium clipper while 1850 Stag Hound has always been called an extreme clipper. Stag Hound has such a lovely yacht like profile, yet Donald McKay never launched another extreme vessel with such a radically designed 40" half hull. In fact, beginning with Flying Cloud second extreme clipper of his California Fleet, he gradually flattened his floors until he finally arrived at the 8" half floor on Glory of the Seas.

@rwiederrich @Vladimir_Wairoa did terrific yeoman's work creating a Stag Hound bulkhead kit in the similar fashion he did so excellently for our completed Glory of the Seas project. Still, based on recent comparisons of Rob's model to statistical dimensions it appears like her deck profile is just a bit slim. So, I'm reapproaching this subject by reexamining plans we have available. The Hall fore and aft body and deck profile is easy to interpret as it's simply matching two halves. By flipping images it was easy to do. However, the Chappelle scan has proven to be a lot more problematic. Since it's taken from a two page book it is skewed in more than one way. Longitudinal lines have a slight "v" to them due to the curvature of the book. Vertical lines are also slightly raked at an angle as are the transverse lines in the hull and deck. These distortions could be the basis for an incorrect deck profile. Using a cell phone app, I've realigned all parallel lines to be true and almost all vertical lines as well, as accurately as possible. Now it remains to combine both fore and aft halves into a whole and create one full plan. At 1:96th scale a 266' long ship is 28 & 1/4th" between perpendiculars, knightheads (vertical line just behind prow) and stern taffrail. Her 40' beam at 1:96th scale is 5". Working with a revised set of prints properly aligned, I plan to create plans the ye olde fashioned way with precise measurements and referring closely to the Cornelius McKay model for her accurate sheer profile. I'm sharing my work here so if anyone wants to pursue this too, they're welcome to do so.

@rwiederrich Rob, A Father’s Day gift of a sort for you. From Monthtly Nautical Magazine Quarterly Review, April 1855 there's an article on the 5 year old McKay California Fleet clipper Stag-Hound. While she had the fastest times among other clippers for the seasons she sailed in. I found a confirming spec that her masts raked 1 & 1/4" each instead of the erroneous 1 & 1/2" printed in the Boston Daily Atlas. There are 2 errata in this article: it's inconceivable that her keel clear of the garboards was 39" as that would leave an impossibly thin 7" for her inner keel. The specs in the Hall lists her outer keel as 30" leaving a more sensible 16" inner keel. In Cornelius McKay's handwritten specs lists her bowsprit steeve as 4.2" (19.34° inclination) not the more aggressive 4 & 1/2" (20.56° inclination) of this article. As we've discussed, using multiple historic sources results in greater accuracy.