ClipperFan

Lars Bruzelius' site is currently inaccessible so I'm reciting these dimensions from memory. According to Duncan McLean, the aft end of the poop deck was 24 1/2 feet wide at 8 feet forward of the taffrail. With a 44 foot overall poop deck length, 36 feet further forward, she's only 2 1/2 feet wider. That shouldn't be so dramatic.

@rwiederrich that will be quite a lively model depiction! Did you ever resolve the outer fore width of Stag Hound's rear poop deck? Since the central apartment width was 13 feet and fore starboard captain's cabin was 12 feet, I naturally calculated the starboard was an equal 12 feet. That makes the total forward width 27 feet. Does that look right on your deck?

@Rick310 I was able to download all images from the link I shared to my laptop. Since the museum has a policy about not publishing their images without permission, I didn't upload them.

https://collectionsonline.southstreetseaportmuseum.org/artobject-detail/?dataId=934479&sortBy=Title%20desc&pageNo=1 South Street Seaport Museum, New York has the best Staghound painting by James Edward Buttersworth. I recognize she's referred to as Stag Hound but in his piece and the label affixed to the frame it's a single word. I've read in the Time-Life Seafarer Series book on Clippers that the full title of this work is "Staghound shortening sail ahead of an approaching gale." It's a beautiful piece full of dramatic action. The oncoming storm is to the far left of the scene and it appears there's a downpour accompanying it. While this is a wonderful piece, deck furnishings aren't accurate when compared to the Boston Daily Atlas. FYI: just below the full-size framed image is a smaller one with arrows. Those lead to a few larger close up detailed scenes of this stunning work.

@MikeR nice job on your more naturally sculpted flying fish figurehead.

Rob, that's an excellent suggestion from a 40 year veteran modeler. One which never even occurred to me!

@Luis Felipe send a DM to @Vladimir_Wairoa to see if he can get you a copy from his supplier in Europe.

@Jared behind @rwiederrich starboard broadside Glory of the Seas view is a row of over a dozen forceps which Rob has collected from his career as a denturist. These implements are what he uses for his builds. Perhaps this might help you avoid more breaks.

@Jared have you considered fabricating a jig of sorts to immobilize and protect the section of spar you're attempting to drill? I would also start with the tiniest drill first to create a pilot hole which could then be gradually widened to your desired diameter. Rob has an incredible assortment of such drill bits. Maybe he could give you an idea of where to find some.

@Jared Maybe @rwiederrich can give you some tool suggestions to alleviate those problems.

@Jared Has the tougher wood worked better for you or are they breaking too? Incidentally completing Stag Hound build within 100 days was a condition of the contract.

@Jared I may be getting you confused with another Flying Fish ship modeler. Were you the guy who researched relative hardness of woods due to original supplies snapping, or am I thinking of somebody else?

While we're waiting for @rwiederrich return to Stag Hound modeling activity, I found this fascinating Sea History article. The focus is on her first commander, Captain Josiah Richardson. There's good detail about her maiden voyage. In addition, there's mention of his tragic command of McKay's third California Clipper Staffordshire. There's also a beautiful piece by Charles Robert Patterson. Too bad it's monotone.

@Snug Harbor Johnny @Jared and I discussed the relative hardness of various wooden dowls. He was frustrated with the brittle nature of kit supplied spars. Chances are that you can probably safely drill small holes in tougher wood.

@Jared beautiful repair job! She looks like nothing ever happened to her. Nicely done.

@campbewj It's been too long since I've looked in on your really sharp Flying Fish build. Your aft coach house profile is really nice. It looks very similar to how the real one on Glory of the Seas narrowed to accomodate working of the ship by her crew. Rob and I have discovered some more facts about the real McKay vessel versus commercial plans. We're doing a project on McKay's premier vessel, the extreme California clipper Stag Hound. While discussing the forward forecastle windlass and bulkhead arrangement we arrived at a completely different plan than current commercial plans show. This has developed from the relatively low interior forecastle height. In the case of Stag Hound, Flying Cloud and Flying Fish, Duncan McLean states their deck height was set at that of the main rail. For both Stag Hound and Flying Cloud that's 5' but for Flying Fish it was a mere 4'6". Keep in mind, decks were 3 & 1/2" thick, making interior height that much lower. Here's the issue we discovered. This area was set up to provide accommodations for a watch of the crew. So in order to provide that, bulkhead walls would have to been higher and the forecastle would have been closed, not open as plans show. Here's an excerpt describing this set up for Flying Fish. This completely contradicts the Ben Lankford lay out. I suspect he patterned it after the Scottish tea clipper Cutty Sark. McLean states that twin companions in the wings of the forecastle lead to crew quarters below. Before these (down below) there are waterclosets, lockers, etc.He also says this area was lofty, well lit and ventilated. Rob and I have concluded there most likely was a 3' drop, creating 7' high bulkheads. Since the windlass can't be mounted above, it too was mounted below. Here's how I envision this revised topgallant forecastle bulkhead for Stag Hound. Flying Cloud and Flying Fish would have had similar arrangements. That eliminates the twin free standing twin structures abaft the forecastle as well as depiction of a windlass crammed into an awkward area too tight to comfortably work in. When you think about McKays deck heights in every other area of his ships, they're all 7' or higher. Why would he then put the forecastle crew in cramped confines? I realize this revelation comes too late for your current build but I thought you would appreciate knowing our latest developments as we discover them.

@Jared Rob apparently developed his technique over 40+ years of model ship building. Chances are, he might have more closely followed instructions too and then gradually modified it through experience.

@Jared that's why @rwiederrich says he rigs from the inside out and going from the mizzen forward. It's a bear to access inner fife rails if there's outer rigging blocking you. He rigs from mizzen forward because it allows him to control stress on the masts.

@Jared understood. I would check in with Rob as to how far to proceed in securing the mizzen topmast before you start rigging that section.

@Jared It's hard to tell for sure but from your stern view, it looks like the mizzen topsail mast has a slight left lean, besides the lower mast. How it will appear once the lower mast is corrected might clear it up.

Rick, From the few contemporary accounts that I've read about the weatherly qualities of Stag Hound her Captain gave her high praise, stating there wasn't another ship that could pass her. He also said she was a very stable and dry ship. What came as a surprise to me though was that the 3 decker Webb California Clipper Challenge had an even more extreme 43" at half-hull.

@rwiederrich it's not a great image, for which I apologize. However, 8' before the stern taffrail on my poop deck plan lines up exactly with the fore of the steering wheel box. It also happens to be aligned with aft walls of the stern waterclosets. Width at that location is 24 & 1/2' as described in Duncan McLean's Stag Hound article. Midpoint of the skylight appears to be 35' across, compared to the 37' width of the poop deck fore. At the companion, it appears to be 30'. If these sketched dimensions don't match with the bulkheads, then let me know what your actual lines are. I know the lines on the poop deck fore look crooked. The sketch is actually arrow straight. Since the pape is 14" × 17" it's hard to get the entire image correct.

@KeithAug enjoy them while you may as Rob works quickly and efficiently. Pretty soon, the magnificent hull of Stag Hound will appear in all her svelte glory!

@rwiederrich Strap in. The Rob dragster of production is just firing up! I can barely contain my excitement. Meanwhile, the maritime historian in me just can't help but resist a comparison from your past future production. As a way of comparing McKay's inagural 1850 extreme California Clipper Stag Hound with his final 1869 medium California Clipper Glory of the Seas here's a couple scenes of her in the similar bulkhead stage. From Rob's past build June 3rd, 2021 almost exactly 3 & 1/2 years ago to his current post, Friday, November 1st, 2024! Since I couldn't locate images of her in the same exact angle, I flipped one to give an approximate comparison. You can see how the extreme 40" deadrise at half hull for Stag Hound was greatly reduced for Glory of the Seas which had a practically flat 8" deadrise at half hull. Still both have quite noticeably sharp clipper entrance and exits.

@Jared I didn't remember that these plans were from the solid hull version and not the plank on bulkhead one. This one dates back to 1953 and is from Model Shipways, Bogota, NJ. I selected these since they refer to the Norway plans, so that should match up. There are scales, they're just not identified very clearly. However, at the base of the Norway tracing you'll see call outs with spacing. It's hard to see but it looks like the scale is written as 1/4th" = 1' in the lower right corner, which would make it 1:48th scale. It makes sense, since that's the identical scale which Cornelius McKay crafted his impressive Stag Hound builder's hull model. Then, on the 1st sheet of the Model Shipways hull plan, there's a similar scale identified as 1/8th" = 1' making it 1:96th scale. I would be curious to see how your plans compare to these.