ClipperFan

@rwiederrich good catch on those modifications. It makes sense that they would have been done to add further protection of an aging vessel. What do you think of the idea of a brace around the mizzenmast to prevent it damaging the roof of the portico, since due to rake, it's practically on top of the roof? Is there a disadvantage from not having access to the spiderband supporting the spanker boom? If we make the portico flush, it solves clearance issue but then easy access to that spanker boom is gone. The only other approach is a bigger square portico, surrounding the mizzenmast which would then exit from the rear of the portico roof and everything would rig to it there. There's a painting of the huge, elegantly decorated James Baine dining room where the mizzenmast is actually in the center of the aisle.

@rwiederrich exactly the same thing I was wondering about. If you look closely at the starboard image of Glory of the Seas bow, there's a small iron brace to prevent the inner bobstay chain from abrading the cutwater. Would such a similar brace had been employed at the front of the portico to stabilize the mizzenmast and prevent such instability? Just a thought.

Portico close-up demonstrates how close everything is.

@druxey sliding doors were what we saw on the front fascia of the rear coach house on Glory of the Seas. Probably because it's safer than swinging doors in rough seas. What makes sense that this is the most likely portico arrangement is that it also gives sailors roof access to the spider band supporting the mizzen spanker boom. A portico further back would make that impossible.

@rwiederrich @Vladimir_Wairoa Here's a 1:96th scale conceptual sketch of the rear portico on Stag Hound. Tolerances are tight but it all works. Dimensions: 8 ft square x 8 ft high, with 6 inch fore and aft overhangs and 1 ft port and Starboard overhangs, with 32 inch high surrounding rail and dual ladders. Portico is recessed 4 ft with port and starboard rearward sliding doors. It's located 7 feet away from the center of the 30 inch wide mizzenmast, which has a 1&1/2 inch per foot rake. An alternative would be a flush mounted portico with single front opening door. Let me know if you like this or do you think flush mount makes more sense?

@rwiederrich @Vladimir_Wairoa just let me know that on paper Crothers plans are accurate. The problem is photographic distortion. So he's going to see if he can get a more accurate scan. Meanwhile, I suggested he overlay the 1881 Henry Hall lines over Crothers. Not because they're more detailed, as obviously they're not but because they're already scans. I downloaded them directly from Google Books. In these comparisons it's very obvious that the more desirable Crothers body plan has a subtle shift to left while both scans of the Hall plans are Arrow straight vertical. As far as being able to produce accurate bulkheads which align with the Cornelius McKay model, this issue is the only sticking point remaining. So, if anyone reading this can make a clean scan of Crothers from "The American Built Clipper Ship 1850-1856" and post it here. It would be greatly appreciated.

@KeithAug welcome aboard! I had the distinct pleasure of being involved with Rob, Vladimir and Druxey in our years long development of the authentic appearance of McKay's final Medium clipper Glory of the Seas. The best surprise of all, which allowed us to take our investigation to a whole new level was direct involvement with author Michael Mjelde. His guidance with rare documents and pictures not even in his books were incredibly helpful. This Stag Hound build is moving at Warp Speed in comparison. Vladimir's struggling with reconciling 3 different interpretations of her body lines but I'm confident we will soon resolve that.

@Luis Felipe I sent you a message a short while ago. Apparently you haven't been able to read it. So I'm posting in your finished 1865 Sir Lancelot build instead. @rwiederrich @Vladimir_Wairoa and myself are currently in process of establishing ship's build lines to finally recreate an authentic model of Donald McKay's inaugural extreme clipper Stag Hound. Unless he has corrected it, you can find the build Log under 1851-1881 scratch build logs. Look for @rwiederrich 1850 McKay clipper Stag Hound. We're very near to launch construction. Hope to see you there! "Stag Hound in the Tea Trade" by Cape Cod artist, Frank Vining Smith

Rob, Reading exploits of "Jack Tar" really gives you an appreciation for their steely nerves and determination. Actually many clipper ships were known as Hell ships because of the incredibly, insane way ship's captains pushed ship and crew often to the breaking point and beyond. One of the most amazing events involved Captain Lauchlan McKay (Donald's brother) and the maiden voyage of the Sovereign of the Seas. During an October gale the ship lost her main topmast went over the side,taking with it fore topmast, fore yard, every stitch of sail on the foremast and mizzen it the mizzen topgallant mast. Captain McKay emphatically told his entire crew of nearly 100 that under no circumstances was any line to be cut. In a week both topmasts, topsail yards and fore yard were all aloft with sails bent. In 12 days, they completely rebuilt everything as if the disaster had never occured!

Rob, Sailors who actually worked these massive clipper ships give really dramatic, first hand descriptions of the hellish conditions they dealt with in manhandling those behemoth sails. A particularly vivid tale involved bringing up a ain topsail, not even the course. It was freezing, sleeting rain, the wind was howling and there was a danger of losing the mast if the sails weren't immediately taken in. Climbing ratlines was treacherous with everything being frozen over. Driving rain nearly blinded the men. Then when they had to fuel the sail, it fought them like a wild banshee with the wind still partially filling it. As the fought to pull the stubborn canvas up, it also became evident it was a frozen sheet of ice too. Meanwhile the mast was swaying back and forth in wild gyrations with the movement of the massive ship below. I remember the sailor saying the slogan one hand for the ship and one for yourself was a lie. Often they had to use both hands to grab and lift the sails. Tragically a man fell to his death as a sudden shift knocked him off the yard. By the time he hit the water the ship had already left him far behind...

@rwiederrich Rob, pretty painting. Is this piece by David Thimgan?

@rwiederrich Rob, I must admit to being emotionally connected to the lovely Stag Hound ever since I saw the beautiful John Steel painting on the Revell box top. He's one of my favorite artists. It takes quite a talent to portray a ship with such bad deck placement as a house where a forecastle should be and yet make it completely believable. However, it's McKay's second clipper Flying Cloud which is still my favorite. But having that authentic model by Cornelius McKay just makes an opportunity to finally recreate McKay's very first clipper an easy decision. Plus it has the extra benefit of never having properly been done before. I'm really getting excited to see how quickly this is all coming together.

Rob explained to me that this conclusion of mine was misguided. I took a look at another illustration of the twin Packet ships Star of Empire & Chariot of Fame drawn by Donald McKay himself. (courtesy of Peabody-Essex Museum, Salem, MA) It includes an internal view of these ship's hulls, including her pitched floors. Conclusive proof that my conclusion was exactly wrong. I so hate when that happens... 🙂 Rob further clarified that due to severe hogging, the bow and stern would both flatten out.

@rwiederrich Rob, having such a valuable resource is really an incredible aid in getting an accurate model of Stag Hound. The very first of McKay's amazing line of legendary clippers, built and launched over a period of nineteen years. I'm surprised how rapidly this is developing in comparison to our Glory of the Seas project.

While we're discussing the current, somewhat confusing keel depth, I will make a case, both for using the Cornelius McKay model as our premiere resource and for using his specific recommendations of additional feature dimensions to realize full accuracy of Donald McKay's inaugural extreme clipper. Here's the excerpt of the letter McKay's son gave to Captain Arthur H Clark upon presenting him with his precious artifact. Besides his over 4 foot model, he mentioned that there was a drawing too. Anybody out for sleuthing? To complete her full 'rotundity' as Cornelius refers to it, he recommends adding 4 inches to bottom planking and 5 inches to her wales. To which, he also mentions add 30 inches to her keel which is built in two depths. My interpretation for these instructions is that Mr. McKay was describing exact dimensions to realize the full aspects for the basic hull of Stag Hound. So I would set exterior keel depth at 30 inches, believing the two depths he mentions are the shoe (false keel) and keel outside her hull. Second reason why I put full faith in the McKay model is our most authentic source to replicate Stag Hound is the force of his own words describing actions he took. Here we have a precise replica of a ship as she was in the process of construction. Not only that, lines were all literally taken off those on the moulding loft floor. Add in this was professionally crafted (referred to as an only correct "builder's model" in existence) by the builder's own son! To me, this is a gift from the past.

While we're discussing location of the main deck, I noticed another important feature from the 1922 port broadside photo of Glory of the Seas beached at Endolyne, sadly awaiting her fiery end. Unlike practically all clipper ship models I've seen, if you look very closely, you'll see her decks are level, not pitched. First look at her forecastle enlargements. Note how the base of her sprayrail is level while the sprayrail itself increases in height slightly as it runs from aft to fore. That's easiest to see when looking at the starboard bow shadow. Now look at her stern. See how both coach house and wheelhouse roofs are also both level? Now, look at the outer rail on turned stanchions. Look carefully at the port side of the wheelhouse. Ever so slightly, the rail raises up from fore to aft while the sidewall of the Wheelhouse remains level. This is most noticeable by comparing the port wheelhouse wall at fore and then at aft. It's subtle but definitely there. From an engineering perspective, this makes more sense. Captains and crew spend months, even years aboard these vessels as their only homes. So it's more comfortable on level decks for them. We've now concluded that the main deck of Stag Hound was 8 & 1/2 inches below her sheerline. I didn't realize that the waterway was sunk 3 & 1/2 inches below the main deck planking. So now, as long as Rob and Vlad agree with me about her level decks, we can locate her main deck from which all distances of her masts are then taken: 50 feet from inside the front stem to foremast center; 67 feet from foremast center to mainmast center; 56 feet from mainmast center to mizzenmast center and finally 42 feet from mizzenmast center to inside of the sternpost.

@Vladimir_Wairoa Feels this is the finished Stag Hound profile. Her overall length is 226 feet and her keel is 207 feet, precisely as she's described in The Boston Daily Atlas. We're still working on her 215 feet length between perpendiculars, from inside her front stem to inside her rear sternpost. To accomplish that requires locating her main deck, which is 6 & 1/2 feet below the top of the monkey rail. With 1 foot internal waterways, exterior sheerline should be 1 foot above the deck. Once Rob concurs, it should be a simple matter of dropping 1 foot below that to locate the main deck. That's important since all mast placements are measured on that main deck line. Progress on realizing this beautiful ship is moving along surprisingly rapidly.

@druxey the 1881 Henry Hall profile aligns just about perfectly with the Cornelius McKay model, except for a slight deviation in the prow profile. I kept everything to scale for the reconstruction of the original McKay Stag Hound bow. @Vladimir_Wairoa using his computer wizardry has overlayed the McKay profile on the Hall profile. You can see the only correction is to slightly revise the bow, which can be easily done.

@rwiederrich Rob, Thanks for that compliment. When I saw Seaman's Bride in Crothers illustrations it reminded me of a picture I'd seen before, although it wasn't a daguerrotype. However, I can see a significant weakness in the headboard, trailboard bow as opposed to the innovative McKay version. The very openess of the former arrangement leaves itself vulnerable to structural damage by a rogue wave. Duncan McLean made quite a bold statement in his introduction to Stag Hound. A person could be forgiven for attributing his glowing praise as pure hyperbole. But what if it wasn't an exaggeration but an honest scientific evaluation instead? It's beginning to make more sense now, when taking into account this unusual bow extension: "This magnificent ship has been the wonder of all who have seen her. Not only is she the largest of her class afloat, but her model may be said to be the original of a new idea in naval architecture." Meanwhile, I did a quick scale sketch of the Stag Hound stern poop deck. With a 7' distance from her mizzenmast center, I'm exploring a possibility of an 8' square portico, recessed 4' with dual sliding door side entrances. Since the poop deck measures 30' across at the fore and it's 5' high, it makes sense from a safety viewpoint to have a rail on turned stanchions in front. With an elevation of 8' the portico would just clear the front railings. Counting 1' overhangs, there's a 10' square area, which would make for a nice overlook. I envision open rails on that area too, but it's just a thought. Here's a preliminary rough sketch on the back of an envelope (wide "V" line is the envelope). It's done at 1:96 scale, to give you an idea of how this arrangement would look. (dotted lines are the 32' long × 13' wide lower apartment outline) Another approach would be to flush mount the portico with a front facing door. Since doors are 3' wide, to have a sliding door would mean a 9' square footprint, unless it's an ordinary door opening, than it could be a small 4-6' square. After all, it's a simple entrance to steps 3' downstairs to the lower apartments. Which one makes the most sense to you?

@rwiederrich Rob, Here's a contemporary image of a clipper ship with both headboards and trail boards, exactly as the Crothers illustration describes. From below it's clear that the headboard is more of a decoration than an integral extension of the ship. There are old fashioned open frames between the headboard and stem. The cutwater has a trail board, which is a beautiful embellishment but not as substantial as the unique McKay bow. That's why I'm so convinced he wanted to keep manufacture of it secret. Again, you want to avoid the trap of misunderstanding McLean's emphasis on lack of decorations. As we discussed before, Scottsmen like McKay and his friend McLean put more focus on seaworthiness than superfluous decorations. However brief though, McLean actually does mention that Stag Hound was equipped with both naval hoods and cutwaters. It's just two sentences and if you blink and you'll miss it: "An idea of its sharpness may be formed from the fact that, at the load displacement line (as the cutwater is tapered to an angle), a flat surface applied to the bow, from its extreme, would show no angle at the hood ends. Her bow commences at the cutwater, and swells from that point in unbroken curvature." Not until his description of Flying Cloud McKay's second extreme clipper, does McLean introduce the more clarifying term navel [sic: naval] hoods. But to me, his description of the Stag Hound clipper is identical to Flying Cloud with the exception of the word "naval." When I did my reconstruction, I kept all components to scale and in proportion identical to what we saw on Glory of the Seas. The only revision that I see necessary is to realign the cutwater taper to the Cornelius McKay bow profile. 1851 Daguerrotype of Clipper ship Seaman's Bride courtesy of H. Furlong Baldwin Library, Maryland Center for History

@rwiederrich Rob My tracing of the 1881 Henry Hall online illustration used 1 verticle line = 8'. When I printed it out, serendipity, each line is precisely 1" apart, printed out at 1:96th scale! Using a ruler, the copper line is exactly at the 16' line (2"). Horizontal line 7 on the Hall lines. Line 8 is possibly when the ship is fully laden. Vladimir's computer overlay of my drawing and what I figure is the Cornelius McKay half-hull model shows that I was very close. It will be no problem to revise the sketch to match the Cornelius McKay profile. In fact, it appears like it's just the bow profile that needs to be corrected. The image is reversed since I originally traced the print from the back. I've posted Vladimir's overlay from both port and starboard views. Seeing how accurate this is, it looks like I'm already a third of the way to getting an accurate hull.

@rwiederrich Rob While I haven't heard back from Vlad yet, I'm sure he won't mind if I share his work here. Vladimir's source for these vessel's line all come from Crothers' "The American Built Clipper Ship 1850-1856." This is developing amazingly quick. At this point, Vlad appears to be relying heavily on the impressive lines of Crothers. It's hard to tell from these plans which appear remarkably close to the Cornelius model. Since McKay's son built his Hull replica directly from moulding loft lines, as they were being laid out for the actual construction of the vessel herself, I want to adhere as precisely as possible to that source. I only hope Vlad concurs.

Rob, I think we're both saying the same thing in different ways. The key point I'm making is that the most reliably accurate framing source, which is primarily what the McKay model represents is his resourceful build. He admits himself that the 30" keel has to be added. To me that by implication includes the stem which is an extension of the keel. As far as practice is concerned, I have never seen a half-hull model include the monkey rail. It's no big challenge to add those missing components. I've got to imagine when the bulkheads are drafted, you'll want that height included. Like we both say, Vlad can do amazingly quick work. He seems to really like the Crothers body plan which has all components included. I just want to be sure Crothers is reconciled with Cornelius's model. I just feel like Cornelius showed incredible forethought to construct an exact builder's model of McKay's inaugural Clipper just while she was being built! Come on! Seriously, how much more authentic do you want to get? By the way, what do you think of the small, square portico now being 7' away from the mizzenmast center?

Bill, Depending on how clever you want to be, the Revell Stag Hound can be built into a pretty little model. Since you mention that silly little forecastle house, I'm pretty sure you've ditched it by now. Rob and Vlad learned the hard way that the forecastle deck mounts atop the monkey rail not the main top rail. The only rail surrounding the deck is the splash rail. It's actually possible to created the cutwater and naval hoods by using flash around the sails. There's plenty of that light, white plastic to spare. It all depends on how invoved you want to get.

@rwiederrich Rob, I thought of something else too. McLean states that the rear sternpost has a 2' rake. Adding that in with a 7' overhang beyond the sternpost would push the front of the poop deck back an additional 2'. Instead of being 37' forward of the sternpost, that makes it 35'. Since the mizzenmast center is 42' from the sternpost, it would now be 7' ahead of the poop deck. Now there's enough space for a small square portico entrance to the stern apartments 3' below. Does this make sense to you?