MORE HANDBOOKS ARE ON THEIR WAY! We will let you know when they get here.
×
ClipperFan
-
Posts
2,152 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by ClipperFan
-
Rob, beautiful work as always. This vessel is definitely "GLORY of the SEAS!" -
Rob, Vladimir, You guys can both relax. I sent Mike 2 emails. The first has a dozen images of Rob's earlier progress on his vessel. The second has a dozen pics of Vladimir's progress. I'm expecting Mike will be suitably impressed with both of your models. I wanted to send him a 3rd with pics on how we developed our plans but I was too tired. The last damn side effect of my procedure. It's how I'm forced to realize I've still recovering.
-
Guys, no pressure. Mike simply wants to see some progress photos. I think I've maybe complicated this issue way too much. For that, I apologize.
-
Rob, Since I have haven't replied to his request for a couple days now, I want to send him something. Don't worry, you've already shared enough progress pics that I can work with what's already been posted. That goes for Vladimir too. I was just thinking if you had the chance you could shoot maybe a couple more. Either way, I'm very confident Mike is going to be major impressed with both of your projects.
-
Rob, Vladimir, Later today I plan to email Mike some progress pics of both of your models. What I think would be most impressive would be to try to capture angles of your Clippers that most recognizably match the many scenes Mike has shared with us. That way I'm hoping it will go a long way to convincing Ron Haug to seriously reconsider his Glory plans.
-
Vladimir, this is word for word, as taken from Seaways, Ships in Scale Jan/Feb 1992, Vol III, No 1 Michael Mjelde's article "Glory of the Seas - Medium Clipper Ship" an excerpt from Duncan MacLean's 1869 description of Glory's construction details: "the floor timbers are sided 15 inches and moulded 20 inches on the keel with 28 inches space of frames from center to center, and as the frames ascend, they vary from 12 inches by 14 inches to eight inches by 11 inches, and the bulwark stanchions at the plank sheer are sided 11 inches and moulded 8 inches." The way I interpret moulded vs sided is that the thicker dimension "sided" would be the part that makes up the backbone of the ship's ribs and "moulded" would be the visible width. So your visible stanchions would be 8" each, 28" apart center to center. Taking into account 1/2 of 8" is 4", your upper bulwark stanchions are 2' (24") apart. Of course, Rob can correct me if I have these dimensions backwards.
-
Rob, I am not offended in the least. I will try better to make it known about my theoretical preferences so that you, Vlad or anyone else know it's not my intention to interfere in your personal visions for the models you create.
- 3,560 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- clipper
- hull model
- (and 2 more)
-
Rob, to paraphrase one of my all time favorite movie lines "What we had here was a failure to communicate!" First and foremost I hope I would never be so arrogant as to demand another modeler, you, Vladimir or anyone else to revise their construction in any way to suit my personal taste. How rude! As you said to me last year, why don't you build your own model the way you want it done. Thanks to Vladimir I at least have bulkheads to be able to eventually do so. I'm even more rueful that you got the totally incorrect impression about how I would want you to finish your vision of Glory. That's your choice alone. My God you've been pursuing this vision for a year now! As I've said on numerous occasions as far as I'm concerned, you're crafting the most accurate 1:96th scale reconstructed from scratch replica of "GLORY of the SEAS" as is Vladimir with his marvelous 1:72nd scale version. Personally, I can't wait to share both of your progress with Michael Mjelde. I think he will be blown away! My entire focus from day one has been and still is to assist you, Vlad or anyone else interested in accurately building "GLORY of the SEAS" not by telling you what to do but in the spirit of true collaboration being able to arrive at the most precise recreation of this wonderful vessel. And I am humbled and honored to be a member of your group.....
- 3,560 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- clipper
- hull model
- (and 2 more)
-
Rob, apparently my preference for an 1869 version of "GLORY of the SEAS" wasn't specified clearly enough. Of course it would be grossly unfaithful to reality to not weather her after many years at Sea as she clearly rests in the 1877 (?) San Francisco dock scene. I was referring to what an incredibly beautiful spectacle she was when her Muntz metal had that impressive, untarnished golden hue contrasted with her satin jet black hull polished as smooth as glass, her freshly applied 24 kt. gold leaf carvings and her lovely Grecian Goddess 'Athene' in glorious white, maybe some thin gold trim to highlight her gown. The way she must have looked when first launched. I personally feel the dramatic contrast between the two distinctly different time periods would demonstrate that as impressive as she was, in the end she was still a working vessel. I hope this clears up any confusion.
- 3,560 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- clipper
- hull model
- (and 2 more)
-
Snug Harbor Johnny I remember Rob going into great detail about his copper plating process in his "Great Republic" build. Since that is a huge file to search thru, I found this fascinating link on a popular discussion of creating realistic, long lasting copper sheathing. I hope this answers your questions:
-
Another interesting observation is that weathered Muntz turns dirty brown instead of light green (like the Statue of Liberty).
-
Rob while I completely agree with your stance about weathering, which is how I usually made my models as a youth, I also think it would be quite interesting to see an alternate version of "GLORY of the SEAS" as she was originally launched in 1869, all shiny and new. Of course such decisions remain with the professional modelers. I'll be content to remain in the cheering section for now.
-
Rob, if you only knew what a delight it is to see your rapid progress. After seeing the glorious golden hue of real Muntz metal, I agree copper itself looks garish in comparison. It will be so nice to see that replicated on your "GLORY of the SEAS". By the way, out of curiosity, how did you determine that shade of Rustoleum would recreate Muntz metal? That's amazing!
-
Vladimir, in any pilot project like this, there are bound to be challenges along the way. I think your idea of getting laser cut bulkheads patterned after Model Expo's "Flying Fish" was and still is brilliant! Thanks in large part to your final computer profile, I was able to see why my drawings were so "barge like" in comparison. My sheer was way off. Too flat. While it's much closer and way more accurate now, I still haven't quite been able to match my lines with your graceful sheer. It may be the fact that you used ratios and I'm doing old fashioned measurements. I'm not exactly sure. Meanwhile, if you can post some real nice beauty shots which align with images Mike's shared with us, that would be great!
-
***Update Again!!!! **** Mike sent another email to Rob and I asking to see progress on both models. With Vladimir's permission, I would like to send his computer profile and laser cut bulkheads developed from them. Then I want to send progress pics which compare your models in the same positions as the many rare photos we've been sent. Mike already mailed to Ron Haug the two photos of someone's model in progress with comparisons to Glory in the same position. Maybe Arina shared those with Mike? If so, it's most likely Rob's model. I'm hoping by sharing these images of 2 highly accurate Glory models with Mike who plans to mail them to Ron Haug, he will convince Ron to radically rethink his own approach to his vision of Glory being a "throw back to McKay's 1830s Packet Ships". So guys, if you want to do some additional real sharp "beauty shots" that would be very much appreciated!
- 3,560 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- clipper
- hull model
- (and 2 more)
-
Rob, how's that old saying go? "Ach, The Haggis is in the fire for sure nae!" Turns out, I was copied on your most recent email from Mike. I took the opportunity to diplomatically say that Ron Haug's latest interpretation of Glory being a throw back to McKay's 1830's Packet Ships is in complete disagreement with the discovery I made that Glory's ratios in 2 important categories matched "Flying Fish almost exactly, with Glory having a 2' sleeker LOA ratio. I explained how you and Vladimir are creating 2 of the most accurate Glory models ever seen before, using laser cut bulkheads created from a profile developed by our months of collaborative efforts. I offered to send Mike progress photos, should he wish. Finally I told him if he would like, I can send him a copy of my 1:96 scale sketch of Glory's Hull which he could then share with Ron. We'll see what develops... **July 28th 2021** EXCITING UPDATE! In his most recent email Michael Mjelde requested I send him a copy of my 1:96th scale "GLORY of the SEAS" ship's lines drawing once completed. Finally it will be possible to have at least an opportunity to share what we've all developed over the past year. For me personally it could be the culmination of a previously inconceivable 12 year journey to correct a wrong made to Donald McKay's beautiful final Clipper. I owe it all to you Rob, in your own dogged determination to finally realize an accurate recreation of "GLORY of the SEAS!" That drive of yours brought myself, Vladimir and many others to join your vision. Ultimately that drew in Arina "TheAuthorsDaughter" who then got her dad, the great author Michael Mejelde involved. From the marvelous crystal clear photos he had gathered over 40 years ago, we have had the rare opportunity to visually inspect practically every inch of Glory. Vladimir lent his amazing computer talent and now we have not one but two beautiful models both being built simultaneously, on different continents, no less. These are heady days indeed!
- 3,560 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- clipper
- hull model
- (and 2 more)
-
Vladimir my apologies, I forgot to ask if you were using the metric system. All of my calculations have been on, I guess it's called the Olde English measuring system. I'm glad you resolved your issue. Yes, when the docking port is the appropriate size it make the ship appear bigger. Kudos to you for reconfiguring it. By the way a new detail I just noticed, which actually makes sense is that the entire docking port is surrounded by very thin wood, like a picture frame. It makes sense that this port would be finished like that so that vulnerable strakes wouldn't be damaged. You have to look closely but it's visible in the scene of Glory on the Ways as well as in her fitting out scene.
-
Vladimir, Rob's probably very familiar with the true shade of Muntz metal aka yellow metal. Here's an ongoing chat in Model Ship World that I thought might be of some value. There's actually a fellow who worked on "Cutty Sark's" most recent restoration who confirms the shiny golden hue is correct Muntz metal. In comparison copper is nowhere near the same. I've read that over time, due to extensive exposure to salt water it does turn green but what shade is beyond me.
-
Rob, a trick I've learned to allow me to avoid upside down photos is to edit them slightly. In this case, I reduced both sides just enough to take out the white edges. Now when it's posted, voila! right side up! As for the confusion on Glory's coppering line. When she was originally launched in 1869, her copper line was specified as being 22'. Later, that line was increased by adding an additional line of copper sheets. Michael Mjelde has said since each sheet was 14" tall, this raised the height of her copper line to 25'. It would make sense that after a few years at Sea, the Captain being concerned about protecting his vessel's Hull integrity made a recommendation to add the additional line of coppering. It's actually referred to more accurately as yellow metal, but in America was it Muntz or something uniquely American that I'm till unsure of.
-
Rob & Vladimir, due to my "anal retentive" preoccupation with keeping all things as accurate as possible with "GLORY of the SEAS" I have repeatedly counted strakes on her side (which is possible with a clear enough image) below her sheerline molding to the top of the starboard loading dock is exactly 7 strakes. Per Duncan MacLean's 1869 description, all strakes were 6 1/2". So 7×6 = 42"+7×1/2 = 3 1/2" more. Top of loading dock is exactly 45 1/2" (3' 9 1/2") below the lower sheerline molding. Since the side is exactly 4 strakes, that makes her side 4×6= 24"+4x1/2 = 2", making the side 26" (2'2") It's harder to tell whether there are 9, 10 or even 11 strakes below the dock, since the thin white line which denotes the coppering line is so hard to make out. Basically that puts the lower dimension between (1) 9×6=54"+9×1/2"=4 1/2" or 58 1/2" (4'10 1/2") (2) 10×6"=60"+10×1/2"= 5" for 65" (5'5") (3) 11×6"= 66" + 11× 1/2" = 5 1/2" for 71 1/2" (5'11 1/2") Where this gets even more interesting is the final dimensions we get to the top of the exterior Monkeyrail Molding. We're now sure the exterior of the Mainrail Bulkhead from sheerline molding to Mainrail Molding is 48" add 18" to top of Monkeyrail Molding equals 66" or 5 1/2'. Adding this to the other 3 measurements gets these results = 58 1/2"+ 26"+45 1/2"+66" = 196" or 16' 4" putting it below the 17' we estimated as the lowest point of her sheerline midpoint of her Main shrouds. Since we know that Glory's sheer was 7' and I count the height at her Jibboom as 24' & an additional 1' for the Quarterrail Cap for Rob's 25' total height. Adding an additional 6 1/2" for 10 strakes puts us closer at 16' 10 1/2". Adding another 6 1/2" to that gives us 17' 4 1/2". So the only useful measurement that fits neatly into every other one is the highest, being 11 strakes above the coppering line. Next I'll try to convert these actual dimensions into usable 1:96th & 1:72nd scale.
-
Rob, I made a suggestion that Mike should see the amazing work you're doing on Glory's Hull but I personally haven't sent him anything. If it is yours, that's a very good thing because, as I've repeatedly said, your 1:96th scale model and Vladimir's 1:72nd scale version are currently the two most accurate reproductions of "GLORY of the SEAS" I have ever seen. I hope Ron Haug is really open to reassessing his version because it looks nothing at all like Vladimir's excellent computer profile. I shared my most recent effort in comparison to Vladimir's and immediately recognized that my sheer was nothing like his. I've completely revised my plans and they're finally starting to look more like Glory herself. I actually traced her Bow, which almost exactly matched my sketch but was a little sleeker. I've also lowered the height of her Stern which now matches the angle more like the Stern section. The Stern now looks very similar to the photo which looks more graceful now. Her outer railing is also slightly higher than I first thought, so that will allow me to do a better job illustrating them. Now that I'm feeling improved, other than still very weak, I'm racing to get this done properly "Shipshape & Bristol Fashion."
-
Vladimir your planking work continues to amaze me. Glory's true form is really looking beautiful. You and Rob are both doing incredibly beautiful work. It's exciting seeing your projects develop. Great work!
-
In my continuing pursuit to finally get an exhaustively accurate lines plan of "GLORY of the SEAS" it has been a particular focus not to repeat the same mistakes which resulted in the less than successful first attempt at a large scale drawing. Since Vladimir and I had such a successful collaboration at realizing practically all of Glory's Hull dimensions, I decided to compare his computer drafted print with my own work in progress. Since both Bow & Stern still seem not quite right, images of both were included too. This image is decidedly difficult to see. Due to extreme length of over 3' including Bowsprit, I had to stand on my bed & shoot it with my cell phone from my 6' height. Between balancing on a mattress and trying to concentrate on keeping all elements square to the tiny viewfinder, this was the best result I could get. Not surprisingly when I looked at my sketch & Vladimir's document, it became rapidly clear that our Hulls don't match at all. So it's back to the "drawing board" as I struggle to match as exactly as possible my Hull with the Vladimir print (which to me, other than some rough spots Bow & Stern, represents the closest we've gotten to Glory's true Hull form). Besides which I also caught some inaccuracies with the calculation of 250' between perpendiculars. I originally thought the entire roughly 10' difference between 240'2" Keel & 250' length was all part of the Bow. I was wrong. When I looked at the "Flying Fish" draft taken from Sweden, I realized my mistake. A small section of the upper Main Deck projects beyond the Stern Rudder. The Rudder also isn't totally verticle, it cants slightly inward. Correcting these oversights resulted in a slightly more verticle Stem below the waterline. As can be seen by the Bow photo, my Cutwater still is too "beaky" in comparison. The actual Prow is more graceful. Finally the Stern rises just a little too high and its shape still doesn't quite match the more lithe one in the photo. The relentless pursuit of perfection continues
-
Rob, this part of your construction process is just so lovely to observe. The dramatic contrast of shiny copper plating with black upper hull has always looked so beautiful to me. Excellent work! Since you usually proceed at warp speed, it won't be a long wait to see finished results too!
-
MrBlueJacket you are absolutely correct. I mistakenly referred to Vladimir's 1:72nd scale when I meant to say Rob's 1:96th scale. The drawing has been painstakenly accurately done to 1"=8' or as you more correctly said it 1/8th" = 1' both to 1:96th scale. Thanks for catching my mistake so I can correct the record. As mentioned this is still very much a work in progress. I wanted to share my process to get feedback from the group. When finished it will include a legend indicating the 1:96 scale nature of the drawing, plus call outs in reference to every detail where it was developed from in support of the accuracy of the final plan. I'm still debating whether to finish it in pen since the pencil is so difficult to see too.
Our Emblem ®
