Jump to content

ClipperFan

NRG Member
  • Posts

    1,961
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ClipperFan

  1. Here's the 1854 Black Ball Clipper "Champion of the Seas" at the time she was launched, she was the largest Merchant ship in the world. She was 2,447 tons, 238' keel. 252' on deck between perpendiculars. Since her stern post was verticle, her stem projected out 14'. From this contemporary daguerrotype, you'd be hard pressed to believe that. While Glory's sheer was 7' this vessel's was a much more modest 4 1/2'. Glory was very similar in dimensions, being 250' between perpendiculars on deck but was significantly smaller at 2102 tons. There's a very detailed description of Champion from the May 20, 1854 Boston Daily Atlas, on Lars Bruzelius' site. As for Glory's Bow I'm now much more inclined to believe she looked very similar to the "Henry B Hyde" but with less dramatic sheer.
  2. Rob, My "eyeball" guesstimate was 18'. If I read your calculations correctly, I was off by 1'. 9' from point above Jibboom to center of 1st notch, 6' from center of 1st to 2nd notch and 4' to cathead center, equaling 19' in total. I'm still wondering about her bulwark height though. Has the damaged Bulwark brought your estimate down. I've read most of McKay's Clippers had 5' Main Rails, typically topped by 18" monkey rail for a total of 6 1/2'. Mike said he spoke with crew who were 6' tall and served on Glory. They told him standing by the bulwark, they could not see over the top. That's what leads me to believe her Bulwarks were over 6'. Your thoughts?
  3. Rob, I edited out the extraneous details and sent these 3 images to Michael Mjelde. He said you did a great job combining these into one picture. He eventually plans to send the overall 1877 scene. I also requested the picture of Glory being towed to Alaska in order to get a more clear view of her fascinating stern.
  4. Vladimir, Probably the only picture of Glory which reveals the true location of her anchor stock catheads and gives an accurate idea of their dimensions. They're located completely under her fore quarterdeck caprail. They fit entirely within her 18" high monkeyrail. Cathead width can be calculated by comparing it to height, my best estimate is 8-9". Distance from first notch to second notch looks to be 5' and about 4' to the cathead. That would make the cathead's distance about 18' from the point of the quarterdeck caprail where they join just above the Jibboom entrance. As usual, Rob can double check and either verify or adjust my estimates.
  5. Vladimir, Druxey's revised figurehead will fit right in. All he did was revise Athene's right hand to match contours of her hand and upper shoulder. One final observation of the Naval Hood. Three equal moldings trim the bottom while two continue from the Hull to trim the upper side. The three below terminate at the outer end the two above go completely around to the other side.
  6. Vladimir, You always do such nice clean work. I am continually impressed. My only critique is that the fat, leading edge is not verticle. It inclines at a slight degree forward, to follow contours of Glory's flaring Hull. Top of the leading edge appears to align directly with the left side of the notch above while botton appears to line up with the center of that same forward, 1st notch. My tracing pad finally arrived, so I will make so tracings of Glory to be exhaustively precise.
  7. Druxey, My suggestion to Vladimir was to replace your older Athene with the more refined version in post #643. About the best tracing of Mike's excellent extra sharp closeup in post #547, is the center image in post #564. However, the section above the anchor hawse hole cants inward, not exactly verticle. I refer to a line that exits the first notch, crosses over the "E" in SEAS and perfectly outlines that leading edge of the Naval Hood. Look very closely, the triple moldings at the lower edge of her Naval Hood aren't verticle either. They each are a little shorter than the one below, aligning with that beveled edge.
  8. Sailor, I sympathize with your verklempft reaction to pictures I share from Michael Mjelde. It's as if they're being transmitted from OZ (Downunder, not the Emerald City)! Try as I might and believe me I've made multiple attempts, images that arrive in my email stubbornly remain upside down. I figure the group would prefer to receive these glorious highly detailed prints upside down than not at all. Mike has told me made these images directly from original negatives of over 40 years ago. Since my own printer hasn't worked for years I've been going to Staples. For 15c a standard page, I've emailed them directly to: staples@printme.com where I've been able to make my own copies. You can print Legal 16c up to Ledger size 24c. They even offer beautiful color too: Standard 55c, Ledger .90c
  9. Rob, A few posts back I shared a page which confirms Glory's sheer was indeed seven feet. From this beautiful 1877 Glory docked at San Francisco scene, her lovely sheer is clearly evident. This is the same image that reveals her impressively lofty rig as well. I agree with Sailor, please share your stitched together scene with our group.
  10. Rob, If you look at the more assertive profile of the "Donald McKay" I believe it will help us reassess "Glory of the Seas" more accurately while dispelling perspective bias clouding our perceptions. I'm not saying her entrance was as aggressive as the "M'Kay" but it does appear her profile below the waterline was inclined back more than our current illustrations show. As for her higher copper line, this is most likely in anticipation of heavy equipment installed to support her work as a factory salmon cannery ship.
  11. Druxey, I just want to be sure I understand you. The profile above that I shared earlier is that of another much larger vessel the "Donald McKay" 260' between perpendiculars, 2,488 tons vs "Glory of the Seas" 250' between perpendiculars, 2,102 tons. I shared this image because its recorded as being accurate, since British took the lines off her while she was in Dry Dock. My point is that this vessel, which has a more subdued bow profile has a far less verticle entrance than what we're estimating for Glory. However, if you're referring to the 1911 Seattle refit of Glory, the smashed upper Bulwarks appear to have shoved some of her upper moldings forward, marring her appearance but not affecting her sea worthiness.
  12. Vladimir, You probably won't like this but I just discovered a mistake I made in calculating Glory's height at her Starboard Docking Port (rectangular hole in her side). I gave specific details in an earlier post this morning. Bottom line, she's 1' 1 & 1/2" lower than before. Her loading dock is 5' above the waterline, 25" high, probably 3' wide and she's 45 & 1/2" to the lower molding. This is going to mess up your Stern again but in reality it goes back to my suspicion that we've had her Stern too big anyways. Speaking of which, one other correction I noted was that the drop below the molding is just a little deeper than you have it. My estimation is about 3'. I agree with your sleeker Bow profile, which appears to match the better overall scene of Glory I just got from Mike. Meanwhile I took another look at Glory's nameplate. Now it appears your sign board has a little too much space. Just from eyeballing, it looks like the letters "SEA" match the distance between the "Y" of GLORY and "S" of SEAS. the "of the" all lowercase would fit in equidistant from those words. Druxey did a great job of getting Athene's right arm position corrected. I would plug in his new lady, replacing the older one. Finally, with a better image of Glory in Seattle, the question of her Cutwater configuration and prow underwater still bugs me. It appears that the semicircular curve goes through both Bobstay mounts and doesn't straighten out until afterwards. Then her prow down to what's visible above the waterline doesn't appear to go down vertically but more of an angle slightly back. British took the lines off the Blackball Clipper "Donald McKay" so this Hull is reliable. Disregard my conjectural pencil sketch of her rigging, topmast positions are reversed in error.
  13. Mike found the missing 5th section of his super close ups of "Glory of the Seas" at docked at San Francisco. What causes the wavy masts is beyond me. I post these right side up but they come out upside down. Go figure. He referred to this as an 1880 scene. In his book it's described as being 1877. Either way, there's no doubt it's the same image. It occurred to me too, that my damn math was off on calculation of Glory's height at her Starboard Docking Port. For my calculations, I've been relying on a published dimension of 6 1/2 inches width per outer strake. Unfortunately I got 1/2 inches mixed up. Upon closest inspection, I now count 9 and a fraction strakes from her waterline to opening base. 9 × 6 1/2 inches = 54 inches + 4 1/2 inches for a total of 58 1/2 inches, with a portion of a strake visible above the white line, I estimate 5 feet. Docking Port side is 4 strakes × 6 1/2 inches = 24 inches + 2 × 1/2 inches = 25 inches or 2 feet, 1 inch. 7 strakes to bottom of Main Rail Molding are 7 × 6 1/2 inches = 42 inches + 7 × 1/2 inches = 3 1/2 inches, 45 1/2 inches or 3 feet 9 1/2 inches. Adding all 3 measurements gives 5 feet + 2 feet 1 inch + 3 feet 9 1/2 inches = 10 feet 10 1/2 inches. With 6 foot 6 inches bulwarks brings Glory's revised Docking Port height down from a previous estimate of 18 1/2 feet to 16 feet, 16 1/2 inches or 17 feet, 4 1/2 inches. 18 feet 6 inches minus 17 feet 4 1/2 inches is 1 foot 1 1/2 inches lower. Since the lowest point of her 7 foot sheer is around midway of her Main Shrouds, as best as I can see, that would be somewhat lower than 17 feet 4 1/2 inches....
  14. Rob, Having these pictures unhindered by the bend in a book really allows us to confirm details we could only estimate before. I'm positive now that there were 11 turned stanchions at the front of Glory's large Stern House. 2 at each corner, slightly chanted inward, close to each other, possibly 2' apart, then there are 7 evenly spaced apart. They're also somewhat inset to the upper deck which serves as a roof. Meanwhile the counterpart turned stanchions of the poop deck are more rugged for their relatively short height and cant inward even more dramatically. A graceful wrought iron bar also appears just in front of the first stanchion. Meanwhile, from the scene of Glory being towed to Alaska, it looks like these same stanchions cant slightly outward around her Stern. I'm also struck how substantially all her Bulwarks are constructed. This was one ruggedly built ship.
  15. Sailor, I should have been more specific. I meant the copper line above the entrance to the water itself. If you look at the Hull it's practically a straight line. The yellow metal plating reflects it too, as it doesn't bulge out until aft of her anchor mooring just before that dark spot you're referring to. If I were to sketch out her deck, it would reflect a very sharp profile.
  16. Rob, A few observations about the overall image of Glory in Seattle 1911. Her Cutwater circular curve goes through both Bobstay mounts and doesn't even straighten out until after going below them. Then her entrance appears to angle back more steeply than other images seem to imply. Her prow appears to be sharper too. Look at her waterline, she doesn't begin to fill out until after the quarterdeck, which signifies a much faster entrance then before. I'm curious as to your thoughts.
  17. Druxey, This image shows Athene's upper arm bracelets as well as her necklace. Look closely, you'll also see the very bottom of her garment has double thin lines. I personally suspect these items could possibly have been embellished with gold at her launch. Especially since it would highlight all the lovely folds of her gown.
  18. Druxey, It was my pleasure. I understand about your choice not to get into the niggling details of Glory's figurehead. I just thought you might appreciate knowing them.
  19. Druxey, From this viewpoint, that looks just about perfect. I realize her face is partially blocked but look how naturally her arm position is and how more accurately her grip appears on that long, flowing gown. Athene wears a fancy necklace, which is barely visible as a grey area at the nape of her neck and two arm bracelets. It's easier to see if you refer back to some pics of her we've already shared.
  20. As promised, both images from page 227 of "Glory of the Seas" Michael Mjelde's first book published way back in 1970. To put things into perspective, Mike had already put 16 years into researching her at that point. Simply incredible.....
  21. Rob, as soon as I saw this I thought of two things. This exact label and how you were surprised that Athene's long trailing toga actually had an open area through it. Mike also sent me both images on page 227 of his 1st book. I'm having a little trouble downloading it. As soon as I can, I'll share them with the group too.
  22. Druxey, That's much better. Now you're getting much closer. If you look real close, you'll see the large light object to the left of Athene's tight hairpin, that entire oval object is her hand, it's a little more parallel to the horizon. Her whole thumb is hidden inside of the fabric, only her upper hand is visible. It represents her gripping the flowing gown much tighter. This is a lovely improvement.
  23. Michael Mjelde has opened up his golden vault and shared some more spectacular images with me. This port side view of her Goddess Athene is one I've never seen before.
  24. Vladimir, Sometimes a picture is worth, well too many words.... Above the anchor hole is what I call the edge of the Naval Hood. There are four big ropes that exit the first notch, run right over the "L" in "GLORY" and then across the Naval Hood. That beveled edge is not verticle; it goes at an angle to match the outward curve of Glory's Bow. Notice the three carved ribbons? They all stop right at the edge of Glory's Naval Hood. The bottom of that Hood has three moldings, not two like on the top. From what I see, especially in the other close up Starboard view, those three are each shorter than the one below. The thickness of those three combined is about equal to the upper two Naval Hood moldings combined. I tried to keep it less technical but there's so many elements involved that it's hard not to. I hope this helps.
×
×
  • Create New...