Jump to content

Rick310

NRG Member
  • Posts

    694
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Rick310

  1. When I cut brass sheet on the table saw, I reverse the he blade which works well. The hull has is a thing of beauty!! Rick
  2. Beautiful Keith! My granddaughter wants to put “people” on the Flying Fish! I need to find some figures for her to paint, we both agreed she should paint them at her house!! Rick
  3. Nice recovery on the lift lines! Your model is coming along real well! Tick
  4. Rob, keep the model safe and enjoy this time with your family! Our daughter and her family, which included our 2 year granddaughter stayed with us for a year and a half ( only supposed to be 6 months, yea, right!), We were still going back and forth between Cleveland and Maine at the time, but when we were here in Maine, having that time with our granddaughter was wonderful and we have a very special relationship with her now! So, enjoy!! Rick
  5. Beautiful hull Rob, seems to have quite the narrow beam. Wonder how stable she was in rough weather? Rick
  6. Holy Cow Keith!! That is remarkable! I agree with the jeweler’s saw option, possibly building it up with thick cyano(?). The grates look spot on! Rick
  7. Jared, these are the original plans for the Flying Fish and predate the revised plans by Ben Lankford. He wrote about the revision in the NRG journal in 1980(?). Rick
  8. Jared, my intent is to not glue the masts in place , rather wedge them. That will allow me to remove the masts as I work from the mizzen, forward. At least, that’s the plan. I’m also planning to rig the lower masts first, shrouds, Spencer gaffs, ect before installing the topmast. The fly in the ointment is the topsail yard which has to be installed before the topmast cross trees can be installed off the model. This will be an interference when installing the lower yard.and will be vulnerable to breakage! I just don’t know any way around it! I know that there will be plenty of other rigging dilemmas as we both move forward! Keep up the good work!! Rick
  9. Thanks Rob! I am followed your advice to work from the mizzen, forward. I‘be learned a lot from your experience, also from George and Jared! Rick
  10. Just a quick update. Finished the main and fore topmasts except for painting and installation the sheaves and fids, which I’ll do after painting. The next item was the fairlead planks. These are .20 inches thick and 3/32 wide. The rest of the planking for the tops is 1/16 inch wide. These were made from boxwood and stained with Ipswich pine as were the topmasts. These were fiddley items to make which took a lot of time and constant re measuring. Both planks for each top were glued together and glued to a piece of wood that was then placed in the milling machine. They were released by soaking in water. Not perfect but serviceable. Next up were the caps. Again, much time and constant checking to be sure the topmast would be parallel. These were then shaped and the straps soldered from 3/64 inch wide brass strips. Still need to bevel the caps. The holes for the tenion were cut with an undersized drill and chiseled out to the correct size. One of the difficult things with the solid hull kit is that there are no lazer cut parts . Each part has to be individually made which takes a considerable amount of time and effort. .
  11. Rich, Rob, after reading your comments earlier today, I sat down to read the September issue of the NRG. And lo and behold the editorial talks about Chapelle and his reluctance to divulge his sources for the drawing he did! The article questions if he really knew the layout of the ships he drew and what does that mean going forward! Are we just perpetuating errors that we have conveniently assumed were correct especially if they came from Chapelle? WOW!! Rick
  12. Bingo!!! Rob and Rich, I totally agree! Everyone has relied on Chapelle as gospel. Who knows what he knew. Is the deck layout on the Challenge model based loosely on a description with generic items such as the winch, capstans. Wc, added because all ships would have had this equipment with no real evidence that this was specific to the Challenge? Including the design of the forecastle. My understanding is that the genus of both McKay and Webb, was the design of the body plans, specifically that part from the planksheer down as that would determine all the qualities of that particular ship, speed, cargo capacity, handling characteristics, ect. Everything above was somewhat generic to all ships. He certainly would have designed the forecastle and aft cabin. If I’m not mistaken, Mc Kay left the rigging up to Her captain Edward Nickolas on the Flying Fish. I’m not sure how involved McKay or Webb would have been with the finish carpenters when it came to deciding the moldings, carved knees, cabin interiors ect.He probably trusted them and left it up to them to do a good job. Makes me wonder how many clipper ship models that we see are just generic models that someone named a particular ship? Rick
  13. Rob, I have to agree with you on that. However, Ben Langford states that one of his references was the Challenge model in the Smithsonian. The plans for that model where developed by Howard Chapelle, and it has the WC as depicted on the Flying Fish. I have 2 very old photos of the model. Rob, I’m not disagreeing with you, but there is a precedent for that location on a contemporary American clipper ( May 1851) Rick
  14. Thanks Keith, I’m going to file that away for use at another time! Rick
×
×
  • Create New...