Vladimir_Wairoa

22 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

Man Vlad that was fast.  I wish I could get my 1/96 frames laser cut....I just don't know anyone around here who does that kinda work.

Looks like you'll have your version build before me.

 

Fantastic news...can't wait to see them

 

Rob

I could  get those cut for you Rob, and send it afterwards but im affraid It is probably fool idea as I assume custom and post would cost more that cutting / as cutting would cost approx 20 bucks.

Rob Richard 

just a quick update I got message that my bulkheads have been cut and already shipped so on the way to me. I am more than happy that i was able to communicate and accomodate with them last important bow adjustment though. now fingers crossed  

15 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Vladimir, isn't it remarkable how these small adjustments have such profound results. For example, did you notice how even the sheer looks less dramatic now? As for the two red lines. To me the outer one looks to be the more accurate. As for where we're heading, if we can accomplish it, as near to perfection as possible. Now you can easily follow the curve of the Cutwater as seen in the 1907 scene (it has nothing to do with "Flying Fish" Cutwater which would be based on the sharper bow profile). 

exactly as you say, they have dramatic efect lets say just stem shape being such profound line where entire planking rise from etc...yes ouer one it is. 

1 hour ago, ClipperFan said:

Vladimir, you're getting so close. This almost feels like that old fashioned kid's game of "hot and cold." I still get a sense that viewer bias or perspective distortion is still affecting our senses. For instance, notice the waterline and pylons behind Glory's Bow in the 1907 shot? It's off. The waterline is slightly tilted up from left to right. To get a clearer understanding look at the relatively short dark area on the left edge of the photo and compare it to the right side. See the difference? The right edge is noticeably higher, almost not quite double. Now if you look at the pylons below the pier just behind Glory's Bow, they aren't verticle, they also tilt slightly towards the left. What I'm driving at is, if you take these optical variances into consideration by say, laying a straight edge of paper to this tilted waterline and using a compass, get it to a true 90 degree angle, so that the pylons are verticle and the waterline is correct, you'll see that Glory's prow and Cutwater are actually a little more aggressive than even this image depicts....

I believe when we're finally done, our outline should match the 1907 Bow almost exactly, as it's the most accurate image we have. Of course, even this one is foreshortened slightly, as it's not a perfect broadside but very close.

Finally, the curve of the Cutwater goes unbroken all the way up to the Figurehead Athene's feet. The beautifully carved archwork was actually bolted onto the Cutwater. Look closely at the impressive Port Side image that Michael sent us and you'll see what I mean. There's just a fraction of the gorgeous overlay left but you can see how it's attached to the Cutwater beneath. 

Iwoudl say we are there Richard.

I leveled photo and saised 90 degrees  line along the columns and windows to make sure i have wasterlevel straight or better that workers erected buildings vertically and than I re /placed our bow to the 1907 glory. looks there....there is missing wood on spray rail so we have that angle there to the right..otherwise it matches ....I dont see where are we heading but I am almost scared to get better result that what we got here

This is such important thing to have cler idea of color perspective. it is always danger to step too far and from beautiful model one can end up in "circus". everything speaks of possibility - windows frames shouts -  color me...so i stand out...etc....In the color thrill I did paint captain cabin light  blue but it became so prominent that now i am thankful half of it woudnt be seen and  covered by planks ...from most desirable room that i thought how to leave it open i now think how the most of it to cover so i can hide it....it is important to establish firm color eprpective and strategy and at least try subtly before final decision. its good to have entire plan at least and stick to it or change slowly. i like experimenting and there is the danger...

I told myself from the start that I will follow Greenwich protoype Chuck is showing from time to time being toned very warm light  honey. that model which is POF half naked. from the outside everything allright.

Chucks color perception is  high and right here. Beautiful light yellow body and deck provides place to color some details to be highlighted not sticking more and more colors or  or 4 th color that would break apart the harmony of the whole. So now to even the mistake  i am firmly set on not coloring beams red  even on sides at all leaving it same as hull - as on my prototype, and thankfully front side of cabin cabinetry that sill go will be also subtle as hull or deck. so only capitain cabin sill stay different. columns will be white not red as on prototype and that will make nice contract on  pear wood deck and black rails.  i will leave capstans wither natural or red. but its true less is more. apology to speak of this on Chucks prototype but Chuck will agree coloring is so important part it can ruin all efort of otherwise pretty model. ...or enhance...

astonishing. just part of fun accidentally  i lifted red line properly and neared it ....voila... i was stunned. it pretty much follows it precisely. so we can say its fish line ....i would never say that with so little tweak and closer look...I think this is  groundbreaking .a milestone. he may have designed bow off fish

@Rob, I will make corrections to centerline of bow part and send it to you afterwards....

or almost exact following  red line from cutwater up to the hood...... but i believe previous change is truer observig that photo. cutwater to hawsehole line is gentler and just slightly curved towards end like at first pic....this seciond is curvy in all profile that is already off....id say

still..change is quite dramatic to previous i must agree with Rich very rough uncohesive curve and  unpleasant line..

how about now ?

blue main line definig it changed quite grossly in respect of red line....awkwardness removed

8 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Now that we're refocusing our efforts on her Bow, I thought it might be interesting to compare this 1907 "Glory of the Seas" Bow section with the profile of "Flying Fish" above the waterline. I see a very strong similarity.

Richard,

it was excellent idea of you to make comparison to this photo ! as I was a bit hesitant to jump on twisting fish curvature adapting  it to glory, even measurements might give same ratio...on my draw is does not look doable at all because i would not keep 250 to 265 at all with it...so i conclude two things...either entire proportions and drawing is plain wrong - which it isnt, being based and cemented on given measured - as these fish angling of bow are so severe  - it would look either stern would look Weirdly odd sort or long....or stem will be angled to 70 percent which would be simply wrong. ......

I know you lean from beginning towards more and more aggressive bow, but in a good sense i  mean it positively, I am suggesting one assumption as we speak from the begginig. what if it is McKays and eye deception that drives us towards that aggressive curvature and McKay even most cleverly composed and adapted Fish curvature to the glory the way that everybody can see that aggressive curvy bow but he made it as overall feel and look will be fish bow and stem itself is definitely quite erect.,.....I am about to demonstrate this by pictures... and lines.....

observing McKays bows, ornamental hood leading into figurehead is somewhat different and bigger that he used to make..... I tried to attach FIsh curvature following stem curvature along from  the bobstay chain fastening at stem, and look what shockingly (for me ) happened....overall profile of fish bow curvature elegantly continued up to the tip of navalhood ending at the head of figurehead making exactly one thing. ....Imagine glory existed. ........

if you seen it far away or under spells of sunglight you would see bow shape of flying fish even if it wasnt it....same as we see on the BW picture you posted her....This is merely speculation, but what if he so cleverly deceived everyone such master way that he amde it intentional and made it this way  -took fish curvature first as the line and from there he followed  back or rear-wise from that point back he drew hood and undergoing and finally made line of stem which is entirely different....??? can be pure fantasy but it has sense in it hasnt it ?

now the pictures, please follow red line which is FISH bow, i diminished it a little as it was smaller ship but nevertheless curvature above waterlevel stays true... than I tried to fool your eyes same way as photography - or McKay if he made it intentionally.....i hid red line and substituted it by green keeping original line of FIDH with outer body of Glory in the picture / if you didnt know that it is same profile as flying fish you woulddnt know / but for that matter you always seen agressive fish bow in glory I guess because it is there ... but I assume not in stem design which is oppposite - different, but in overall shape including hoods 

so based on various line comparison I dared  making such speculative  proposition based on observation of photos , not backed by McKay previous designs etc... what do you think about this thinking guys ? could it be possible ?  than  I modified shape of curvature of stem from waterlevel up to the first ornamental block...to copy fish curvature  ...

Rich,

this is that exact line of flying fish bow from #510  compared to glory...

looks like this...its s shape is pronounced on both sides ...

40 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

I can't wait to see.  Thanks for the reissue of the drawings...I will be able to cut the bulkheads out from them.

However the aft keel section didn't come out all the way...the fantail portion failed to print in your drawing...I guess I'll have to make it up as I go.

 

I will use the bulkhead distancing from each keel frame and fashion my own keel frame.

 

I see you are building this as if it were a production model of the Flying Fish.  Same design in bulkheads and framing as well as the bulwark build up.

 

I don't have the ability to laser cut my bulkheads..so I will cut them out by hand as I did all my other models.

 

Things are getting exciting now.   I'll probably build this 1/96 version hull from balsa and then use hardwoods for the deck houses and other fittings.

 

Rob

Rob, yes that one line  of the stern went out broken for me as well. i dont know why it dissapeared though i have difficulty to restore it . but i needed break from computer so i dont intend to return to it for some time. i spent way too many evenings with her neglecting other life things so i have to make  it up now.

Rob  at the end it does not matter how it is cut. it does not make any real  difference. i did cut 2 models previously myself  1:24 cutty sark was giant project to saw i did it by hands. enjoyed it. sou will have it probably sooner than I as you add those in one piece planks so Im excited for that as well. yes I intend to follow completely model shipways building design which will be enormous help as I have entire 6 sheets fish plan at home . well only method. 

V. 

Folks, fyi im having bulkheads of actual state of effort cut in 1:72 scale. I still consider it merely as test but if it turn out fine i will probably continue planking so i can see the outcome of effort. I think it can be valuable to have finally 3D version of where are we now finally seen even in bulkhead and sheer plone state for visual perspective imaginary but specially when it is planked to make solid 3D shape. I cant wait having those arrived  to see how  drawing turns up.  and i would post the pics of course. if all goes well i wont start before autumn though as i dont model thru summer. then i Intend seamlessly continue with program drawing deckhouses and deck stuff and so i can have those pieces laser cut as well. i intend to build her with best materials available to my liking and ability, boxwood included dfor molding and deckhousesand decorations...so here goes my preliminary plan. with meticulous approach as aou folks set as standard here it seems to me it will cover more than three years for me to get  her rigged. ouch.   V. 

Few little updates on winnie.   My first proper grating. A lot to be desired but learning the craft.i put more glue than should  so i had to remove it afterward. Point is to sand stick just so they fit snuggly. I hope next 3 remaining will be better.  I was so happy after sanding.one square fell of I have to insert some square.  ...i really like those small masts platforms. Few sanding and from simple piece of wood there is nice joinery. And yes great cabin there is....all in her carulean ...well ...sort of. Point is. I prefer Chucks natural color of wood ...reason of painting. ? Simply to mask some bad sanding of transome. So there is nothing to be proud of . But. Even learing to paint is part of craft. and finally...

 I must say the chaptwr 4 is pretty difficult but so interesting. learning to work with small instruments and not to spit glue over as after cannot be painted.. Planking will wait few months and then chapter 5 and leisurily enjoying Chucks progress for autumn shopping.  

Thank goodness for Chucks stopping making ropes ! 

very nice. 

On 3/29/2021 at 2:53 AM, Matt D said:

I couldn’t resist starting on the gratings and coamings.  They were calling to me from inside the box!  I’ve actually been looking forward to making Chuck’s gratings since before I started the Winnie project.  So here is a picture of my first coaming and grating, ready for paint and WOP.

lovely Matt. i see you opted for squarish design. they are now ahead of me i am a bit scared though that i will messup . will see ...:)

I really enjoy your progress George. 

Watching Chuck ahead chapters is like getting another chapter package for free. so enjoyable.  

1 hour ago, rwiederrich said:

Wonderful...you have translated her into drawings very well.  I can see how you designed her similar to the Flying fish design.  With amidships open so you can add the bulwarks later.  Interesting.

 

Love it.

 

Rob

Thanks yes, i find their design best so far ive seen for clippers as it allows to install proper timberheads up on waterway and from ther rail also topgallant one. most authentic possible i woudl say on POB. 

15 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Please do Vladimir.......I'm assuming it will be in 1/96.....?

Beautiful drawings by the way......

 

Rob

Thanks Rob, the beauty of it is that it is scaled by percentage..... variable. I created it in 1:20 measuring relative to 1:1 huge.  but no matter what program or simple picture viewer you open the bulkheads you can just adjust viewing percentage and voila you get scale you wish.......you need to know one reference scale only ....in 26 percent opened size it is 1/72 depending on where you measure the beam..... / widest point around middle=18.8 cm beam in 26 per cent opening  =44 ft in 1.1

opening and viewing at 19 per cent = 1:96 if you measure at the bulkheads exactly 14 cm...

19.5 per cent opened (but there needs to be program to count in half = 1:96 measured beam at widest -

20 per cent would be close but slightly more than 44 ft.

also all related pages are made in one program so it is all simply related....

same applied to centerbulkheads....just make sure you have it opened in same percentage size as bulkheads....its same measure....

same for ornaments page....

here you can see i finally managed to finish all bulkheads curved them and lowered as  waterway to be installed up is included...

I copied all exact design of built exactly after model shipways flying fish....it was painstaking work . just remember I diminished watterway for model making puropse by 2 mm. so instead of 8 mm in 1/72 it would be 5 mm waterway...

this is how they turned out. we can see and  feel the shape already...

Rob, Richard, folks,

i rely on your measures for sure, but i work differently  as i dont have knowledge of your caliber... by comparing distances.

i measured mold  to mold and it gives roughly 2x distance to copperline at 25ft for sure. photo is black but we can see approx  tip of rudder going to rudder hole,,, tjhat is mold to mold plus a bit i had measured it but forgot the numbers....

I can tell you folks, this is only inches discrepancies you play here....I looked at the draw again......there is no place to labor excessively as main  numbers doesnt allow to.....as LBP is provided and LOA is provided....you can either literary CUT OFF tip of bow if you want longer sleeker stern, or you can do vice versa if you want agressive bow and shorter stern. nothing else can be moved.......

yes can.....instead of 84 degrees stem angle we can go 86.....

or at back stern stem we can go from vertical to little leaning downwards....as we excluded these un Mckayish things.....i believe shape is pretty much established.....and I can quite comfortly have bulkheads cut....

i measured all over thoroughly and tried to update stern  and again measured bulwark heights and sheers watterway, depyth of hold......according last number provided.  I included planking exceeding behind sheer line mold as welll....I will now post pics with numbers... speaks for itself......

i measured bulwark again which gave me 6.12 FT....

to obtain 250 ft between perpendiculars....

and 265 overall, I shortened a tiny bit of forward tip to be less aggressive and used comparing distances measures so stern is now again different than before.....

what you say about stern shape now   folks ?

there is final pic as last one.....

@ Rob, I can send you folks bulkheads templates for the boat, but first i want to check them myself in hand to check  i drew them correctly...as I suppose this is testing phase for me

please underthand that I will never match your precision, truth be told im quite  thankfull that  Richard is kicking me into more precision...

as it helps it to shape it better but I would say at this point. I dont think it someone  would shape her differently placing all the shapes and measures at this point.....

 first  picture shows new more shallow angle of bottom of stern and original Michaels stern....

i can redone tip to more agressiveness forward as we had it before but i have to go back to more dull stern it makes.... 2 FT at the back or at the tip of forward rail....quite a lot to consider....

hope make sense

thanks

V.

2 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Vladimir,

I expressed your appreciation to Mike who's being so generous with these fantastic images which likely haven't been seen in decades. I was so impressed that I sent Mike a request for the rest of the vessel in this scene.

Meanwhile, the stern shows that the turned rails aren't verticle. They cant outwards almost imperceptibly around the stern, appear to be most verticle along the Wheelhouse section and then cant inwards around the large Stern house. The monkeyrail below also appears to do the same. The main rail drop almost appears to Bow inward but it looks to me like it's an affect of the short shelf like area combined with double planksheer moldings. Most fascinating is the 3' - 4' area below which ends in a slight ridge. While it gave an initial appearance of being solely around her Stern, I now suspect it encircles the entire vessel but is far less noticable. In fact, it looks like it aligns perfectly with the lower end of the Naval Hoods. What surprised me was that this same feature can be seen on McKay's illustration of sister Packet ships "Star of Empire" & "Chariot of Fame" as seen here. Finally as first suspected, the graceful drop below this line curves slightly inwards as it drops to the rudder. In totality, this area of Glory is far more complex than first suspected.

this is fascinating . seeing plan drawn by McKay himself - i was about to think from photo itself that rail seem to be angled...so it is confirmed though... i cant keep up with you folks, i didnt have time lately hopefully around weekend i will ne able to sit behind the desk. ...also with bulwarks, there is ton of stuff i have to measure remeasure....again. one question to ask folks, where is beam to be measured? at the widest part of hull - underwater included? at that would be widest though...thank you. V. 

3 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob & Vladimir,

I asked Mike for a better look at Glory's stern from the scene of her being towed to Alaska. Here's his original, facing down and a cropped version facing up. As I first noticed, her Stern is far more elegant and complex than earlier suspected. Her turned Rail stanchions, while appearing almost verticle seem to cant just slightly outward, as does the monkeyrail below, then her main rail looks like it bows slightly inward but I suspect it's due to the effect of her moldings. The area below that appears to bow out slightly. Rob can measure it. My best guess is about a 3 - 4 drop. Finally the rest of the Stern curves again just slightly inward as it drops gracefully to the rudder below. Far more complex than at first glance.

 

wooow what a beautiful closeup photos of stern woohoo. 

On 3/28/2021 at 3:13 PM, JpR62 said:

WOP -> Wipe-On-Poly

Unfortunately, very difficult to obtain in Europe ☹️

Scrubbyj427, Thank you for sharing this great technique !

Thank you Jean,...... good news for you,  > check amazon.de. they have a few in stock. seems easy to get even in europe   V.