Glory of the Seas 1869 by rwiederrich - FINISHED - 1/96 - medium clipper

[ClipperFan]

1 hour ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

Yes yes, and yes... I agree wholeheartedly regarding this. Im gonna change it and i know how now. This is much important segment to get right-close.  There is defnitely not quarter circle curvature...thank you for pics. helps a lot indeed.

Vladimir,

Isn't it fascinating how our perceptions can get biased by misleading or misinterpreted evidence? Good luck with your revisions. I'm looking forward to seeing them.

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

I think this is a lot better.  There is just tiny slight move into curve line and it looks way different from nearpoint and from the far. From the closeup all main longest line from the rudder up looks even vertical from closeup look, quite round from very far....try to look at these draws from both perspectives, near and far...its strange how different isnt it?

one most inportant thing. all the photos of stern are taken from various perpectives....so we can only assume two most importantlongest lines shaping it   . corelation and position of those two is most important to give fundamental shape..... so we can for sure say few things i guess. monkey rail part is vertical . and at the moldings meetup, shapes are starting their new way towards other linkup...all together create a shape. We can also fay for sure that sheer segment (where name of the ship sits we is not curvy at all but its straight under certain angle.....and this is part of the charm...position of it in regards to lower long line creates that curve plus monkey rail being straingt up turining it brutally but on small length...!  you can see I drew almost NO curve with  both longest lines - almost vertical... and its position towards each other with otherw  forms nice curvy stern....i would say farer it is curvier it is.and nearer we see woodworking deatailing where moldings sit...differently. 

 

 

 

i think its heading to far more realistic outcome than this first simple round below.,.....

and that its enough for today from me. looks like a lot been done again from all. eager to know how you see it. v.

Edited March 17, 2021 by Vladimir_Wairoa
add

[ClipperFan]

1 hour ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

I am seeing more complex shape than simple curve....something like this...

which at the end evoke round stern as described to the sight taking to account curve below sheerstrake with line above it...with complexity of planking of sections around strakes it doesnt look like undisturbed curve even on cutty sark when looking pretty closely from the narpoint, which is precisely what we are trying to achieve here...

 

Vladimir, this is definitely much closer. Starting from the Stern Rail, notice how the turned stanchions tilt slightly outwards. They're also much thinner. They appear to be smaller versions of the full scale ones on her large Stern House. The Monkey Rail looks perfect now as does the Main Rail below. If you look closely, you'll see that besides the two moldings that wrap around the entire ship, there are also two small, thin flat shelves that do the same thing. One can be seen just above and the other mirrors it just below the double moldings. These features are what appears to make the Main Rail look like it's almost indented. The small bulge in your illustration is more subtle on Glory and blends into the curving section below. Upon closer observation of her Stern in the towing scene what appeared at first to be a curve outwards now looks more like it's actually a slight gradual arched curve inwards where it meets the rudder. Lay a ruler on the image you'll see what I mean. What you have now is much closer to the photos now.

[rwiederrich]

1 hour ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

I am seeing more complex shape than simple curve....something like this...

which at the end evoke round stern as described to the sight taking to account curve below sheerstrake with line above it...with complexity of planking of sections around strakes it doesnt look like undisturbed curve even on cutty sark when looking pretty closely from the narpoint, which is precisely what we are trying to achieve here...

 

That's more like it Vladimir.  Still not quite sold on the stern post though....but it is a work in progress.

 

Rob

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

22 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Vladimir, this is definitely much closer. Starting from the Stern Rail, notice how the turned stanchions tilt slightly outwards. They're also much thinner. They appear to be smaller versions of the full scale ones on her large Stern House. The Monkey Rail looks perfect now as does the Main Rail below. If you look closely, you'll see that besides the two moldings that wrap around the entire ship, there are also two small, thin flat shelves that do the same thing. One can be seen just above and the other mirrors it just below the double moldings. These features are what appears to make the Main Rail look like it's almost indented. The small bulge in your illustration is more subtle on Glory and blends into the curving section below. Upon closer observation of her Stern in the towing scene what appeared at first to be a curve outwards now looks more like it's actually a slight gradual arched curve inwards where it meets the rudder. Lay a ruler on the image you'll see what I mean. What you have now is much closer to the photos now.

Very interesting comments Richard thanks. I myself was playing with idea that it even leans inwards from that photo but i am not sure i would dare going that direction as we dont know exact angle. this is not definite as i am toing to lower the stern still a bit more. i would say that angle is even steeper than this as stern will sit down a bit . ... yes i noticed those small strips around  i will add them. regarding stanchions. those are just figurative atm their thickness noe shape aaprt of height  iwas calculated ...i will  try to create exact match later. V. 

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

3 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

That's more like it Vladimir.  Still not quite sold on the stern post though....but it is a work in progress.

 

Rob

There is still more work needed Rob i agree. it needs to be lowered as whole i hope it will show differently. thanks a lto for remark. V. 

[ClipperFan]

2 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

Very interesting comments Richard thanks. I myself was playing with idea that it even leans inwards from that photo but i am not sure i would dare going that direction as we dont know exact angle. this is not definite as i am toing to lower the stern still a bit more. i would say that angle is even steeper than this as stern will sit down a bit . ... yes i noticed those small strips around  i will add them. regarding stanchions. those are just figurative atm their thickness noe shape aaprt of height  iwas calculated ...i will  try to create exact match later. V. 

Rob and Vladimir, 

This is the subtlety that my artist's eye sees. From top down the Wheelhouse and Stern House both aren't purely verticle, there's an ever so slight cant inward, which I suspect is true of all structures. The turned rail on the Stern House definitely cants inward slightly. The picture of the Cabin Boy standing on the roof clearly shows it. The Stern Rail that surrounds it on turned stanchions is verticle on her sides but cants just slightly outwards around her curved Stern, as does her Monkey Rail below. The Main Rail is straight but due to the double moldings and thin shelf which surrounds the entire Ship, appears to be indented, as illustrated here. Then there's a small section just below which only appears to be on the round portion of Glory's Stern which is almost straight but does seem to have a slight bow outwards, after that there's a drop to the Rudder Post which isn't straight but bows inwards slightly. It's all very subdued but it's definitely visible.

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

1 hour ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob and Vladimir, 

This is the subtlety that my artist's eye sees. From top down the Wheelhouse and Stern House both aren't purely verticle, there's an ever so slight cant inward, which I suspect is true of all structures. The turned rail on the Stern House definitely cants inward slightly. The picture of the Cabin Boy standing on the roof clearly shows it. The Stern Rail that surrounds it on turned stanchions is verticle on her sides but cants just slightly outwards around her curved Stern, as does her Monkey Rail below. The Main Rail is straight but due to the double moldings and thin shelf which surrounds the entire Ship, appears to be indented, as illustrated here. Then there's a small section just below which only appears to be on the round portion of Glory's Stern which is almost straight but does seem to have a slight bow outwards, after that there's a drop to the Rudder Post which isn't straight but bows inwards slightly. It's all very subdued but it's definitely visible.

beautiful sketch your artistic hands shows. I will say its pretty much as I incorporated it in 2 D profile draw.

I would say guys we need to remember that 2D profile picture is just FLAT sight and for human eyes is pretty dull and boring as we are used to acceept percept and visualize automatically in 3 D. even yourdraw is  3 D shape but showing that outlining share that I observed there and tried to compose it myself.  2 D flat profile will never ever look like 3 D and.....

 

we all are used to see that simple round stern of  clippers but those pictures and photographs are almost all taken from distance / where those outlining molding dissapear and it looks like round.....I remember this when cosntructing cutty sark... all we are doing is closest look work like those carpenters were standig one meter close to her planks. I would say they didnt see round stern at all the plate (wooden ) or area where you have name glory is pretty much flat for sure . its visible also in famous photo at the beach where she is dragged up to the shore before she is burnt....

 

i will try to demnostrate it on small cutty model I have. if we look from very near we can see straight flat profiled line from rudder up...2D. and it is indeed straight....but we see round from far away . how come ? because 2D and 3 D deception plays role here ...as we move back , our brain is able to calculate surrounding round and curved planks around that created even more round feel than it is. and not to forget, moldings that pretty make it look almost squarishly proportioned dissapear from far and dissapearance help to our eyes to form round cohesive object......kind of not broken with disturbance of molding which apear uncomfortly BIG from near and disappear from far...so our brain is not focused on disturbing detail which breaks apart lovely round feel.......but eyes automatically embrace whole shape....

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 17, 2021 by Vladimir_Wairoa
add

[ClipperFan]

15 minutes ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

beautiful sketch your artistic hands shows. I will say its pretty much as I incorporated it in 2 D profile draw.

I would say guys we need to remember that 2D profile picture is just FLAT sight and for human eyes is pretty dull and boring as we are used to acceept percept and visualize automatically in 3 D. even yourdraw is  3 D shape but showing that outlining share that I observed there and tried to compose it myself.  2 D flat profile will never ever look like 3 D and.....

 

we all are used to see that simple round stern of  clippers but those pictures and photographs are almost all taken from distance / where those outlining molding dissapear and it looks like round.....I remember this when cosntructing cutty sark... all we are doing is closest look work like those carpenters were standig one meter close to her planks. I would say they didnt see round stern at all the plate (wooden ) or area where you have name glory is pretty much flat for sure . its visible also in famous photo at the beach where she is dragged up to the shore before she is burnt....

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vladimir, you get the picture! Thanks for the compliment too. What's fascinating is looking at your revised Stern when it's smaller, it looks very similar to your older all round one. I believe when you incorporate these latest subtle changes, it will result in even more dramatic impact.

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

One more photo of glorys stern...bw with strong shade are good to show 2D image......interesting....even there is slight curve its i would say quite dramatic lean out from what was first almost circle . what unexpected journey.

But this picture leaving all in the shade can alarm us wrongly that her stern is massive...we know from other photos how slim and elegant is as I put yellow line behind sushine all aftwards is going inward ...

 

 

 

Edited March 17, 2021 by Vladimir_Wairoa
add

[ClipperFan]

46 minutes ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

One more photo of glorys stern...bw with strong shade are good to show 2D image......interesting....even there is slight curve its i would say quite dramatic lean out from what was first almost circle . what unexpected journey.

But this picture leaving all in the shade can alarm us wrongly that her stern is massive...we know from other photos how slim and elegant is as I put yellow line behind sushine all aftwards is going inward ...

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

beautiful sketch your artistic hands shows. I will say its pretty much as I incorporated it in 2 D profile draw.

I would say guys we need to remember that 2D profile picture is just FLAT sight and for human eyes is pretty dull and boring as we are used to acceept percept and visualize automatically in 3 D. even yourdraw is  3 D shape but showing that outlining share that I observed there and tried to compose it myself.  2 D flat profile will never ever look like 3 D and.....

 

we all are used to see that simple round stern of  clippers but those pictures and photographs are almost all taken from distance / where those outlining molding dissapear and it looks like round.....I remember this when cosntructing cutty sark... all we are doing is closest look work like those carpenters were standig one meter close to her planks. I would say they didnt see round stern at all the plate (wooden ) or area where you have name glory is pretty much flat for sure . its visible also in famous photo at the beach where she is dragged up to the shore before she is burnt....

 

i will try to demnostrate it on small cutty model I have. if we look from very near we can see straight flat profiled line from rudder up...2D. and it is indeed straight....but we see round from far away . how come ? because 2D and 3 D deception plays role here ...as we move back , our brain is able to calculate surrounding round and curved planks around that created even more round feel than it is. and not to forget, moldings that pretty make it look almost squarishly proportioned dissapear from far and dissapearance help to our eyes to form round cohesive object......kind of not broken with disturbance of molding which apear uncomfortly BIG from near and disappear from far...so our brain is not focused on disturbing detail which breaks apart lovely round feel.......but eyes automatically embrace whole shape....

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vladimir, as the old phrase goes "the Devil's in the details".... beautiful workmanship on your Cutty Sark model. I especially appreciate the gold embellishments. 

[ClipperFan]

49 minutes ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

One more photo of glorys stern...bw with strong shade are good to show 2D image......interesting....even there is slight curve its i would say quite dramatic lean out from what was first almost circle . what unexpected journey.

But this picture leaving all in the shade can alarm us wrongly that her stern is massive...we know from other photos how slim and elegant is as I put yellow line behind sushine all aftwards is going inward ...

 

 

 

Vladimir,

Remember I've been saying McKay's Sterns all had low overhang? Take a direct line up from the shadow of the rudder joint below. Now look at how little of Glory's Stern projects beyond her rudder. This view actually highlights that fact more than some others do. What's challenging with this image is the fact that sunlight washes out specific details we're able to see in other views. In this image it does appear like her Monkey Rail is verticle but if you look very closely it does project slightly outward. The lovely gold carvings are so shimmery it conceals the character of her Main Rail, so it's hard to tell that it's not rounded. Good catch with the yellow line, although I think it would be a parallel line following around her Stern. This view also shows that Glory's Stern Post is a direct line right up to her Stern planks, there's no significant cut out like your plan indicates. There does appear to be a small pintle device at the very top of the rudder, which is to be expected.

Finally, if our premise that Glory's bulwarks are 6 1/2' tall is accurate, it would mean that her Stern is about 19 1/2' above her waterline, putting her Stern 5 1/2' lower than her Bow and just about 1 1/2 higher than the lowest level of her sheer of 18' at the midline of her Main Shrouds. Of course until we can definitely prove her Bulwarks are 6 1/2' this is still somewhat speculation. 

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

8 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Vladimir,

Remember I've been saying McKay's Sterns all had low overhang? Take a direct line up from the shadow of the rudder joint below. Now look at how little of Glory's Stern projects beyond her rudder. This view actually highlights that fact more than some others do. What's challenging with this image is the fact that sunlight washes out specific details we're able to see in other views. In this image it does appear like her Monkey Rail is verticle but if you look very closely it does project slightly outward. The lovely gold carvings are so shimmery it conceals the character of her Main Rail, so it's hard to tell that it's not rounded. Good catch with the yellow line, although I think it would be a parallel line following around her Stern. This view also shows that Glory's Stern Post is a direct line right up to her Stern planks, there's no significant cut out like your plan indicates. There does appear to be a small pintle device at the very top of the rudder, which is to be expected.

Finally, if our premise that Glory's bulwarks are 6 1/2' tall is accurate, it would mean that her Stern is about 19 1/2' above her waterline, putting her Stern 5 1/2' lower than her Bow and just about 1 1/2 higher than the lowest level of her sheer of 18' at the midline of her Main Shrouds. Of course until we can definitely prove her Bulwarks are 6 1/2' this is still somewhat speculation. 

 

 

i will play with measurements today 

 

first thanks for liking cutty, it is just photo etch, so not really my contribution there, and I must apologize folks, as seems I was measuring sheer wrongly before...i didnt note its deck line  in relation to flatness of it...sorry for that.  This is such learning process of naval fundamentals for me alongside research, so i am posting correct sheer measures now as well as bulwarks....measured at perpendiculars... though difference between  fore and aft gives roughly nice 8' sheer...i assume its how the number is determined if not ill learn again....

stern sheer is 2.1 FT converting from inches. do you want me to lower it to 1 FT ? so it will be  1 FT above flat line at the end of stern...half of how is now.... that it would go to 9' difference...

Edited March 18, 2021 by Vladimir_Wairoa
add

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

Meanwhile I corrected / proportioned postition and thickness of sheers on the wales proprerly against each other..., which also widened a bulwarks. .I took printscreen and positioned its relative to drawing.....I added two thin streams inside of sheer thicker moldings.....going along ...it looks a bit crowded from small view but thats how it is....

 

 

 

[ClipperFan]

3 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

 

 

i will play with measurements today 

 

first thanks for liking cutty, it is just photo etch, so not really my contribution there, and I must apologize folks, as seems I was measuring sheer wrongly before...i didnt note its deck line  in relation to flatness of it...sorry for that.  This is such learning process of naval fundamentals for me alongside research, so i am posting correct sheer measures now as well as bulwarks....measured at perpendiculars... though difference between  fore and aft gives roughly nice 8' sheer...i assume its how the number is determined if not ill learn again....

stern sheer is 2.1 FT converting from inches. do you want me to lower it to 1 FT ? so it will be  1 FT above flat line at the end of stern...half of how is now.... that it would go to 9' difference...

Vladimir,

In our continuing search to realize "Glory of the Seas" as she was initially built, we're all collaborating as best we can to accomplish our mutual goal. Rob can either verify or revise my rough estimate on the Stern's height. From my measurement, she appears to be 19 1/2' at her Taffrail. We're fairly certain she's also 25' at her Bow. Using the published 7' sheer from Duncan MacLean, that puts her lowest area, midway of her Main Shrouds at 18'. Counting strakes at her Starboard Docking Port, I got 10 from waterline to base, 4 on the side and 7 to lower Main Rail Molding, with each strake being 6 1/2"  it comes to 12'  adding 6 1/2' Bulwark brings that dimension to 18 1/2'. We haven't nailed down the exact location but my estimate is somewhat midway between Main Mast and Foremast Shrouds being closer to the Shrouds. Using these dimensions, run a parabolic curve hitting these points. From her impressive 1877 San Francisco docking view, it looks like the most dramatic rise occurs at her Quarter Deck Cap Rail forward.

Depth below waterline is a consistent 22'. 

Her prow is a graceful curve from her Cutwater through her lower Bobstay then it's a almost a straight line at a negative 8 1/2 degrees from verticle, with what appears to be a 1/4 circle at the Stem bottom where it joins the Keel.

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

OK ive done lots today.  i reconstructed sheer, basically turning it, so it maintained elegant line. it lowered at the aft sheer to total 1.3 FT its very slight but gradual move up, giving it about 19 taffrail  to  waterline now, and it upwarded also bow up giving it 24 something from watterline so i am pretty satified.

I only need to add body vertical volume to 22 FT i think its without keel....and i think we have her....but I need these all changes now apl;y to bulkheads . that will do over weekend. thanks for checking.

She appears completely changed now, her prow rising upwards a bit higher and stern buyoantly very slightly rises  butjust a bit....

you can see on stanchions how much i lovered her butt. a lots of pics to follow...so you can see new sheer and process of it....

 

 

 

 

new sheer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

old upper new lower

 

 

 

Edited March 18, 2021 by Vladimir_Wairoa
add

[rwiederrich]

Great work Vladimir.

 

From this image you can see that her bulwarks is over 6 ft.  the portion cut out to make way for canary work and men standing on the main deck gives a great perspective of measurement.

 

By following the plankshear to can see the effects of the hogging issue she had.

 

Many details can be arrived at from this image.

 

Rob

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

18 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

Great work Vladimir.

 

From this image you can see that her bulwarks is over 6 ft.  the portion cut out to make way for canary work and men standing on the main deck gives a great perspective of measurement.

 

By following the plankshear to can see the effects of the hogging issue she had.

 

Many details can be arrived at from this image.

 

Rob

Thank you Rob. I must add lowering stern pretty much destroyed elegant shape of stern we had as it proportionally moved down it shortened main line coming up from rudder and now i would say it loogs ugly to me... i m working to reconstruct it somehow to the same proportions accordingly....angling sternpost downwards would sort it out as it would lenghten the line again but....we dont want that i guess...:)

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

24 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

Great work Vladimir.

 

From this image you can see that her bulwarks is over 6 ft.  the portion cut out to make way for canary work and men standing on the main deck gives a great perspective of measurement.

 

By following the plankshear to can see the effects of the hogging issue she had.

 

Many details can be arrived at from this image.

 

Rob

at least some amazing news , we are pretty much there Rob and that measurement wasnt even taken into account....  - resulted  out itself . means your calculations and proportioning as whole guys pay handsomely off... your assesment seems spot on...

 

 

 

 

[ClipperFan]

4 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

Thank you Rob. I must add lowering stern pretty much destroyed elegant shape of stern we had as it proportionally moved down it shortened main line coming up from rudder and now i would say it loogs ugly to me... i m working to reconstruct it somehow to the same proportions accordingly....angling sternpost downwards would sort it out as it would lenghten the line again but....we dont want that i guess...:)

Rob & Vladimir,

The lowered Stern now looks a little too low now. I agree with Vladimir that it's not as elegant as before. Maybe the lower view of Glory's stern foreshortened her Stern height a little. Rob can you double check my calculations? I estimated about a 4' difference between her Stern and Bow from looking at the 1877 SF dock photo. That would put her Stern at 21' instead of 19 1/2'. It would also make the difference between her lowest point of 18' and even 3' difference instead of 1 1/2'. I hate to drive Vladimir nuts but this might look better.

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

42 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob & Vladimir,

The lowered Stern now looks a little too low now. I agree with Vladimir that it's not as elegant as before. Maybe the lower view of Glory's stern foreshortened her Stern height a little. Rob can you double check my calculations? I estimated about a 4' difference between her Stern and Bow from looking at the 1877 SF dock photo. That would put her Stern at 21' instead of 19 1/2'. It would also make the difference between her lowest point of 18' and even 3' difference instead of 1 1/2'. I hate to drive Vladimir nuts but this might look better.

No worries Richard, Im not going to do do bulkheads recalculation untill we set firmly on this one - as it is very slow process I have to adjust each one and i wouldnt like to do it twice for sure

Meanwhile seems like all lines messed up so i am driving myself nuts anyway thankfully im backuping at least each fresh one so far.... i reshaped stern but it doesnt look that perfect to be honest unless I move sternpos downward to the ship....21 would do it to be honest. . I reshaped stern as I took previous one. I think much better now....

 

V.

Edited March 18, 2021 by Vladimir_Wairoa
add

[ClipperFan]

24 minutes ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

No worries Richard, Im not going to do do bulkheads recalculation untill we set firmly on this one - as it is very slow process I have to adjust each one and i wouldnt like to do it twice for sure

Meanwhile seems like all lines messed up so i am driving myself nuts anyway thankfully im backuping at least each fresh one so far.... i reshaped stern but it doesnt look that perfect to be honest unless I move sternpos downward to the ship....21 would do it to be honest. .

V.

Vladimir,

I get it with the driving yourself nuts comment. Imagine doing this in your spare time since 2009.... You sort of end up wondering if you're becoming obsessive-compulsive! Back to our project, which really feels like we're getting so close. We're constantly trying to evaluate 3D and calculate 2D dimensions from them. I think everyone is becoming very familiar with how an observation point has a substantial impact on how an object appears from different perspectives. When I attempted to calculate the Stern's height from the close up of Glory's 1869 fitting out photo, I forgot to account for the fact that this was taken from below the Ship's horizon. That likely means the Stern would be a little higher. It's like if you saw a man from atop a small hill, he would look a little smaller than if you saw him on level ground. 

Meanwhile looking at the Stern from the Alaskan towing scene, there's a definite sheer heading towards the Bow, which looks like it's more than a mere foot and a half. As for determining sheer itself, where Glory is still fairly new, look at her 1877 San Francisco dock image. Again her Stern looks like it's higher than a foot or so above the level of the Main Shrouds. So the work continues....

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

21 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Vladimir,

I get it with the driving yourself nuts comment. Imagine doing this in your spare time since 2009.... You sort of end up wondering if you're becoming obsessive-compulsive! Back to our project, which really feels like we're getting so close. We're constantly trying to evaluate 3D and calculate 2D dimensions from them. I think everyone is becoming very familiar with how an observation point has a substantial impact on how an object appears from different perspectives. When I attempted to calculate the Stern's height from the close up of Glory's 1869 fitting out photo, I forgot to account for the fact that this was taken from below the Ship's horizon. That likely means the Stern would be a little higher. It's like if you saw a man from atop a small hill, he would look a little smaller than if you saw him on level ground. 

Meanwhile looking at the Stern from the Alaskan towing scene, there's a definite sheer heading towards the Bow, which looks like it's more than a mere foot and a half. As for determining sheer itself, where Glory is still fairly new, look at her 1877 San Francisco dock image. Again her Stern looks like it's higher than a foot or so above the level of the Main Shrouds. So the work continues....

its noted. yes I would say as well that its more than 1 foot along such longitude... even from the bulkheads rise can be seen that Michaels 2.6.. 2.7 rise is very shallow and smooth... rising steadily towards stern......we have to keep in mind quite extential moving also comprises other aspects and shapes sometimes unwanted direction....as if we move one proportion and only one, it will deform other one...

.anyway we got show here again so I have still plenty to do meanwhile around ornamentation drawings as curves must be closed for laser.  lets settle this issue for a bit in minds...longtime work cases eyestrain is an issue for me so i will slow down a bit here....screen is an enemy ...:)

so i will take few days off from her. V.

 

 

 

 

 

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

...

 

[rwiederrich]

Vladimir...you are doing a great job...but I think the middle roll of the planksheer is level with the rolled edge of the naval hood.  they mark out the level of the weather deck or the main deck.  your latest drawing shows it lined out above the trim of the hood and not going all the way to the stem...when the trim should flow directly into and then become the planksheer.

 

You have it depicted on several of your other drawings.....not sure if that is how you interpreted it or if that is just an oversight.  Or maybe I've got it wrong....   The planksheer is depicted by a band of 3 raised portions of a single or possibly double piece trim.  It begins at the tip of the hood(as a double ridged molding) and when it arrives at the origin of the bowsprit it becomes a three ridged molding with the center ridge being that of the top ridge of the hood molding.  The lower ridge of the hood's top trim molding, becomes the lower ridge of the 3 ridge trim of the planksheer.  And of course the top ridge finds its origin at the root of the bowsprit. This 3 banded or ridged molding extends completely along the hull to the apex of the stern. 

 

This molding marks the level and curvature of the main deck(you know this because of your previous drawings depicting it as such)

 

Your scroll work is wonderful.....

 

Sorry for the nitpicking.

 

Rob

Edited March 19, 2021 by rwiederrich

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

7 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

Vladimir...you are doing a great job...but I think the planksheer is level with the rolled edge of the naval hood.  they mark out the level of the weather deck or the main deck.  your latest drawing shows it lined out above the trim of the hood...when the trim should flow directly into and then become the planksheer.

 

You have it depicted on several of your other drawings.....not sure if that is how you interpreted it or if that is just an oversight.  Or maybe I've got it wrong....

 

Your scroll work is wonderful.....

 

Sorry for the nitpicking.

 

Rob

Thank Rob, you have full right to nitpick everything Rob, I wanted to show ornament....its new risen sheer from yesterday...its just yet not risen rest to it properly....of course it links up....

[rwiederrich]

2 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

Thank Rob, you have full right to nitpick everything Rob, I wanted to show ornament....its new risen sheer from yesterday...its just yet not risen rest to it properly....of course it links up....

Great job...I must have been premature in my observation.

 

I don;t wish to be a taskmaster........

 

Rob

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

....

 

 

[ClipperFan]

Rob, Vladimir. Druxey, et all

It looks like there were more than one image taken of "Glory of the Seas" on the Ways in 1869. I noticed that the position of the flagstaff with starry flag at her Bowsprit changes angles in various pictures, as does the angle of inclination of her Bowsprit Cap and Bowsprit too. The most noticeable difference is between the 1st and 2nd scene. It's hard to tell, since the middle pic has the Flag partially cut off but the flagstaff is verticle in this scene, while it's angled slightly backwards in the top one. Meanwhile in the third, bottom scene, the dolphin striker, which we referred to as being a reliable source as a plumb line actually angles outward slightly. I just thought others would appreciate these subtle differences.

[ClipperFan]

7 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

...

 

Vladimir,

Beautiful work on these lovely ribbon scrolls. Some observations on the ornamental moldings of the Naval Hood . While the two lower moldings of the Main Rail continue on to complete the upper moldings of the Naval Hood, there are three thinner moldings that comprise the edge of the lower Hood arch. All three terminate at the tip, while the top two actually continue to the opposite side. The lower moldings aren't even at the Bow where they meet the Hull, they actually stagger inwards, as they edge the joint which is at an angle to match the curve of the prow. There's a hawse line running from the notch in the Cap Rail outward, running over the engraved "E" in "Seas" perfectly outlines this junction.