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

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

8 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

It almost seems beyond comprehension that anyone could arrive at any other conclusion then what we arrived at.    The rub of the inconsistency lys in the fact we used 3 heads and we bounced ideas and observations off one another.  Ron with all his years of experience simply had himself (though that in of itself is significant).  It still did not allow for a peer review.  I think, if for no other reason, we had the advantage of numbers.  Not to mention the original author himself,  Mike Mjelde.   I’m satisfied with my representation, based upon our conclusions,  In spite of the current apparent mischaracterization.

This is very well observed and thought out Rob. 

Edited July 13, 2021 by Vladimir_Wairoa
add

[rwiederrich]

6 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

This is very well observed and thought out Rob. 

Well Vlad...we all put in a lot of time and research ourselves, and it is deflating when a known expert on the subject of shipwright technologies renders a completely different example then what was agreed upon among our group.  Mike Mjelde must see, himself the inconsistencies between our and Ron's renderings.  I mimic Rich's bewilderment.

 

But as I have stated clearly before...this is about perception and I choose to accept what we have perceived....cuz......I trust my own eyes and my own acquired ability to render what i see, into an accurate model.  I have years of experience in mechanical drafting, engineering, and fabrication....so I tend to fall back on those skills to aid my own perceptions.

 

Best thing of all, is that it is a personal thing...you can model your(speaking of anyone) model after whatever you will....I will do the same...without any guilt.

 

What an adventure Vlad......we have undertaken.

 

Rob

[ClipperFan]

12 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

It almost seems beyond comprehension that anyone could arrive at any other conclusion then what we arrived at.    The rub of the inconsistency lys in the fact we used 3 heads and we bounced ideas and observations off one another.  Ron with all his years of experience simply had himself (though that in of itself is significant).  It still did not allow for a peer review.  I think, if for no other reason, we had the advantage of numbers.  Not to mention the original author himself,  Mike Mjelde.   I’m satisfied with my representation, based upon our conclusions,  In spite of the current apparent mischaracterization.

Rob, the very fact that your Hull form, even incomplete bears such an amazingly close resemblance to various contemporary photos of "GLORY of the SEAS" is all the proof we need to validate that the lines our combined group arrived at are accurate. I am thrilled to observe you and Vlad's inspiring progress.

[rwiederrich]

8 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob, the very fact that your Hull form, even incomplete bears such an amazingly close resemblance to various contemporary photos of "GLORY of the SEAS" is all the proof we need to validate that the lines our combined group arrived at are accurate. I am thrilled to observe you and Vlad's inspiring progress.

Thanks Rich...I was hoping she would be a good representation.....NOT just a good similarity.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Spent a bit of time in the shop today and I first painted the starboard gunwale and I took Rich's advice and painted the waterways blue.

 

Some images.

[rwiederrich]

I then focused on finishing up the stern topgallant rail.

[rwiederrich]

I did the rail work at the same time as the painting but one had to be before the other....I guess.

 

Next images are of the planksheer and rail molding being added.  I also worked on touching up small blemishes in the hull on both sides.

 

Some of the images are taken to mimic some of the images of Glory on the beach and such.

 

Next thing will be to add the starboard naval hood and its trim.   Enjoy the images.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Comparative hulls

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

1 hour ago, rwiederrich said:

Comparative hulls

my gosh its her !  

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

5 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

I did the rail work at the same time as the painting but one had to be before the other....I guess.

 

Next images are of the planksheer and rail molding being added.  I also worked on touching up small blemishes in the hull on both sides.

 

Some of the images are taken to mimic some of the images of Glory on the beach and such.

 

Next thing will be to add the starboard naval hood and its trim.   Enjoy the images.

 

Rob

beautiful stern ! you can be as proud as possibe Rob. classy work in every aspect. clapping hands. 

[rwiederrich]

5 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

beautiful stern ! you can be as proud as possibe Rob. classy work in every aspect. clapping hands. 

Thanks Vlad.  It really is a compromise.  I'm still not completely satisfied and will probably(before it's all said and done) do more refinement work on the stern.

 

Comparative images can be very tricky.  It is nearly impossible to replicate fully.  Since angulation of subject...location and latitude of photographer is never the same.  And the greatest issue is the accuracy of the subject matter.

I took a comparative image of my first Glory...and though it was some what representative of the original photo...it lacked in every way.

 

I hope as I approach greater completion of this new Glory, that further comparison images will be rendered as far more convincing.

Thanks again for your continual support and encouragement.

 

Rob

Edited July 14, 2021 by rwiederrich

[ClipperFan]

10 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Comparative hulls

Rob, that is spot on! You simply have to share these with Michael Mjelde. I have a feeling he will be blown away! I completely agree with Vladimir's expression, as he put it succinctly and perfectly "My God, it's her!"

[ClipperFan]

Rob, while your Stern is probably the most accurate ever realized in a Glory model yet, it is lacking one distinctive component of the real ship. Look closely below the sheerline and you'll see another more subtle line. I now believe this is a 3'6" drop, coinciding with the lower Naval Hood molding. That would mean that while it isn't so clearly distinguishable across her entire Hull it's still there. If you go back to McKay's illustration of his Twin Packets "Star of Empire & Chariot of Fame" that same thin line is there too. I surmise that perhaps this might be a mounting line for all of the wrought Iron shrouds as well.

[ClipperFan]

14 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Spent a bit of time in the shop today and I first painted the starboard gunwale and I took Rich's advice and painted the waterways blue.

 

Some images.

Rob, I appreciate your humility in altering your choice of painting the waterways blue. I think later on when all additional deck structures and details are added in, this will make a lovely, distinctive contrast.

[rwiederrich]

1 hour ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob, while your Stern is probably the most accurate ever realized in a Glory model yet, it is lacking one distinctive component of the real ship. Look closely below the sheerline and you'll see another more subtle line. I now believe this is a 3'6" drop, coinciding with the lower Naval Hood molding. That would mean that while it isn't so clearly distinguishable across her entire Hull it's still there. If you go back to McKay's illustration of his Twin Packets "Star of Empire & Chariot of Fame" that same thin line is there too. I surmise that perhaps this might be a mounting line for all of the wrought Iron shrouds as well.

Smarty.....I know about those moldings and I am adding them as well.  If you review the port side, you will see them present.  I just didn't add them to the starboard side yet (Still working it)....One thing at a time bro.....

 

I had a deep suspicion that you might catch that and again I suspected it might be assumed I *forgot* the extra trim.  I mostly appreciate your forbearance and keen eye to be able to point out the inconsistency...and the  apparent oversight    You 're keeping me honest and true to Glory.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

2 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob, I appreciate your humility in altering your choice of painting the waterways blue. I think later on when all additional deck structures and details are added in, this will make a lovely, distinctive contrast.

Rich...I wanted to paint the waterways the blue....but the grey(pearl) I selected for the gunwale was far too grey.....so I had to repaint the entirety.  And I wanted the grey to slightly *bleed* through the white to give the allusion of a slightly blued pearl color.   I took your advice knowing it was the right choice.

 

I think the final result is acceptable.  See them on the port trim image

 

Rob

 

Edited July 14, 2021 by rwiederrich

[ClipperFan]

3 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Smarty.....I know about those moldings and I am adding them as well.  If you review the port side, you will see them present.  I just didn't add them to the starboard side yet (Still working it)....One thing at a time bro.....

 

I had a deep suspicion that you might catch that and again I suspected it might be assumed I *forgot* the extra trim.  I mostly appreciate your forbearance and keen eye to be able to point out the inconsistency...and the  apparent oversight    You 're keeping me honest and true to Glory.

 

Rob

Rob, while I appreciate the joke, in fact the particular line I'm referring to has no molding at all. It's just a line that Vladimir & I identified a while ago. Below the sheerline molding, it's visible if you look closely enough.

[ClipperFan]

3 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Rich...I wanted to paint the waterways the blue....but the grey(pearl) I selected for the gunwale was far too grey.....so I had to repaint the entirety.  And I wanted the grey to slightly *bleed* through the white to give the allusion of a slightly blued pearl color.   I took your advice knowing it was the right choice.

 

I think the final result is acceptable.  See them on the port trim image

 

Rob

 

Rob, it is beautiful.

[rwiederrich]

2 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob, while I appreciate the joke, in fact the particular line I'm referring to has no molding at all. It's just a line that Vladimir & I identified a while ago. Below the sheerline molding, it's visible if you look closely enough.

Point it out Rich on the real vessel

[ClipperFan]

2 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Point it out Rich on the real vessel

Rob, it looks like a linear shadow. It's below the sheerline. What cinches that it's a structural feature, for me at least, is that when you look at the outer edge of the Stern, there's a noticeable change in profile at that exact line. 

If you re-examine McKay's twin Packets, count down 5 lines at the Stern, there's no molding but the line goes clear across the entire Hull. It appears to be about a 3'6 " drop below the double molded sheerline, which would align it perfectly with the lower Naval Hood molding. 

Vladimir saw it too. Somehow he even caught it in the 1869 fitting out scene. It's definitely there and may help account for the complex geometrics in creating such a graceful Stern.

 

[rwiederrich]

Indeed, I noticed the anomaly some time ago myself, but I gathered it was a structural  issue and not a signature of the shipwright.  Personally I wasn’t sure it was worth trying to replicate in this scale.  I’m sorry I strayed from replicating this unique feature.  I suppose our year of research has finally been breached by my lazy oversight.   I hope Vladimir will include this detail on his model. Good eye.   

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

1 hour ago, rwiederrich said:

Indeed, I noticed the anomaly some time ago myself, but I gathered it was a structural  issue and not a signature of the shipwright.  Personally I wasn’t sure it was worth trying to replicate in this scale.  I’m sorry I strayed from replicating this unique feature.  I suppose our year of research has finally been breached by my lazy oversight.   I hope Vladimir will include this detail on his model. Good eye.   

Friends I follow this one with interest i fully agree with Rob, it would have been impossible on his scale from planking thickness eprspective etc..

Im fully aware of that sharpish curvature  and hopefully it will be pronounced on mine stern i will try to photograph it. thx  Rich for keeping esharp eye. V. 

[ClipperFan]

2 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Indeed, I noticed the anomaly some time ago myself, but I gathered it was a structural  issue and not a signature of the shipwright.  Personally I wasn’t sure it was worth trying to replicate in this scale.  I’m sorry I strayed from replicating this unique feature.  I suppose our year of research has finally been breached by my lazy oversight.   I hope Vladimir will include this detail on his model. Good eye.   

Rob, in no way did I mean to denigrate the unbelievably accurate model you are constructing. You mentioned being a little dissatisfied with your Stern (which I think is just beautiful) so I thought you might benefit from knowing about this fascinating feature of Glory's construction. 

[ClipperFan]

4 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

Friends I follow this one with interest i fully agree with Rob, it would have been impossible on his scale from planking thickness eprspective etc..

Im fully aware of that sharpish curvature  and hopefully it will be pronounced on mine stern i will try to photograph it. thx  Rich for keeping esharp eye. V. 

Vladimir, if you're going to incorporate this fascinating ridge, for lack of a better term, I recommend it be 3'6" drop below the sheerline. Your illustration of this feature, respectfully was too close to the sheerline, at 1:72nd (1"=6') this drop would be appx 1/2"=3' & maybe 1/16th" which translates to 3/8ths'. Not precisely 1/2' but I'm doing this in my head. 😉 That would exactly mirror the Naval Hoods. I have nothing more to go on, but it makes sense that this somehow could be the mounting point for all of the wrought iron that anchors all three shrouds. It only becomes more visibly noticeable as the fullness of Glory's hull transitions to her rear flank and Stern. What is most noticeable in the beautifully clear photo Mike sent us, is this is the directional default where her curvilinear Stern drops gracefully to become the sharp exit which is so beautifully noticeable in the this Stern scene.

Edited July 15, 2021 by ClipperFan
math correction, sigh

[rwiederrich]

5 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob, in no way did I mean to denigrate the unbelievably accurate model you are constructing. You mentioned being a little dissatisfied with your Stern (which I think is just beautiful) so I thought you might benefit from knowing about this fascinating feature of Glory's construction. 

The sheer line mentioned may indeed be a structural anomoly, representative of the second internal deck....where as the planksheer  is representative of the main deck or more accurately the waterway.

 

I wasn't being critical of your acute observation of my lack of representation of said structure.  I was being critical of my own oversight.

 

I wish to make a disclaimer now:    I will, at times, omit or even *fudge*(accidently or intentionally) on certain details of this build.  Either by way of keeping it simple (due to scale) , by sheer ignorance on my part or by blatant laziness, which may either be, because I wish not to redo an error or my own personal interpretation leads me in that direction.

 

I've made it very clear, on many occasions....that I'm generally a lazy modeler...prone to stray from the pure path, apt to disguise poor workmanship, and tend to rely upon copious amounts of paint and gimicry to hide those faults.

 

Thanks for allowing me the vent space.  Hope it doesn't exacerbate my transparency.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

5 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

it makes sense that this somehow could be the mounting point for all of the wrought iron that anchors all three shrouds.

Rich could you be more specific concerning these shrouds you speak of.  Not quite sure I understand your usage of the work in this application.

 

Also did you notice in this image of her stern the bumpkins are removed.  I don't see them...since their function is no longer needed.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Having this example we can see in this drawing the area in question.  the item you are talking about is most likely the second deck area

[ClipperFan]

1 hour ago, rwiederrich said:

Having this example we can see in this drawing the area in question.  the item you are talking about is most likely the second deck area

Rob, from this illustration, it looks like the horizontal "post timber" is the structural member I'm referring to. If, as McKay's other illustration shows, this feature covers the entire Hull, it would be a logical mounting point for the iron bars which anchor all Shrouds and back stays which are crucial in supporting all three of Glory's massive masts. 

[ClipperFan]

Rob, when I went to share this image of Glory's Hull it came as a surprise that the iron bars I was referring to actually don't mount directly into the Hull but into another projecting mounting board, which completely demolishes what I was thinking. My turn to eat some humble crow. Yum!

[rwiederrich]

1 hour ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob, when I went to share this image of Glory's Hull it came as a surprise that the iron bars I was referring to actually don't mount directly into the Hull but into another projecting mounting board, which completely demolishes what I was thinking. My turn to eat some humble crow. Yum!

I had originally thought you were talking about the chain plates...but I wanted for more clarity.  The chain plates which extend down from the lower channel that is bolted to the waterway are themselves bolted to the hull via prevented plates.  I'm sure the iron bolts used, pass through significant frames...such as the hull frames or a strake from of some kind.