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

[ClipperFan]

Here are the best images I have of Glory's Goddess "Athene" Figurehead. The first is from a Magazine article about the Shipcarver's work. On the bottom it states her height as being 90". Second is from Time-Life which depicts her floating against a blue background.

Third is a small image from a little pamphlet, possibly about India House itself.

Fourth is from a fascinating children's book which has the sole image I've found which depicts Glory's figurehead from the right side. Look closely and you can see what was probably original gold trim when she was first launched.

These are the sources I've been relying on in my efforts to capture her true beauty.

[rwiederrich]

Several point I’d like to make.  One, I think the new drawing doesn’t represent the curve of the stem nor the hood very accurately.  Though that may not be the focus of the corrected stem and entry compared to Mike’s original drawing.   Secondly,  I think the unclear example you presented  can’t be held without its own issues.......namely the ever exaggerated sweeping cut water. ,  which I think is too extreme,  based on other photographs.  Apart from some minor corrections to the foot of the figurehead and the length of the hood , I think my representation  mostly mimics that of the last image I posted of her on the beach...and that of her launching photos.     Please remember, I still need to correct the curve of her rail.  Please correct me if you find fault in my assessment.

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

Oh my goodness...where to start 

 

few days not following and what a read.

 

@Rob, i enjoyed immensely your photos and description of meeting with Mr.Mjelde.

 

by the way, on the table - Fantastic model on its own. ! wow ! 

 

@ Dear Arina, please pass to your father a sincere Thank and admiration for his phenomenal talent and effort with writing the books about Glory. The way that it far beyond just ordinary writing.

I spent two lovely summers being drown into the books so immensely it was unputdownable. I rejoice those moments with as happy warm feelings still giving me a pleasure with fighting my longterm healthy problems and psychiatric diagnosis. 

 

at this point I wish endless speculations about plus minus verticality of bow ends soon and Some plan materialised I can buy of jump into  i just want to start assesssing preparations and material so i can start building the glory by autumn this year hopefully if hlealthy....:)   looks like i can turn back to my own observations stating bow agressiveness cannot be that radical  but from now on I outstep from these discussions. 

 

@ Clipperfan , great stuff about figurehead also some great artistic skills. 

 

even im in the middle of different boat but you made me unroll my glory plan today to look at :)) 

 

I guess we all enjoyed past postings with enormous joy. ! you are doing great effort Rob. Thanks. 

 

stay safe V. 

.....

[ClipperFan]

Michael Mjelde deserves our universal gratitude and appreciation for his incredible personalization of Donald McKay's longest lived vessel "Glory of the Seas." Decades later, I am still fired up by this incredible vessel. In port, contemporaries described her as an impressive Clipper of enormous beauty. 

My total goal, as I'm sure Rob and Mr Mjelde has too, is to see the genuine form of McKay's last Clipper be realised as precisely as possible. 

"Perspective distortion" is the devil we're dealing with, as it's damnably difficult to get accurate proportions but not impossible.

Using her Port anchor and Bobstay as true verticle plumblines, gravity is pulling both free standing objects directly down, it's possible to estimate other angles. Glory's on an inclined plane in order to launch her when ready. Drawing an extended line from the bottom of her keel where it intersects with a verticle plumbline from her anchor, reveals that her waterline below isn't verticle but has an ever slight incline backwards. Knowing her figurehead is 90" from head to toe, it's obvious she projects at least 15' from her Cutwater since the carved arch she resides on is slightly longer than her. The Cutwater curves gracefully almost to the waterline where is straightens out.

Another factor to remember is that Glory was specifically designed to batter her way around Cape Horn through some of the toughest seas on the planet. Looking at observable samples of McKay's vessels, there is a similarity of designs which supports a more aggressive prow. To support my position about a more "extreme prow" I've reversed Walters' painting  followed it with the broadside of the actual Ship in Port. It's amazing how much the two hulls match in profile.

If you look at the close up detail of Glory in port and compare her photographic image to the proposed new Bow, they just don't match. Run a verticle line up from her prow where she's practically straight and look at the clear wedge shape that emerges; compare the same verticle line in the new Bow, those shapes will not match.

Finally, a much smaller, lighter stern is visible in both Walters painting and broadside photo. Again, they are remarkably similar. Compare them to the proposed new stern and they just don't match either.

It makes me wonder, of all the many images Ron Haug has, does he even have the broadside from San Pedro?

It's my burning passion, as I'm sure is Mr MJelde's, Mr Haug's, Rob's and everyone else on this forum to see Donald McKay's wonderful creation realized as accurately as possible. Please, repectfully let's be sure we get it right this time.

Edited February 5, 2021 by ClipperFan
Spelling and refinement

[rwiederrich]

1 hour ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

I guess we all enjoyed past postings with enormous joy. ! you are doing great effort Rob. Thanks. 

 

Vladimir, I know too well your own interest in Glory since are conversations last year.  Michael Mjelde has been so gracious and he is truly a Vault of information.   Still...it is hard to settle on a final drawing until one is fully confident it represents the most accurate depiction...again..this is difficult because it is based on photographic and artistic evidence....which is highly subjective.....relying upon the observers perceptions and perspective.

 

Then again  Michael has informed me that he possesses many more photographs of Glory that have never been published...one in particular of a head on view of her in Donald McKay's yard before launching.  This may show us the true sweep of her bow curves.  
Waiting for these additional photographs of Glory from Michael(and there are over a hundred), I am hesitant to make any final conclusions of her true dimensions. 

 

Michael is considering allowing me to correct the models stem that he brought to my house and also to finish her...that will be a thrill for sure.

 

Thanks for the fine compliments

Rob

 

[rwiederrich]

Clipperfan.....for as much work that has already gone into devising the most accurate hull for Glory...your position is far from without merit and I agree.  Because I, as you recall, made the same measurements and calculations as you did and presented them myself...but with evidence like the new beach image of her profile it makes determinations that much unclear.  Too much distortion for sure.

Before I make my final decision, I want tot wait and see more photographs from Michael.

 

Beautiful work by the way....I appreciate your efforts for sure.

 

Rob

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

13 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Here are the best images I have of Glory's Goddess "Athene" Figurehead. The first is from a Magazine article about the Shipcarver's work. On the bottom it states her height as being 90". Second is from Time-Life which depicts her floating against a blue background.

Third is a small image from a little pamphlet, possibly about India House itself.

Fourth is from a fascinating children's book which has the sole image I've found which depicts Glory's figurehead from the right side. Look closely and you can see what was probably original gold trim when she was first launched.

These are the sources I've been relying on in my efforts to capture her true beauty.

wow i never seen starboard side view....its far from non erotic postures other greek figures are shown.... One of few most beautiful figureheads in my opinion. (not olny by fact of late figureheads era, but from various aspects. its shockingly erotic for the acceptance of the era, more so in such religion driven or influence absorbed society that america of that time was - ...whatever... v.

[rwiederrich]

2 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

its shockingly erotic for the acceptance of the era, more so in such religion driven or influence absorbed society that america of that time was - ...whatever... v.

 

Ashore...it was socially prudent and morally acceptable to be respectable and honorable of the female figure....Buuuut when at sea  me hearties were bold, brash and lusty.

 

I think clipper ships were far more accepting of partially nude figureheads then any military vessel.  They tended to burnish military , animal or inanimate subjects.  Clipper figureheads represented the physique of the vessel...Beautiful!

 

Rob 

[ClipperFan]

Rob,

Thanks for your patience with my dogged determination to pursue accuracy at all costs. It's just these Hull lines don't, for lack of a better word.... feel right. I realize that's totally subjective but for the past decade, I've been working on getting a scientifically accurate representation, based on all available photographic evidence. Actually I was encouraged to see the San Pedro image since the poorly reproduced image of my sketch was done several years before it was published. 

Vladimir,

If you were to use flesh tones to paint her exposed areas, you would be amazed to see how skimply clad she really is. Erotic is an accurate term, yet somehow she is alluring and innocently beautiful at the same time. The only right side image is from a very affordable children's book which also has the only full lines of McKay's fabled Clipper "Lightning." I'll find a copy of the cover and share it. 

 

[rwiederrich]

26 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

children's book which also has the only full lines of McKay's fabled Clipper "Lightning." I'll find a copy of the cover and share it. 

 

I wanna see...

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Clipperfan....I took your original image that we all know of Glory on the ways...prior to her launching, and added plumb lines off the anchor and the martingale.  then I drew the keel inclination.  It is clear the horizon point is evident in the progression to the distance.  Now you can see the stem inclination...it is evident it is NOT vertical...but as you can see the right angle established from the conjuncture of the X and Y axis is slightly off...due to the horizontal incline...formed from the angle of  exposure.  Basically a distortion from the angle were the picture was taken.  I believe you were attempting to describe this effect yourself.

 

Any input?

 

Rob

[druxey]

A better indicator of vertical is the dependent anchor shank, I think. (Less possible distortion due to the camera lens).

[rwiederrich]

8 minutes ago, druxey said:

A better indicator of vertical is the dependent anchor shank, I think. (Less possible distortion due to the camera lens).

 

Either plum will provide adequate reference.

 

Good thing we are not trying to compensate for Chromatic anomalies that were prevalent in the lenses of cameras of the period...such as coma and astigmatism.

 

It takes an educated and attuned eye to compensate for all the aberrations we are working against...but I think we are roping her in.

 

Rob

[ClipperFan]

"Donald McKay & the Clipper Ships" by Mary Ellen Chase - North Star Books 1959 

This is a children's book. Amazingly, an exceedingly rare blueprint of McKay's Clipper "Lightning" as well as the sole right side image of Glory's Greek Goddess Figurehead and Glory on the Ways are all reproduced inside. Google it & this particular example is currently available for $19.00.

[rwiederrich]

Thought I had that book...but I do now...

 

Thanks.

 

Rob

[ClipperFan]

Rob,

Your plumb lines are perfect. Now observe the thin wedge shape that's created by the lines between the anchor line, the Cutwater and Glory's long Hull below the waterline. It's not verticle but slopes slightly backwards. 

I don't know yet how to draw lines on images, so I edit them instead. I've cropped Walters oil, Glory's broadside (which to me is the most accurate Hull shape to date, since it's fairly level with the observation line) and my Hull reconstruction. From what I see, the photo shows the most pronounced prow. 

Comparing all of these images, all 3 Hulls look consistent and to me at least the sole one that doesn't, is the new proposed Hull. 

 

Edited February 6, 2021 by ClipperFan
replaced partial image for entire one

[druxey]

My perception, from photographic evidence, is that from the waterline down, the bow and stem were a straight line, slightly  inclined. The curved portion is only above the waterline.

[ClipperFan]

druxey

The bow below the waterline is straight until the last 3 yellow metal plates, then it curves just so slightly before the turn towards the keel bottom. The larger point I was making is that the Bow below the waterline isn't vertical. 

 

[ClipperFan]

Rob,

I almost forgot, you're welcome. I love finding these really neat publications. Often, especially in the 50s & 60s books geared towards younger audiences have some surprisingly rare photos, paintings and ship's blueprints.

I don't know if you've ever heard of this but I just ordered it. "Around in the Glory: Chronicle of the 42nd Voyage of 'Glory of the Seas' around Cape Horn" by the ship's captain Daniel McLaughlin. Description says it's illustrated. If it contains any new images, I will certainly share them.

Edited February 6, 2021 by ClipperFan
Getting book title fully accurate.

[rwiederrich]

Indeed your arguments are compelling for sure..and one who has a keen eye myself..can't find fault in your evaluation, however I still think it best to wait for further images coming from Michael before we conclude anything.

 

I made some further measurements to the Launching image and found the curve of her prow is spherical from the foot of the figurehead to the cutwater/coppers edge..then flowing at a slight 5 or so degrees aft and down to the keel head.

 

This is so fun, I hope our enthusiasm doesn't fail us for impatience.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Here is another image with some elevations and measurements...note the slight angle to the bow from true perpendicular/vertical.

 

Rob

[ClipperFan]

Rob,

Here's a more clear pic from Michael Mjelde's first book. Both Bow and Stern are consistent with other images. I also found the Clipper "Lightning" lines, drafted by Donald McKay himself. This is from the North Star Books publication.

[rwiederrich]

57 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob,

I almost forgot, you're welcome. I love finding these really neat publications. Often, especially in the 50s & 60s books geared towards younger audiences have some surprisingly rare photos, paintings and ship's blueprints.

I don't know if you've ever heard of this but I just ordered it. "Around in the Glory: the 42nd Voyage of Glory of the Seas" by the ship's captain Daniel McLaughlin. Description says it's illustrated. If it contains any new images, I will certainly share them.

 

Where did you get that...I want one.

Just found one and bought it...yeah!

 

Rob

Edited February 6, 2021 by rwiederrich

[ClipperFan]

Rob,

What a great catch on the arc of the Cutwater being a section of a circle! I always sensed it was something like that but just couldn't quite see it so clearly until you highlighted it just now. It's also clear that her prow below the waterline isn't verticle but more of a slight incline back. It should be possible to extrapolate that precise degree on a compass setting. Any idea what that is? In his day, Donald McKay was reverently referred to as a Marine Mechanic by Duncan McLean of the Boston Daily Atlas. All of his vessels were scientifically laid out according to the latest hydrodynamic principles available and Donald was famous as an innovator. For example, British Ship builders were so uncomfortable with the radical Bow of the "Lightning" that they tacked on additional cladding to fix what they considered to be a flaw in his design! This obviously infuriated Mr. McKay. Fortunately, their awkward addition couldn't last long, as waves washed it all off. "Lightning" then proceeded to shatter records on her journeys from England to Australia. She became famous as one of the fastest vessels on that route.

As for our desire to complete this project correctly, after a decades long "relentless pursuit of perfection" I know we all can afford to be patient.

However, there's Mr. Mjelde's looming deadline to consider. From your meeting that sounds like it's coming up fairly soon. Didn't you say that the manuscript for his third publication is already complete? So, I'm going to redouble my efforts to get this done at the full scale we originally discussed. Meanwhile, I don't suppose Mr. Mjelde or Arina TheAuthorsDaughter gave you any idea when the final publishing deadline for his third book would be?

My other concern is not wanting to insult Ron Haug's work. But if it comes to a choice between that and seeing yet another inaccurate lines plan, what else do you think we should do? Do you think there's enough time to collaborate with Ron, to show him our research? I've got to believe that everyone wants to be faithful to Mr. McKay's genuine article.

To all of us who love Donald's Clipper Ships, even Medium Clippers, it's important to get it right. My sense is, just like the "Great Republic" was a pioneer of the great four masted Barks which followed years later, "Glory of the Seas" wasn't quite a 'Down Easter' but was a definite precursor to them. We have to continue to make as strong as possible a case in defense of Donald McKay's unique creation. Don't we owe it to his memory? After all this time, it would be a shame to see yet another flawed lines plan published, when there now appears to be plenty of visible evidence to contradict it.

Edited February 6, 2021 by ClipperFan
Complete revision

[rwiederrich]

9 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob,

Here's a more clear pic from Michael Mjelde's first book. Both Bow and Stern are consistent with other images. I also found the Clipper "Lightning" lines, drafted by Donald McKay himself. This is from the North Star Books publication.

 

Isn't it interesting that in the top picture..she retains her royal masts....but this is after she received her helm house up in the mizzen....but when she was first hauled up to Alaska she didn't have the helm house nor the royal masts..not to mention the backstays required to maintain them.   Just another weird mystery.

 

Rob

[ClipperFan]

I hated to see that mizzen helm house, it disfigured the masts and yards so poorly. It signifies to me how much the owners disrespected her Clipper Ship lineage. From a coldly practical, functional viewpoint, I'm sure it was a benefit to the helmsman but God what an awful sight!

Edited February 6, 2021 by ClipperFan
Grammar correction

[ClipperFan]

It's possible this scene shows her with royals fiddled, either because the weather is calm and quiet or because she's just beginning her long tow from Washington to Alaska and they haven't been lowered yet.

Obviously scenes of Glory before that Mizzen monstrosity were earlier in her career.

Her conversion to become a floating Salmon canning factory extended her years of service. While it was an innovative first, sadly it led to her ultimate doom. When Boston merchants were considering the costs to transform her back to McKay's original Clipper Ship configuration, it was added expense to remove all of the factory processing modifications that made them conclude it was too expensive to save her.....

Edited February 6, 2021 by ClipperFan
additional information

[druxey]

Back to the form of stem! I've straightened the photo and superimposed a circular arc in perspective, then the line of the stem and a vertical. The arrowed set-back, measured in stem-widths should establish the angle accurately. The circular arc appears to have a radius of keel to waterline, more or less. Comments?

[ClipperFan]

druxey

Now we're talking scientific precision! I took a compass to the image on my phone and it appears to be a 5 degree incline backwards. Also it does appear that while below the waterline, she appears arrow straight, it's not exactly, as the edge curves forward ever so minutely. I've also read that Glory's Hull was sheathed with yellow metal up to 22'. Knowing that fact, we can measure her height above the waterline. My phone is too small to accurately calculate this but visually it appears that her dimensions above the waterline are slightly more than below. My estimate from Keel to Monkeyrail is close to 50'.

Her measurements at Starboard loading port can be calculated by counting strakes, which have been published as being 6 1/2" each. Unless anybody else has a more accurate count, this is the number found from a clear enough image of Glory on the ways: waterline to bottom of port 9 strakes, 58 1/2", side of port 4 strakes, 26" ; port to main deck lower molding 7 strakes, 45 1/2" total= 130" or 10.83' probably 11'. main deck rail height is 5', monkey rail above that is 18", 1 1/2'. I don't know if three 6" moldings (lower main, upper main and monkey rail) add to height or not, excluding them she's 17 1/2' above waterline. Counting depth for moldings she's 19'. Combined with a 22' waterline below that comes to either 39 1/2' or 41' at her Starboard loading dock. 

[TheAuthorsDaughter]

12 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob,

What a great catch on the arc of the Cutwater being a section of a circle! I always sensed it was something like that but just couldn't quite see it so clearly until you highlighted it just now. It's also clear that her prow below the waterline isn't verticle but more of a slight incline back. It should be possible to extrapolate that precise degree on a compass setting. Any idea what that is? In his day, Donald McKay was reverently referred to as a Marine Mechanic by Duncan McLean of the Boston Daily Atlas. All of his vessels were scientifically laid out according to the latest hydrodynamic principles available and Donald was famous as an innovator. For example, British Ship builders were so uncomfortable with the radical Bow of the "Lightning" that they tacked on additional cladding to fix what they considered to be a flaw in his design! This obviously infuriated Mr. McKay. Fortunately, their awkward addition couldn't last long, as waves washed it all off. "Lightning" then proceeded to shatter records on her journeys from England to Australia. She became famous as one of the fastest vessels on that route.

As for our desire to complete this project correctly, after a decades long "relentless pursuit of perfection" I know we all can afford to be patient.

However, there's Mr. Mjelde's looming deadline to consider. From your meeting that sounds like it's coming up fairly soon. Didn't you say that the manuscript for his third publication is already complete? So, I'm going to redouble my efforts to get this done at the full scale we originally discussed. Meanwhile, I don't suppose Mr. Mjelde or Arina TheAuthorsDaughter gave you any idea when the final publishing deadline for his third book would be?

My other concern is not wanting to insult Ron Haug's work. But if it comes to a choice between that and seeing yet another inaccurate lines plan, what else do you think we should do? Do you think there's enough time to collaborate with Ron, to show him our research? I've got to believe that everyone wants to be faithful to Mr. McKay's genuine article.

To all of us who love Donald's Clipper Ships, even Medium Clippers, it's important to get it right. My sense is, just like the "Great Republic" was a pioneer of the great four masted Barks which followed years later, "Glory of the Seas" wasn't quite a 'Down Easter' but was a definite precursor to them. We have to continue to make as strong as possible a case in defense of Donald McKay's unique creation. Don't we owe it to his memory? After all this time, it would be a shame to see yet another flawed lines plan published, when there now appears to be plenty of visible evidence to contradict it.

Dad actually has two books that have been submitted for publishing (not approved yet and a daunting process unless someone has a benefactor). They’re both on different time periods of Glory and more  on particular voyage or people vs the vessel itself. He has enough file folders of photos and data on her (a few file cabinet drawers) for a few books! Over the years he’s become more of a generalist in maritime matters (not solely focused on clipper ships) so Glory hasn’t been only focus but fortunately with time more info has come forward and more of her history has been unearthed. Sadly the most important and pertinent was destroyed by fire back East or hasn’t come to light.

Edited February 6, 2021 by TheAuthorsDaughter