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

[Kevin-the-lubber]

3 hours ago, TBlack said:

hemostats

I got a few myself several years ago when I discovered our sterile services dept was throwing them away if they had the slightest damage. I wish now I'd been greedy and taken the whole crate.

[rwiederrich]

3 hours ago, Kevin-the-lubber said:

I got a few myself several years ago when I discovered our sterile services dept was throwing them away if they had the slightest damage. I wish now I'd been greedy and taken the whole crate.

When in a pinch and you really need to reach in there……..I have several specialty pair of these 14” tweezers and these 16” curved hemostats.    Just in case. 
 

Rob

Edited May 16, 2022 by rwiederrich

[TBlack]

I don't even want to think about why a surgeon would need an 18" clamp.

[rwiederrich]

So it continues …….. work on all the bunt lines and sheets.  
 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Crazy work area. 
 

Rob

[Glen McGuire]

1 hour ago, rwiederrich said:

Crazy work area. 

How the sausage is made is never pretty, but it's so good when it's done! 

 

I'm still in love with that base!  Just a perfect complement.

[TBlack]

2 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Crazy work area. 
 

Rob

 

I know, but gives such insight to the author.

[ClipperFan]

Rob, Vladimir, 

Mike was generous enough to send me a personally autographed copy of his second publication Clipper Ship Captain. He's such a caring fellow. Since he was still recuperating, his wife actually mailed it. How thoughtful that he wanted to keep his commitment even while recovering from a health issue. 

Meanwhile I stumbled on another issue where our recreation corrected another unforced error of the original. Mast spacing was very carefully calculated by Mike using the same 1869 fitting out scene in Boston Harbor. As before, nothing was done to take into consideration the rear facing angle of the massive ship to the cameraman. That means the masts, all of them are shifted slightly forward. It's a delicate line to walk but I think I'm doing it with as much diplomacy possible. Since there is no published spread for the masts of Glory of the Seas I made reference to two other Clipper ships for which there are: Stag Hound & Flying Fish. Calculating the ratios of each measurement gave sensible results to keep proportions equal. Accuracy of this process was confirmed when the ratio for Glory's forecastle predicted 34'. That's before I rediscovered her actual forecastle was specified as being 35' in the MacLean article. This issue has come up since Mike requested I draw Glory's fore section incorporating the slimmer bow lines that Vladimir drew. Now I'm realizing to be fair, due to having to respace her masts, the entire deck arrangement needs to be redone to include these corrected mast distances. Since I'll be tracing her hull from the foremast back, it's just a matter of getting the entire new sketch done before the July 1st deadline.

[rwiederrich]

1 hour ago, ClipperFan said:

As before, nothing was done to take into consideration the rear facing angle of the massive ship to the cameraman. That means the masts, all of them are shifted slightly forward. It's a delicate line to walk but I think I'm doing it with as much diplomacy possible. Since there is no published spread for the masts of Glory of the Seas I made reference to two other Clipper ships for which there are: Stag Hound & Flying Fish. Calculating the ratios of each measurement gave sensible results to keep proportions equal.

It is true there is some horizontal shift when the true profile is considered.  the true issue is *what* is the actual angle of the photographic capture?  3 degrees?  If the angle could be surmised, then a more accurate offset or shift can be calculated.  Trace out the true hull length...then take an educated guess and draw a 90 Degree line from the aft hull perpendicular to the midline.....where you think the image was taken from...say directly in front of the last mizzen shroud or channel..  Then draw lines from that point to the main mast and the fore mast.  This is a visual map....so you can visualize the shift when you move along the distance of the hull.   From rudimentary calculations....it appears(from what you are saying), there is  a 1~2 degree shift.  Moving the mast back.  I'm sure that, that  true angle can be calculated using some nifty geometry math.  Regardless what is calculated, the angulation or calculated distance is not much at all.  6 to 10 inches is all.........I would guess.

Personally...I NEVER rely upon just one image to determine the location of structures.  Cross referencing between all known images and using known distances....ie......figurehead length or bowsprit banding distance....one can quite accurately reverse engineer practically every distance on her.

 

Rob

[druxey]

One would need to use trigonometry, I think. The issue is you need to know one side and two angles or two sides and one angle. Not knowing the distance camera to subject means that all one can manage is an educated guess.

[rwiederrich]

39 minutes ago, druxey said:

One would need to use trigonometry, I think. The issue is you need to know one side and two angles or two sides and one angle. Not knowing the distance camera to subject means that all one can manage is an educated guess.

The Trig factor was my first personal suggestion to myself...but then as I thought through it more the unknown variables, turned it more into guess work then anything else and simple geometry would only permit you to visualize a possible answer....NOT verify any conclusions.  I'm a visualizer....so I mocked up a simple model to scale with the image of Glory's fitting out image.  By first noting the positions of the mast from a similar angle as in the photograph......then shifting my view to a clearer PROFILE....I was able to identify the optical shift.....moving the vertical masts back along their central axis.

This phenomena is easily noted by looking at something, then opening a single eye and shifting back and forth from left eye to right.......You can easily see the shift of the object back and forth.  The difference from pupil to pupil.  Together they form a stereographic image...separately they show the single image offset.     This is how optical range finding was used.

 

Anyway........I could clearly see the shift and could estimate the degrees and thus the distance shift.  Ultimately taking me back to that tricky word....Guess.  Educated though it be.

 

Rob

[GrandpaPhil]

Your educated guesses have been really good up to this point!  
 

I would trust them any day!

[rwiederrich]

1 hour ago, GrandpaPhil said:

Your educated guesses have been really good up to this point!  
 

I would trust them any day!

Well....I appreciate that....but I reiterate..........I'm nothing but a *Hack* lazy modeler, always looking to find the quick, easy way to do things.  Possibly, it is my eye to step skip, that lends itself to my ability to pull a rabbit outa my hat now and again.  Ingenuity finds its origins in desire, and desire coupled with its sister(Smoke an mirrors).....produces the end result.  And sometimes it's worth looking at.

 

It was once said of me, *A little of me goes a long way*.  That's either a curse or a blessing...depending on your perspective. 

 

Thanks for your vote of confidence.  I respect the honor.

 

Rob

[ClipperFan]

Here's the logic I used to calculate Glory's mast placements. First I calculate ratios of all elements specifically listed by MacLean in his description of McKay's first Extreme Clipper Stag Hound which had a length of her main deck between perpendicilars of 215'. Dividing each figure by this LOD gave me the following ratios as follows:

stem to foremast: 50' ratio .2325

fore to mainmast: 67' ratio .3116

main to mizzenmast: 56' ratio .2604

mizzen to sternpost: 42' ratio .1973

 

Assigning these ratios to Glory's 250 LOD gave me the following results:

stem to foremast: 58'

fore to mainmast: 78'

main to mizzenmast: 65'

mizzen to sternpost: 49'

 

Repeating this exercise with Flying Fish which had an LOD of 210' gave me the following numbers:

stem to foremast: 52' ratio .2476 

fore to mainmast: 62 ratio .2952

main to mizzenmast: 52' ratio .2476

mizzen to sternpost: 44' ratio .2095

 

Using these ratios, I again calculated Glory's mast distances:

stem to foremast: 62'

fore to mainmast: 74'

main to mizzenmast: 62'

mizzen to sternpost: 52'

 

Before I discovered the actual distance of Glory's forecastle listed as 35', I used this same process to calculate it based on a 30' forecastle of Flying Cloud. Here are those results, based on her 235' LOA:

forecastle: 30' ratio: .1276

 

Using Glory's 265' LOA resulted in:

forecastle: 34' (1' shy of actual length) 

 

I mistakenly told Mike that I used the ratio results of Flying Fish but when I reviewed the large sketch, it revealed that I actually had used those of Stag Hound. 

 

Glory of the Seas mast distances:

 

forecastle: 35' (Boston Daily Atlas)

stem to foremast: 58'

fore to mainmast: 78'

main to mizzenmast: 65'

mizzen to sternpost: 49'

 

 

 

 

[rwiederrich]

Wonderful information.   What can be deceptive is her actual deck length verses her deck length *between perpendiculars*  Add another 6ft to her fantail for her actual deck length.

 

I'll use your computations and verify what my final measurements are on my Glory.  I suspect they are pretty close, since external validation based upon those landmarks was also used to qualify the masts locations as well.

 

Good job Rich.  From these data points....does it effect your original locations much?

 

Rob

Edited May 18, 2022 by rwiederrich

[ClipperFan]

Rob, 

Not one bit. The Stag Hound ratios were precisely what I used to illustrate mast placements. Other than the forecastle deck, the mast distances are from center to center. 

[rwiederrich]

Added all the chain lifts.  Need to finish off the bunt lines and make the downhaul jin blocks. 
 

Rob

[ClipperFan]

Rob, by now you know of my vivid imagination. It's not much of a stretch to think of you asleep at night. Meanwhile an entire crew of miniature shipwrights and riggers are furiously at work all night. The following morning, you post pictures of their work and take credit as if it was your own! Of course that's just too much "Disney" for reality. But you get my drift. Your work and I know it's entirely you, is more akin to miniature ship construction than mere modeling. I continue to be in awe of your results.

[rwiederrich]

12 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob, by now you know of my vivid imagination. It's not much of a stretch to think of you asleep at night. Meanwhile an entire crew of miniature shipwrights and riggers are furiously at work all night. The following morning, you post pictures of their work and take credit as if it was your own! Of course that's just too much "Disney" for reality. But you get my drift. Your work and I know it's entirely you, is more akin to miniature ship construction than mere modeling. I continue to be in awe of your results.

Well I need to have a talk with their supervisor...because they aren't working hard enough...7 hours of sleep and 8 hours of work....means those jokers are spending way too much time in the lunchroom.  15 hours a day...these imagineers...should have been done with Glory a month ago.   

 

I'm picken up what you're laying down.  I'm hoping to get lots done tonight.  We'll see.

Thanks...as usual...you are so kind.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Lots of stuff going on.  Added the topgallant sheets.  
 

Rob
 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Working the Jin blocks.   These boogers take time.   They’re pretty small too. 
 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Working more on the royal sheets and still rigging them bunt lines.  
 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Couple more as I wait to blacken more chain. 
 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

All that is left on the mainmast is the royal and sky sail lifts.     
 

I’ve been bustin it out.    And I’m pooped.  
Probably finish those up tomorrow. 
 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Just had to fit it on deck to see. 
 

Rob

[druxey]

Impressive height! Coming along really well, Rob.

[BANYAN]

Spectacular - I need say no more I think Rob.

 

cheers

 

Pat

[ClipperFan]

Rob,

Mainmast height is just incredible. Your detail work is second to none. I especially appreciate those teenie, tiny gin blocks. Amazing!

[rwiederrich]

30 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob,

Mainmast height is just incredible. Your detail work is second to none. I especially appreciate those teenie, tiny gin blocks. Amazing!

I still need to make the top 3 gin blocks and the Jacobs ladder too....but she is nearing completion.

 

Rob

[ClipperFan]

Rob, 

I'm almost done on the revised forecastle deck sketch for Mike. Seeing the size of just this fore section of Glory of the Seas (it goes as far back as 38' of the large house behind her foremast) again reinforces how seriously large your model is. Then when I think of Vladimir's even larger one..... you both are creating such impressively beautiful tributes to McKay's final Clipper Ship.