Glory of the Seas 1869 by Vladimir_Wairoa - FINISHED - 1:72 - medium clipper

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

Recreation of stern and various observations. 

 

Folks, this will be quite a long post, with lots of pics so beware. I will try to be as much cohesive as possibly could with clear demonstration of every aspect of it.  

First explanation what made me go to this elaborative effort and so on. 

 

As Richard is heading to NRJ article, I wanted to point out certain aspect of our research and ! execution of our research. I believe honesty is a paving stone of every valuable research and I would be suspicious reading whatever text pointing out perfection or definite conclusions. Honest research is never definite in universities studies and leaves windows open for future research and so on. I am therefore very much interested in Richard article as its quite weight of responsibility and wisdom lying on his shoulders. However, I have no doubt knowing his experience and so on. 

I would not be happy reading something of definite apraisal as I will demonstrate our both slightly different execution  than reasearch of  sterns that wont escape notice of naked eye.  are rather outcome of individual approach of our both are not last words in this resort - reminding we are not designing a kit. 

Hence I am thankful to Rich for his meticulous effort to watch evey slight bit but at the same time I would like to point out not to lost whole picture. 

I would be sad if this would turn out pessimistic as outcome is quite contrary. I will show recent model expo profesional plan of flying fish and its outreagous findings regarding stern and it will conclude rather compliment how thoroughly  we dvelved  in our painstaking research. 

 

observation 1. 

Im not that good with numbers but  i like curves...   we had 3 famous photos of stern / i would point our each of rather missleading than helpfus due shooting angle. its logic as noone would climb mast to take pic with bygone camera / impossible. Few paintings and one word of describtion at launch - CURVILINEAR. thats it. Speaking of  whether stern is round  seems to me quite strange as we need to establish defining Authority. 

 

If we had better pics I would challenge article from 1869 newspaper. I believe we shouldnt as its given ship data   written by that time PROS taken from McKay himself. Therefore Curvilinear ....

 

 

 

 

 

observation 2. 

 

I take for granted what Crothers describes as curvilinear in his  american clipper "bible"

please note what slight moving curve leads to oval or round. - its not that easy to spot by untrained eye and notable rather by comparing actual curve than by eye.....its quite shockingly difficult to see difference but little can be enough move from curvilinear....but round as Mr. shipwright says? definitely nope. pic below / 

 

3. Actual comparison. 

Please dont mix counter with shape of deck or rail. i will come to that later. 

now we speak about counter that defines stern and from where poop cabin is build up. 

I outlined Crothers definition of Curvilinear shape and compared to our glory Michaels and plan of Flying fish by model expo. 

 

results are quite interesting. we need to remember we didnt have agreed on plan on paper how stern would look like.  as we  both individually built our sterns as natural outcome of bulkheads - 

[probably we should as it will be uniform but isnt it nicer to see execution of two differnt eyes on same theme? its quite interesting how small curve shape of goose liner matches round of curvilinear shape / not surprising as those natural curvatures of mathematics and tools were used at that time we speak of....

 

 

 

 

4. actual comparisons. 

my glory. at this point I dont have Robs from that period of build unfortunately. from observatin I believe its even truer than mine. I dont have pic but Michaels haf counter in book matches as well. 

 

 

5. now comparing complete stern curvatures at deck level. 

first itneresting observation. I came to conclusion that Crothers portrays McKays stern curvatures something as his sign / many show pretty much same characteristicall overall notable shape / few from the book here....

 

 

 

6. comparing deck level curvature of mine glory Robs glory Michael glory , model expo flying fish. 

michaels - Very accurate with Crothers 

 

 

 

flying fish of moel expo - note how drastic outway from curvilinear. extreme. I must note - was there something like Mckay halfmodel to portray such extremity that creators relied on  ? at counter level its even more extreme look 

 

 

 

 

 

flying fish at counter ! 

i wouldnt say its authentic unless i see half model . its extreme work of model expo. 

mckay wouldnt took such stern of flying fish to portray glory...

finale & my concllusion. 

I pic mine and Robs execution of stern at deck level. 

its obvious what implies. Mine reached slightly towards  wider - flying fish of model expo. Robs reaching more to rounder feel than middle prototype of crothers and Michael. again kudos to michael drawing but mind you. These are pretty slight derailing of details of very solid sterns toward what we call curvilinear. both. remember we dont have photo and what I oserve paintings lean toward extreme portrayal - as model expo flying fish. photo of alaska canmery rather to rounder . and very photo from the back implied thgere is solid straight  line in thge middle saying its not round stern. speaking if commertial plan like flying fish derails as much...we did splendid ourselves. 

so that is my conclusion. thanks for patience. maybe it helps Rich with his article somehow as well. for me interesting observation indeed. 

 

mine 

 

 

Robs

Edited October 15, 2021 by Vladimir_Wairoa
add

[rwiederrich]

2 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

curvilinear

So we are curvilinear, you and I.

 

Simply put, we fall within the parameters of what could have been the actual curve of Glory's stern.   Reassuring indeed...cuz I wasn't planning on cutting out and remaking it if I hadn't made the grade.   If I had actually made the grade.

 

Fantastic study and continual research Vlad.  Your contribution on the subject is well received and fully appreciated.

 

Rob

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

57 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

So we are curvilinear, you and I.

 

Simply put, we fall within the parameters of what could have been the actual curve of Glory's stern.   Reassuring indeed...cuz I wasn't planning on cutting out and remaking it if I hadn't made the grade.   If I had actually made the grade.

 

Fantastic study and continual research Vlad.  Your contribution on the subject is well received and fully appreciated.

 

Rob

Thanks Rob, i believe we pretty much fit handsomly

. put it other way cross of our both in my opinion woudl be possibly ! epitome:)

as mine miss a bit of essential roundness in counter ! where you recreated  i would say perfect or identical copy or prototype thus its  vice versa at the rail profile or deck.   speaking of details... i just wanted also Rich understand one thing. even slight more sanding at execution can lead slightly other direction when building stern therefore i believe those little details. otherwise speaking of - that we had to at the same time MAKE sure looking at 3 dimensional aspect of stern ! ATTHE SAME time not 2 dimensianal like on pics - i believe we did fine considering   complex 3dimensional asepct of stern. its shape is quite complicatec meeting varoius corners at different thickness - its different look at picure and draw conclusion and actually make one ! 

 

we had to watch also horizontal size of stern and entire roundness and rise of it. its easier to aepak than make! 

 

im glad you found it underestandable ( with my language etc...)

in my opinion.  V. 

Edited October 15, 2021 by Vladimir_Wairoa
add

[ClipperFan]

Vladimir,

That's quite a detailed, well thought out and intellectual evaluation of McKay's "curvilinear" stern. What simply amazed me when I first saw the rear view of Glory in Alaska was the almost flat center of her counter. In essence this curvilinear quality was far more of a rounded flat than a more graceful ellipse, which was how I originally envisioned curvilinear to be. Fortunately, despite your lack of this incredibly significant photo, you guys both captured this quality of Glory very closely. Kudos to both of you for a job well done!

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

8 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Vladimir,

That's quite a detailed, well thought out and intellectual evaluation of McKay's "curvilinear" stern. What simply amazed me when I first saw the rear view of Glory in Alaska was the almost flat center of her counter. In essence this curvilinear quality was far more of a rounded flat than a more graceful ellipse, which was how I originally envisioned curvilinear to be. Fortunately, despite your lack of this incredibly significant photo, you guys both captured this quality of Glory very closely. Kudos to both of you for a job well done!

Thanks Rich, maybe I unnoticed that photo Rich. Which one is it please? 

[ClipperFan]

3 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

Thanks Rich, maybe I unnoticed that photo Rich. Which one is it please? 

Vladimir,

It's the very 1st of three photos in your long post about the shape of Glory's stern. It's looking through evergreens from slightly above directly at her Stern while she's docked in Alaska. From this never before seen image it's clear the center of her Stern is far more flattened than a round stern would appear. Thus "Curvilinear" now means to me a flat center with curves on the ends where the Stern meets the sides.

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

1 hour ago, ClipperFan said:

Vladimir,

It's the very 1st of three photos in your long post about the shape of Glory's stern. It's looking through evergreens from slightly above directly at her Stern while she's docked in Alaska. From this never before seen image it's clear the center of her Stern is far more flattened than a round stern would appear. Thus "Curvilinear" now means to me a flat center with curves on the ends where the Stern meets the sides.

i got it Rich. Though I think from that very horizontal view it would appear rather even if it was a little rounder I think. But i got your point. i also think if rounding in center  just about above rudder its very very subtle -  rounding is so small or decent that in the center it can be flat for whatever lenght we may assume:) from that pic....one more observation I made if i understand it dorrectly - or you may correct me if i am worng, curvilinear at counter doesnt mean deck level must look exactly same. 

there is place for tweakong to the infinity. well rather decent than infinity

 

this makes me try another experiment of photography  perspective experiment from which we could definitely proove how much flat it is in deck level  - i will try to photo from same view and same focal lenght mine glory - which is in fact flat upper stern and cutty sark of revell which is on fact round as hell at counter level and rounder at deck level. just for my own curiosity  if i can spot clear difference between flat and round at deck level. 

[ClipperFan]

51 minutes ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

i got it Rich. Though I think from that very horizontal view it would appear rather even if it was a little rounder I think. But i got your point. i also think if rounding in center  just about above rudder its very very subtle -  rounding is so small or decent that in the center it can be flat for whatever lenght we may assume:) from that pic....one more observation I made if i understand it dorrectly - or you may correct me if i am worng, curvilinear at counter doesnt mean deck level must look exactly same. 

there is place for tweakong to the infinity. well rather decent than infinity

 

this makes me try another experiment of photography  perspective experiment from which we could definitely proove how much flat it is in deck level  - i will try to photo from same view and same focal lenght mine glory - which is in fact flat upper stern and cutty sark of revell which is on fact round as hell at counter level and rounder at deck level. just for my own curiosity  if i can spot clear difference between flat and round at deck level. 

Vladimir, this "curvilinear" vs "round" topic highlights another feature of McKay's more robust larger Clippers vs Great Britain's more Yacht like Tea Clippers. McKay vessels in particular were noted for their stout short 'overhang' vs English vessels which had more delicate rounded ones. In fact, it's thought that the famous Tea Clipper "Ariel" was lost due to waves sinking her counter from the Stern. 

I look forward to the images of your Glory taken from the same vantage point as this rare Alaska photo. Perhaps Rob can do the same with his too. It would be fascinating to see results compared to Glory herself.

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

41 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Vladimir, this "curvilinear" vs "round" topic highlights another feature of McKay's more robust larger Clippers vs Great Britain's more Yacht like Tea Clippers. McKay vessels in particular were noted for their stout short 'overhang' vs English vessels which had more delicate rounded ones. In fact, it's thought that the famous Tea Clipper "Ariel" was lost due to waves sinking her counter from the Stern. 

I look forward to the images of your Glory taken from the same vantage point as this rare Alaska photo. Perhaps Rob can do the same with his too. It would be fascinating to see results compared to Glory herself.

I agree with your suggestion. 

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

I am surprised what blind chance could do. First. To my limited knowledge and experience, gosh i never thought of british clippers as šport of yacht profile untill you pointed IT out and only now i realised how much so. Strange Because i looked at cutty fór oné year - but Revell model IS so screwed in this regard as if i was looking ať yacht America. 

 

To the famous photo. Honestly, that photo was hunting me for a long time fór reason i couldnt take exact view or photo of my ship. I think i finally found out where was the problem. If you look carefully you see stern and rail rather diminished and Wales and sides of ship are visible so perspective IS very very narrow . Which implies only one fact no matter how far was photographer. IT was taken with Telephoto Lens! Im not sure how much extended those were at that time Apart of štandard Lens that was used always but It sure was Telephoto. I finally managed to take almost Exact proportions with more less sams angle-  first with standard and slightly wide Lens and second with Telephoto of quite a length. 

You Can see even with štandard focal length there IS no chance to see sides of ship raising  from water ( its all burried far below and behind stern as it is not brought close by lens quite opposite. stern is on other side portayed bigger than should as what is nearest is always bigger with wide lens . 

and stern IS also not narrowed quite opposite enhanced  - exactly what wide Lens does. tele Narrows and diminish whats close and enlarges and brings closer  whats far. Opposite of wide angle- that widens enormously close objects and diminish narrow ones.....

 

first is  with between moderáte wide to štandard 35-50 focal Lens 

Interesting observation - my stern looks ! round even IS very flat in reality  ! 

 

Experiment was done from rather SE view slightly from  above of Boat  framing že Area of Boat. 5 measures of waterlevel ať rudder and on other side trying to get samé portion of mizzenmast as on original photo. See that on wide len s such framing was not even possible from samé positionso IT was not wide( very my j unlikely ať that tíme anyway)  

 

 

 

 

This oné is with tele  :

 

im quite shocked . 

you can observe  how similar are now ships in their respectful view . how fat became her butt and  sides fattened grossly her stern finished and got narrowed and her profile became shorter - back of photo rised . Its pretty much samé angle- and focal length as original photo...

 

Here: 

 

 

...sometimes i feel like Sherlock

 

point is : now we only need photo with same tele lens and from same position of more rounded stern to see if there is difference. it there is visible we know her prern 99 percent no matter Crothers or whoever ! 

 

hay hoo....:) 

Edited October 16, 2021 by Vladimir_Wairoa
Add

[ClipperFan]

Vladimir, great catch about the use of telephoto lens! My only observation is that your angle is still lower than that used from the tree in Alaska. It make sense that an intrepid photographer would go to that length in rugged Alaskan territory to get such a shot. Compare the amount of roofs viewable on the Wheelhouse and Rear Carriage House to how there's almost none visible of the Wheelhouse and a much lower view of the Carriage House in your own. Overall an excellent discovery though.

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

1 hour ago, ClipperFan said:

Vladimir, great catch about the use of telephoto lens! My only observation is that your angle is still lower than that used from the tree in Alaska. It make sense that an intrepid photographer would go to that length in rugged Alaskan territory to get such a shot. Compare the amount of roofs viewable on the Wheelhouse and Rear Carriage House to how there's almost none visible of the Wheelhouse and a much lower view of the Carriage House in your own. Overall an excellent discovery though.

Thanks Rich, one more Discovery as well- my rail is very wide and should be slimmer. Which im going to change

[ClipperFan]

1 hour ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

Thanks Rich, one more Discovery as well- my rail is very wide and should be slimmer. Which im going to change

Vladimir,

What must be encouraging though must be how much your Stern captures all the intricacies of Glory herself. I think one of the most exciting facets of our proposed NRG article will be the uncanny resemblance of your two models to the genuine vessel herself.

[rwiederrich]

Did a bit of work on the boat skids. 
 

Rob

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 17, 2021 by rwiederrich

[ClipperFan]

2 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Did a bit of work on the boat skids. 
 

Rob

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rob, I can't wait to see your latest results!

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

I continue adding comparisons of famous photos. ..

 

 

Edited October 17, 2021 by Vladimir_Wairoa
Add

[rwiederrich]

5 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

I continue adding comparisons of famous photos. ..

 

 

Great job and likeness. 
 

I don’t even think mine could pull off that well.    
 

Rob

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

Just now, rwiederrich said:

Great job and likeness. 
 

I don’t even think mine could pull off that well.    
 

Rob

Rob I like it enormously. you made ornamentals stand out at your scale, even that tripple strip not to mention gorgeous figurehead. i have still to finish anchor hole. how the hell you could paint those ornamentals, im sure under loupe. just wow. 

[ClipperFan]

Rob, of course Vladimir's right. Your Bow treatment is just gorgeous.

[rwiederrich]

Vlad....any new images of any of the mods you made to correct some of the issues you wanted to change?

 

 

Rob

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

On 10/26/2021 at 7:48 PM, rwiederrich said:

Vlad....any new images of any of the mods you made to correct some of the issues you wanted to change?

 

 

Rob

Hello Rob, yes i found tíme today 

i swapped incorrectly a wide rail and installed properly thick one. i  must say IT changed view considerably. I Will continue slowly further installing proper planks on long cabin and hatch opening on Wheelhouse etc...

 

 

 

 

 

[ClipperFan]

Vladimir, beautiful work! You and Rob both are creating miniature masterpieces. By the way, did you finally get the mailer with my large over a meter sketch of the Hull of "GLORY of the SEAS?" You should have received three prints by now, I would hope.

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

18 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Vladimir, beautiful work! You and Rob both are creating miniature masterpieces. By the way, did you finally get the mailer with my large over a meter sketch of the Hull of "GLORY of the SEAS?" You should have received three prints by now, I would hope.

Many thanks Richard. Regarding sketch no not yet. But I think I may have few items at post office from last week as per notice so I plan  to go this week to pick it up, presumably one of those might be as well it. i will inform in return. Vlad. 

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

Chapter ....masting rigging...

Completing bowsprit /jiboom. 

 

Few photos from the work. Thank you fór watching comments etc. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 16, 2022 by Vladimir_Wairoa
add

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

The day I  made yard truss spans...

 

 

 

 

Edited January 17, 2022 by Vladimir_Wairoa
Add

[ClipperFan]

Vladimir Wairoa 

Nice to see you back in action on your lovely Glory! I look forward to seeing your results as you rig this mammoth model. I'm sure it will be stirring. Your new Bowsprit looks quite impressive.

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

20 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Vladimir Wairoa 

Nice to see you back in action on your lovely Glory! I look forward to seeing your results as you rig this mammoth model. I'm sure it will be stirring. Your new Bowsprit looks quite impressive.

good day Rich and humbly thank you for a compliment. 

Yeah i decided to move on and finish her hopefuly at some day- year. scale allows me to go with dwtails on that thing. so i ll be shaping and assembling all the yards ( which is pretty quick ) masts and so on when i have time. not sure how often but i usually work on batch of things so some weekends and so on. thank fro stopping by stay tuned. Her sailing profile is quite something, large long yards two topsail yards and so on...:) asking forgivness ofsome derail of authentic vigour, i wont do composite masts - it requires massive patience time consuing and skill and tools i dont have. im becoming alergic to wanky looks so i woulnt stand less than top outcome of that thing and its not i can do. i intend to leave masting and yard natural varnished fo sake of visibility of every bands details etc...or natural masts black yeards i dunno yet  i quite like jubboom natural though...well stop talking lets go working on her by evenings. plenty to look fwd to. V. 

Edited January 17, 2022 by Vladimir_Wairoa
add

[ClipperFan]

Vladimir, it might help you to know that all yardarms on Glory's fore and main masts are identical sizes. So you & Rob can fashion duplicates for both masts. Then it's just the moon sail yard on the main as well as the mizzen yards.

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

35 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Vladimir, it might help you to know that all yardarms on Glory's fore and main masts are identical sizes. So you & Rob can fashion duplicates for both masts. Then it's just the moon sail yard on the main as well as the mizzen yards.

Thanks as always Rich, yep I already noticed that. some yards for M &F as well i think. it will be my first complete complex masting rigging, but i think its far easier than pre 1800 rigging - in teems of less messy roping etcetera - with helps of casted iron many structural parts that made rope on some places obsolete and with help of chains as well. its messy because of enormous sails  but pretty much males a lot more sense than on warships on 1700 - 1800 era. 

Edited January 17, 2022 by Vladimir_Wairoa
add

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

@ClipperFan

 

Rich based on this painting Looks like she was some time rigged with only one big topsail instead of two narrow ones  - same as flying fish. 

just an observation though...

 

https://www.vosegalleries.com/works/glory-of-the-seas-at-singapore