Flying Fish by Jared - Model Shipways - 1:96

[ClipperFan]

2 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

Sometimes, stumbling across knew data, that was in plain sight counts as *measuring* twice.......

 

Rob

@rwiederrich knowing how much additional work my mistake cost you and @Vladimir_Wairoa I was mortified to discover it was just a matter of not carefully reading everything thoroughly the first time. Now, to me "measure twice" means to be sure nothing's been missed.

[Jared]

Given how many design errors you have all discovered in the fore section of the plan, I am apprehensive to find out the accuracy of the rest of the model's build plans 😳.  Hopefully they are not going to be an issue.

 

On the positive side this kit has been an excellent educational tool, both for honing fine boat building scratch-building skills and making me really appreciate how the art of tall ship building evolved.  

 

 

[rwiederrich]

54 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

@rwiederrich knowing how much additional work my mistake cost you and @Vladimir_Wairoa I was mortified to discover it was just a matter of not carefully reading everything thoroughly the first time. Now, to me "measure twice" means to be sure nothing's been missed.

Rich...it was just as much my mistake as it was yours.  I knew visually the Forecastle looked too low...coupled with the original main rail issue.....I just looked at it incorrectly.  And that, in of itself, is part of the problem.  Knowing better but allowing your own bias or laziness to get in the way.   I know, now, what pitfalls to avoid...since we cut our teeth on Glory of the Seas.  In these adventures, I expect you to be clear and honest...throw a rock at me, if need be, to get my attention, If you think something is out of place historically.   We can always discuss it....as we have done in the past.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

1 hour ago, Jared said:

Given how many design errors you have all discovered in the fore section of the plan, I am apprehensive to find out the accuracy of the rest of the model's build plans 😳.  Hopefully they are not going to be an issue.

 

On the positive side this kit has been an excellent educational tool, both for honing fine boat building scratch-building skills and making me really appreciate how the art of tall ship building evolved.  

 

 

Ships are balanced....thus we must look at them balanced.  If something looks wrong, stop and evaluate...educate yourself on the trueness of the design.  Don't just go for it....not unless you don't care.

Taking into consideration how long it takes to build one of these guys....it's best, to take the extra step and make sure, or you will suffer the agony of having to look at your incorrect model for the rest of your life and continually telling/reminding yourself, *I should have just fixed it when it was easier*.    You've already taken the first step of admission.  No need to beat yourself up over it.  She is still something to be proud of... indeed.

 

Rob

Edited October 31 by rwiederrich

[ClipperFan]

@Jared

It still baffles me how such supposedly careful research, even involving NRG could possibly get so many details wrong. Her bowsprit is listed as being 18' outboard, with each iron band being 3' apart, there should be 6 bands for 5 each 3' spaces, with 18" going into the bow and 18" before her cap. From plans, it appears the bowsprit is about 3' short. Jibboom is 20' inner, 15' outer and 5' end for a total of 40' outside an 18" cap. Total should be 59'6". Other than appearing a bit short, Model Shipways plans I found contradict the plans you shared as the bowsprit diameter remains consistent. They state that they're based on tracing of original plans in the Sjøfortsmuseum, Bergen, Norway. 

The first major disagreement I have with her erroneous bow treatment is a complete lack of any support for her flying fish figurehead awkwardly tacked onto her bare stem. It completely misses unique McKay navel hoods and elegantly curved cutwater which even the Buttersworth oil profile portrays. Donald McKay introduced his revolutionary bow with Stag Hound his "Pioneer craft of the California Clipper Fleet." That's how McKay's son Cornelius described her. Duncan McLean went into more detail evaluating these devices on McKay's Flying Cloud. His record breaking second California Clipper. It defies logic that McKay would abandon this for his fourth clipper but his third California Clipper. 

I've attached the Norway tracing, more natural flying fish figureheads, an overlay of the tracing to show how her bow would have really appeared. This also move the hawes hole further down, just below the base of the navel hood. Even the Butterworth's piece shows a more pronounced bow than just a bare stem. The first of three Model Shipways plans refers to the Norway tracing and admits use of the Boston Daily article as well. 

This is where I also differ greatly with their interpretation. McLean very clearly states that her topgallant forecastle provides lofty, well lit and ventilated accomodations for crew below. There are also twin companions in the wings leading to those quarters below. Before, meaning ahead of those companions are waterclosets for use of the crew. That places the waterclosets below, just ahead of companionway ladders. Since her total bulkhead height, including monkey rail was 5'10" how can you possibly stuff a windlass into such a short space? Forecastle height was set at the 4'6" main rail height, surmounted by a 16" high monkey rail. Since her decks were 3 & 1/2" thick, that makes space underneath maximum 4' 2 & 1/2". Meanwhile, to provide a sheltered area for the crew beneath, the entire forecastle bulkhead must be enclosed. This alternate plan from Stag Hound and Flying Cloud would look very similar, but for Flying Fish it would be 6" shorter. This also eliminates both wing structures outside the forecastle and places her windlass below out of sight. Spacing of masts are precisely described: 52' stem to foremast center, 62' to mainmast center, 52' to mizzenmast center and 44' to sternpost. All masts rake alike at 1 & 1/4ths" per foot. While not specifically described, her bowsprit steeve was most likely 4" to the foot, identical to that of her earlier sister California Clipper Flying Cloud. All specs are listed in McLean's detailed article.

The longhouse abaft the foremast is described as being 33' long, 15' wide and 7' high. From Michael Mjelde's descriptions, these are internal dimensions. Configuration of the aft coach house is accurate for the outline which conforms with her outer bulkheads, leaving clear working space for crew. There's no evidence that a raised central companion existed. It's most likely the coach house height was 7' with a slightly curved roof. Since poop deck height was at main rail height, it would have been 2'6" above the poop deck. The offset port side aft companion is correct according to Michael Mjelde's plans. Mounting it in the center interferes with the aft deck companion while being offset to port doesn't. Another significant difference is a more ornate front fascia as portrayed in the Buttersworth oil. This is confirmed by pictures of the quite ornate fascia on Glory of the Seas coach house.

Lastly, lubber's holes in solid tops are longer and wider than plans. All of these revisions are completely in line with all specifics as provided by Duncan McLean.

 

Edited November 1 by ClipperFan
corrections

[Jared]

Thanks  @ClipperFan for all this detailed information and your evaluation of it all.  Interestingly, the Model Shipways drawings you attached  are not the same as the ones that came with my newer Model Shipways Flying Fish kit.  Offhand I cannot say how close the two sets are measurements wise.  Its hard for me to compare from the small size and resolution of the drawings you attached and the need to see a scale bar on the earlier plans.  I do note one obvious difference in the locations of the ships boats.

[ClipperFan]

8 hours ago, Jared said:

Thanks  @ClipperFan for all this detailed information and your evaluation of it all.  Interestingly, the Model Shipways drawings you attached  are not the same as the ones that came with my newer Model Shipways Flying Fish kit. Offhand I cannot say how close the two sets are measurements wise.  Its hard for me to compare from the small size and resolution of the drawings you attached and the need to see a scale bar on the earlier plans.  I do note one obvious difference in the locations of the ships boats.

@Jared

I didn't remember that these plans were from the solid hull version and not the plank on bulkhead one. This one dates back to 1953 and is from Model Shipways, Bogota, NJ. I selected these since they refer to the Norway plans, so that should match up. There are scales, they're just not identified very clearly. However, at the base of the Norway tracing you'll see call outs with spacing. It's hard to see but it looks like the scale is written as 1/4th" = 1' in the lower right corner, which would make it 1:48th scale. It makes sense, since that's the identical scale which Cornelius McKay crafted his impressive Stag Hound builder's hull model. Then, on the 1st sheet of the Model Shipways hull plan, there's a similar scale identified as 1/8th" = 1' making it 1:96th scale. I would be curious to see how your plans compare to these.

Edited November 1 by ClipperFan
additional information

[Rick310]

Jared, these are the original plans for the Flying Fish and predate the revised plans by Ben Lankford.  He wrote about the revision in the NRG journal in 1980(?).

Rick

[Jared]

That was my understanding.   I have not read the NRG article.  Thanks. 

[Jared]

Have been pursuing Rob's advice and have prerigged a lot of the standing rigging and futtock's shrouds onto the main topsail and topgallant masts while these were off the model.   It was sooooo much easier doung it this way!   Yesterday I glued this assembly onto the main mast so I can finish up the rigging.

 

Along the way I discovered a major FUBAR setback  that I now need to  address.  While all of the masts align well in the profile direction, I discovered when viewing the model from the bow or stern ends,  that the lower mizzen mast was badly misaligned (see attached photo).   How I missed this I have no idea.  A really bad seniors moment for sure! 

 

I gave a lot of thought about what to do about how to repair it.   While the mizzen shrouds and ratlines are completed the mast itself was not glued in place.  I think the simplest way to fix the problem without destroying everything I have rigged on the mizzen mast would be to cut and remove the lower lanyards then pull out the mast and fix the drill angle through the aft cabin roof.    I certainly would welcome any better ideas.  🙄

Edited November 9 by Jared

[gak1965]

Do you know how loose the mast was in the socket? To put it another way, do you think you can move it without redrilling the hole? Are you confident that it isn't just being pulled to one side by tension on the shrouds?

 

The lanyards make sense as a first pass if you have enough room between the deadeyes to correct for the lean without making the shrouds and lanyards look too unbalanced compared to the other masts.

 

Sorry to hear this, but it could be worse. The other two masts look nice, straight and aligned 

 

Regards,

George

[Jared]

Thanks George.  They were snug. However after slicing the lanyards on 1 side I was able to pull it out.  I then used a dremel tool to slant the hole.  I also had to cut the lanyards on the other side.   I have reglued the mast and am going to leave it overnight before securing the ratlines with new lanyards.  Surprisingly the fix has so far been rather painless.

Edited November 8 by Jared

[ClipperFan]

5 hours ago, Jared said:

Have been pursuing Ros's advice and have prerigged a lot of the standing rigging and futtock's shrouds onto the main topsail and topgallant masts while these were off the model.   It was sooooo much easier doung it this way!   Yesterday I glued this assembly onto the main mast so I can finish up the rigging.

 

Along the way I discovered a major FUBAR setback  that I now need to  address.  While all of the masts align well in the profile direction, I discovered when viewing the model from the bow or stern ends,  that the lower mizzen mast was badly misaligned (see attached photo).   How I missed this I have no idea.  A really bad seniors moment for sure! 

 

I gave a lot of thought about what to do about how to repair it.   While the mizzen shrouds and ratlines are completed the mast itself was not glued in place.  I think the simplest way to fix the problem without destroying everything I have rigged on the mizzen mast would be to cut and remove the lower lanyards then pull out the mast and fix the drill angle through the aft cabin roof.    I certainly would welcome any better ideas.  🙄

@Jared

It's hard to tell for sure but from your stern view, it looks like the mizzen topsail mast has a slight left lean, besides the lower mast. How it will appear once the lower mast is corrected might clear it up.

[Jared]

The mizzen topmast is only loosely fit at the moment.

[ClipperFan]

1 hour ago, Jared said:

The mizzen topmast is only loosely fit at the moment.

@Jared

understood. I would check in with Rob as to how far to proceed in securing the mizzen topmast before you start rigging that section.

[Jared]

With the lanyards on the shrouds of the lower mizzen mast off now I have a lot easier access to the deck area under and on the aft side of the mast, which will make rigging in these  areas much easier.   Rigging the lanyards back on will be a later step.

Edited November 9 by Jared

[ClipperFan]

4 hours ago, Jared said:

With the lanyards on the shrouds of the lower mizzen mast off now I have a lot easier access to the deck area under and on the aft side of the mast, which will make rigging in these  areas much easier.   Rigging the lanyards back on will be a later step.

@Jared that's why @rwiederrich says he rigs from the inside out and going from the mizzen forward. It's a bear to access inner fife rails if there's outer rigging blocking you. He rigs from mizzen forward because it allows him to control stress on the masts.

[Jared]

I was led astray by the rigging sequence and approach I read in several books including the kit's plans.  I did not learn of Rob's superior approach until it was too late, but now am a convert trying to implement his methods as best  as I can.  Lesson learned the harder way: work smarter not harder.

 

The standing rigging on the main mast is coming along fine.  I will update the log with photos when I am further along .

Edited November 9 by Jared

[ClipperFan]

1 hour ago, Jared said:

I was led astray by the rigging sequence and approach I read in several books including the kit's plans.  I did not learn of Rob's superior approach until it was too late, but now am a convert trying to implement his methods as best  as I can.  Lesson learned the harder way: work smarter not harder.

 

The standing rigging on the main mast is coming along fine.  I will update the logvwith photos when I am fuether along .

@Jared

Rob apparently developed his technique over 40+ years of model ship building. Chances are, he might have more closely followed instructions too and then gradually modified it through experience.

[Jared]

The standing rigging on the mainmast has now been completed.  A lot of slow careful and sometimes very difficult work.   I am holding off securing the Mn Royal and Mn Sky backstays for now, to leave more room under and behind the main mast to make later rigging of the mizzen stays easier.    

 

Thanks for looking. 

 

 

Edited Wednesday at 10:41 PM by Jared

[Jared]

The one thing troubling me the most about my model has been the loose lift lines on the main lower mast (see items 293 & 208 of this build).  With my frequent accidental  encounters with the mast as I continued with the rigging, the problem got much worse with the upper lines of the lift sagging terribly (photo 1).   Through some luck and thought I have been able to fix this.

 

As to the luck, yesterday the cap of my superglue was so plugged up with solidified glue and would no longer fit, causing the nozzle to plug.  It defied removal by physical means so I turned to the internet and discovered acetone would dissolve hardened superglue.  Sure enough this did the trick and my glue is good again.

 

So what has this to do with my sagging main lower yard lifts?  The rigging lines at the end of my lower mast were glued with a superglue.  Carefully applying small amounts of acetone to the rope allowed me to open the knots and then retighten the rigging (photos 2 &-4).  

Edited Thursday at 07:51 PM by Jared

[Rick310]

Nice recovery on the lift lines!  Your model is coming along real well!

Tick

[Jared]

I decided to see if I could apply my newly discovered skills to repair my first plank on frame build, the Artesania Latina 1805 Virginia Pilot boat Swift.  The top mast was accidently snapped of several years ago and seemed to defy glue repairs (photo 1).  I determined that the problem was the running rigging at the top of the mainmast was too tight.  I decided today to see if I could try to undo one end of the line and try the repairs again.  

 

I had to use a combination of hot water, acetone and laquer thinner treatments to eventually loosen and release the line attached to a deck cleat.  I then repaired the upper mast with epoxy glue and retied the running rigging line after the epoxy on the mast cured.  I secured the new knot with white glue.  The repaired model is shown in photos 2-4).

 

Now I am back at my Flying Fish.

 

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  I'd loathe drilling a hole through a relatively thin mast section to accommodate a halyard ... even if that is 'called for'.  That creates a weak point, unless that portion is reinforced by a metal collar.  I'm opting for a pair of blocks on either side (jeers fashion), with the line in one continuous piece that goes through a block (for a single halyard) on the other side ... for a project still being mulled over.

[Rick310]

Well done!

Rick

[Jared]

It is a weak spot.  It is where the tip on my Flying Fish jibboom also broke.  While there are other sheave holes on the FF spars, on the advice of another modeller I now apply a coat of superglue around all drill sites before drilling.   I am also using a stronger wood (maple/birch) as my spar material.  I also intend to house the completed FF in a case to protect it and keep it clean. 

Edited Saturday at 11:08 PM by Jared

[ClipperFan]

14 hours ago, Jared said:

I decided to see if I could apply my newly discovered skills to repair my first plank on frame build, the Artesania Latina 1805 Virginia Pilot boat Swift.  The top mast was accidently snapped of several years ago and seemed to defy glue repairs (photo 1).  I determined that the problem was the running rigging at the top of the mainmast was too tight.  I decided today to see if I could try to undo one end of the line and try the repairs again.  

 

I had to use a combination of hot water, acetone and laquer thinner treatments to eventually loosen and release the line attached to a deck cleat.  I then repaired the upper mast with epoxy glue and retied the running rigging line after the epoxy on the mast cured.  I secured the new knot with white glue.  The repaired model is shown in photos 2-4).

 

Now I am back at my Flying Fish.

 

@Jared

beautiful repair job! She looks like nothing ever happened to her. Nicely done.

[ClipperFan]

13 hours ago, Snug Harbor Johnny said:

  I'd loathe drilling a hole through a relatively thin mast section to accommodate a halyard ... even if that is 'called for'.  That creates a weak point, unless that portion is reinforced by a metal collar.  I'm opting for a pair of blocks on either side (jeers fashion), with the line in one continuous piece that goes through a block (for a single halyard) on the other side ... for a project still being mulled over.

@Snug Harbor Johnny

@Jared and I discussed the relative hardness of various wooden dowls. He was frustrated with the brittle nature of kit supplied spars. Chances are that you can probably safely drill small holes in tougher wood.