Flying Fish by Rick310 - Model Shipways - 1/96

[Rick310]

I have been reading with interest the blogs about buildings Model Shipways Flying Fish.  This is opportune for me as I have been building the solid hull version of this model for over 40 years.  I have been particularly interested in other builders interpretation of the aft cabin and stem of the Flying Fish.  I have been fortunate in that I was able to observe and photograph the china trade painting of the Flying Fish when it was up for auction in 2005(?) at Northeast Auctions..  Since then we have all benefited from the pictures of the Flying Fish painting by James Buttersworth that is now available to view online.  Both these paintings have cleared up questions about the ship such as mast and bowsprit colors aft cabin face and to some degree, the figurehead.

While I think I am the only builder building the solid haul version, I will attempt to relate my own experience building this model and the results of my own research and thoughts.  I hope you did this interesting.

[Rick310]

This is a picture of the box the model came in.  It has been through the wars as you can see.I will add more picture which I started taking about 6 years ago. I would like to add that this is first wood model I have ever made.  Since I started the Flying Fish, I did make Blue Jacket’s J24 and I restored a old model that had wood sails.

[ClipperFan]

Rick310 the Model Shipways solid built Hull of your McKay Clipper "Flying Fish" is simply beautiful. I'm very familiar with the lovely tribute painting of her by Buttersworth, courtesy of the very generous on-line Vallejo Gallery. Your reference to a China Trade piece auctioned off in 2005 is one I've heard of before. If they're available, please post the pictures you took of this intriguing work. I've read that Chinese artists would have spray-painted backgrounds to which a particular vessel would be added as the centerpiece. This unique practice was done specifically for a quick turn around in order to sell it to Ship's Captains. These paintings were highly prized among Ship's Owners and Captains due to their highly accurate portrayal of their own vessels. So you can see why I'd love to see your images of this China Trade depiction of "Flying Fish."

For the past eighteen months, as a result of the wonderful generosity of "Glory of the Seas" author Michael Mjelde, Rob Wiederrich's group have been the benefit of ultra rare, incredibly sharp images of McKay's final Clipper. I've shared one here, which is a great view of her after cabin. As you can clearly see, the sides of the rear house conform to the narrowing ship's stern. There are other great pictures of the front fascia of this great house which also verifies a very ornate design. So as not to hijack your blog with too many Glory pics, I've shared just one other of the front. "Flying  Fish" being an Extreme Clipper and a much smaller ship than "Glory of the Seas" which was a Medium Clipper, her resulting proportions would be reduced too.

Finally, the actual rail which surrounded the rear quarters of "Flying Fish" still exist today. Apparently her Captain Simeon Jones repurposed these components for use at his Mansion at 490 Main Street, Centerville (Cape Cod) Mass. Finally when it comes to the construction and appearance of her bow, for some peculiar reason, all models of McKay Clippers mysteriously leave off the naval hoods and cutwaters which were part of McKay Clippers ever since he introduced his Extreme Clipper "Staghound." If you like, I shared some concept sketches with George which incorporate these components and incorporates a more realistic, natural flying fish figurehead. I'd welcome an opportunity to collaborate with you on your model.

[gak1965]

1 hour ago, ClipperFan said:

 

Finally, the actual rail which surrounded the rear quarters of "Flying Fish" still exist today. Apparently her Captain Simeon Jones repurposed these components for use at his Mansion at 490 Main Street, Centerville (Cape Cod) Mass. 

Wait, what? You mean the rail on the roof of the carriage house, or the taffrail? The Fish was wrecked in China, the Captain brought home parts of a rail to put into his house? Where were they incorporated?

[Rick310]

Here are the photos of the China trade painting of Flying Fish. Due to the cramped quarters, I couldn’t get a full picture. Although I have the catalog with the picture.  I need to dig it out.

[Rick310]

[Rick310]

Interestingly,the China painting shows the ship’s boats painted black whereas Buttersworth depicts them white.  Also, theChina Painting has the fore end of the taffrail , where it turns down, as bright, not painted whereas Buttersworth omitted this detail.  I believe the taffrail does not extend as far forward as depicted on the FF plans by Model Shipways. This makes sense to me as the curved part of the rail could function as a hand rail for the ladder/steps up to the poop deck. This is how I choose to model them. I believe that Buttersworth omitted this detail as opposed to the Chinese artist adding something that wasn’t there.  The Chinese artist probably had first hand knowledge of FF where as Buttersworth may have painted from descriptions of FF?  Just my opinion.

 

 

 

 

[Rick310]

 

When I purchased this model some 40 years ago I had no previous woodworking or metalworking experience such as soldering. So obviously choosing this model as my first wooden model ship, I made a good choice! LOL

 

I immediately ran into problems when I started carving the hull in that I was never able to establish or maintain a consistent centerline. I also made the mistake of trying to carve out the bulwarks instead of cutting them out and replacing them with sheet stock.  The result is that the hull is not symmetric which caused large problems when it came time to plank the deck and place the main, top gallant and Taffrail and stanchions. The hull and the deck were planked with Holly, which was good for the deck and bad for the hull.  The holly, being very flexible, ended up being wavy on the hull, and instead of removing it and replacing it, I ended up sanding it down so that the plank lines were eliminated except at the bow and the stern.  

I purchased copper sheets for the copper plating, not realizing it came with an adhesive on one side. This was a mess to remove but after that I held the copper sheet over an open flame to discolor it per Eric Romberg and then cut the Copper sheet into strips and cemented it on with contact cement. I did not do a very good job.  It looks OK from a distance, but not very good up close.  I also made the forward facing bulkhead of the aft cabin house, but more on that later, the main top gallant and taffrails, with stanchions purchased from Bluejacket.  I did not like the white metal fittings that came with this kit

 

 and decided long ago to replace them or make my own. The replacements from Bluejacket are of much better quality.

For references I have made extensive use of Wm Carothers American Built Clipper Ship, Paul Morris’s book on the Benjamin Packard which contains a wealth of information in the photos of the details of the actual ship as well as NRG ship notes, Model Shipways magazine, and mote recently EDT’s superb 3 volume set on the Young America. 

[ClipperFan]

11 hours ago, gak1965 said:

Wait, what? You mean the rail on the roof of the carriage house, or the taffrail? The Fish was wrecked in China, the Captain brought home parts of a rail to put into his house? Where were they incorporated?

gak1965 the fence rails which can be seen at the entrance to the Mansion are purportedly taken directly off of the Clipper "Flying Fish" by the ship's Captain. Since both commissioned Buttersworth oil and China Trade work depict a rear house with only a metal rail at front and a small section of the sides, the sole source of these wooden turned rails has to be those surrounding the exterior of the quarterdeck. Here's a fascinating link to the Southeby's Real Estate listing. Apparently Captain Simeon Jones named his home "Longacre."

 

 https://www.newseaburyre.com/listing/21608269/490-main-street-barnstable-ma-2632/

Edited March 25, 2022 by ClipperFan
additional information

[Rick310]

When I purchased the FF model and reviewed the plans, the aft cabin face as depicted on the plans just didn’t look right to me.  With all due respect to those who developed the plans, It is not aesthetic and the asymmetry with just the one window bothered me especially when compared to photos of the Benjamin Packard and the Glory of The Seas that have beautiful aft cabins.  Therefore I decided to model the aft cabin similar to the aft cabin of the Packard.  This was done prior to the Buttersworth painting being made available.  This is what I came up with.

[Rick310]

About this time, the photos of the Buttersworth painting became available online, clearly depicting 2 windows on either side of the aft cabin.  The windows were added and the fancy knees where then made along with the molding which was again modeled after the Packard.  At his point I was unsure about windows and elected not to place any.

[Rick310]

I modeled the doors to the storage space on either side of the poop deck similar to the Packard.  Note that the planks are vertical as opposed to horizontal.

[ClipperFan]

 H.c   Rick310 I applaud your determination to recreate the more ornate rear house of  "Flying Fish" as it authentically appeared. Using the Buttersworth oil, commissioned by her Owners specifically to honor her 1st place finish in the "Great Deep Sea Derby" in which she out sailed 14 of the best American Clippers, including other crack McKay vessels, I believe is a very reliable source to refer to. I agree with your decision to include the larger more ornate windows. We now have definitive proof that "Glory of the Seas" actually had 4 good sized ones. I've attached a picture of her front facade so you can see how elaborate the house really was. Buttersworth appears to echo Glory's house but with an added embellishment of small spheres which surround the entire structure. My 2 suggestions are that the 2 outer windows would be a little closer to her central doors. There does appear to be a panel between the window and the corner. It also makes sense considering the large corner piece will block the view, while being a little further in would solve that issue. 

My other observation is that the rear contours of the house in fact narrow towards the stern in order to keep the walkways on both sides consistent. This can be clearly seen from the stern image of Glory. I've included a sketch of the section to show how it looked.   

[Rick310]

An excellent observation ClipperFan and I agree with you about the placement of the windows. I am not going to correct this version as I’m not sure I can do it without having to remake the entire bulkhead. I also have the plank on bulkhead version of the flying fish so that when I am done with this version I can correct my mistakes on the next. This too I will also correct.

in regards to your truly excellent work on The Naval hood  with Glory of the Seas, may I recommend the book ship carvers of North America by Brewington. It was published I believe in 1963 and is out of print. I understand he’s considered the definitive work for American ship carvings. He has included three or four pages devoted to The Naval hood and the transformation of the cut water to take the smaller figureheads and billet heads for the clipper ships and the transformation from upright to leaning forward to reduce weight.   I believe you would find this extremely interesting. I Also want to commend you for the beautiful drawings you have rendered, especially of the flying fish. I am attempting to carve the figurehead and I find your drawings to be very useful. Thanks again

[rwiederrich]

On 3/24/2022 at 4:29 PM, Rick310 said:

 

When I purchased this model some 40 years ago I had no previous woodworking or metalworking experience such as soldering. So obviously choosing this model as my first wooden model ship, I made a good choice! LOL

 

I immediately ran into problems when I started carving the hull in that I was never able to establish or maintain a consistent centerline. I also made the mistake of trying to carve out the bulwarks instead of cutting them out and replacing them with sheet stock.  The result is that the hull is not symmetric which caused large problems when it came time to plank the deck and place the main, top gallant and Taffrail and stanchions. The hull and the deck were planked with Holly, which was good for the deck and bad for the hull.  The holly, being very flexible, ended up being wavy on the hull, and instead of removing it and replacing it, I ended up sanding it down so that the plank lines were eliminated except at the bow and the stern.  

I purchased copper sheets for the copper plating, not realizing it came with an adhesive on one side. This was a mess to remove but after that I held the copper sheet over an open flame to discolor it per Eric Romberg and then cut the Copper sheet into strips and cemented it on with contact cement. I did not do a very good job.  It looks OK from a distance, but not very good up close.  I also made the forward facing bulkhead of the aft cabin house, but more on that later, the main top gallant and taffrails, with stanchions purchased from Bluejacket.  I did not like the white metal fittings that came with this kit

 

 and decided long ago to replace them or make my own. The replacements from Bluejacket are of much better quality.

For references I have made extensive use of Wm Carothers American Built Clipper Ship, Paul Morris’s book on the Benjamin Packard which contains a wealth of information in the photos of the details of the actual ship as well as NRG ship notes, Model Shipways magazine, and mote recently EDT’s superb 3 volume set on the Young America. 

That is a unique way the pin rail for the mizzenmast is mounted on the inside of the aft rail.    Is that in the plan?

 

Rob

[Rick310]

Hi Rob, 

no, Ian going to address this in another post.  There is not enough room on the taffrail for all the belaying pins without them being crowded.  I choose to expand the taffrail to accommodate all the pins.  This is the same as the Benjamin Packard and the Star of India in San Diego which is a much later ship.  I have no evidence that this was done on the Flying Fish.  Call it artistic license LOL

[Rick310]

[Jared]

On 3/24/2022 at 12:11 PM, Rick310 said:

Here are the photos of the China trade painting of Flying Fish. Due to the cramped quarters, I couldn’t get a full picture. Although I have the catalog with the picture.  I need to dig it out.

It would we great to see the catalogue photo.  Thanks.  I had no idea that the Chinese painting existed. 

[ClipperFan]

22 hours ago, Rick310 said:

An excellent observation ClipperFan and I agree with you about the placement of the windows. I am not going to correct this version as I’m not sure I can do it without having to remake the entire bulkhead. I also have the plank on bulkhead version of the flying fish so that when I am done with this version I can correct my mistakes on the next. This too I will also correct.

in regards to your truly excellent work on The Naval hood  with Glory of the Seas, may I recommend the book ship carvers of North America by Brewington. It was published I believe in 1963 and is out of print. I understand he’s considered the definitive work for American ship carvings. He has included three or four pages devoted to The Naval hood and the transformation of the cut water to take the smaller figureheads and billet heads for the clipper ships and the transformation from upright to leaning forward to reduce weight.   I believe you would find this extremely interesting. I Also want to commend you for the beautiful drawings you have rendered, especially of the flying fish. I am attempting to carve the figurehead and I find your drawings to be very useful. Thanks again

Rick310 first, thanks for the compliment. While you can't revise the front fascia, already more accurate than most, you can still modify the sides into a gradual reducing curve and reduce the rear wall to match the similar profile as confirmed by the photo of Glory docked in Alaska. Such a configuration makes better sense for working of the ship. What I find very unusual is the missing safety rails for most of the rear house but according to both works of art, that's the case. The Buttersworth piece looks like the rail is painted yellow but I suspect it might have been brass instead. McKay was famous for using the finest materials in constructing his vessels so the brass isn't that far fetched. As for the more natural Flying Fish figurehead, that's in keeping with the more ornate carvings of the time. Sailors were very proud of their figureheads, which epitomized the spirit of the vessel. I'm looking forward to seeing your progress.

[Rick310]

 

After I had completed the aft cabin bulwark and the forward companionways, I decided to move onto the channels.  However it occurred to me that I needed to complete the top gallant rail and the taffrail first.  I was afraid I would break off the channels attempting to attach the rails.  This was one of the projects I was really dreading given the asymmetry of the stern.  I purchased stanchions from Bluejacket to replace the ones provided with the kit.  The stanchions from Bluejacket are much nicer.  I attempted to make a jig to bend the rails with some success after multiple attempts.  Of course the asymmetry was still a headache.  I made both the top gallant and taffrails, attached the top gallant rail, measured and cemented the stanchions and finally the taffrail.  Prior to this I measured the taffrail for the belaying pins and immediately found that there wasn’t enough room for all the mizzen belaying pins.  From photos of the Benjamin Packard I notice that the taffrail was expanded(wider) for the belaying pins on the mizzen mast.   This is also seen on the Star of India in San Diego. I understand that these are both much later ships.  Therefore I expanded the rail in the way of the shrouds and backstays.  I will still have to add additional pins fore and aft on the taffrail as needed.  I have no evidence that this was done on the FF.  If I tried to squeeze in additional pins between the stanchions, it would be crowded and difficult to belay the lines.  This solution seems reasonable to me.  I should add that anytime I’m unsure what to do and the plans aren’t specific or seem wrong, I try to find examples of what was done on another ship if possible.

I also decided to shorten the taffrail.  This was done because the China trade painting depicts them as not extending so far forward as the plans and the point where they turn down as being left bright.  As posted before, shortening them would have the advantage of functioning as a hand rail for the steps to the poop deck.  The Buttersworth painting does not depict the turn down of the fore end of the taffrail rail but ends at the forward side of the aft deck house.

Bending the end of the taffrail was a challenge because the basswood kept crushing and I had no luck with boxwood.  It took me almost 2weeks to get 2ends that were usable.  These were stained with Minwax Ipswich pine. I also used this stain on the gangways which were made out of cherry because a mahogany stain ended up being too dark.

[Rick310]

ClipperFan, I agree that the rail on top of the aft cabin is probably brass. That is how I intend to model it as shown on the Buttersworth painting.  I hope to model the aft cabin as you suggest, curving towards the stern.

[ClipperFan]

Rick310 I like how you crafted that curved piece. It definitely matches that depicted in the chinese painting. I thought this image would interest you, while it's contradictory to both "Flying Fish" pieces of artwork, here's the actual rear quarter rail ending as seen on "Glory of the Seas". It appears to be an elegantly curved piece of wrought iron which is inserted into the top of the rail on one side and straight down into the hull on the other.  

I think you'll find that curved diminishing walls will look more sensible once installed. As for the wider quarter rails, I was wondering since most of the lines are terminated inside the missen shrouds, according to how Rob is rigging his Glory, would the extra belaying pins be necessary? 

[rwiederrich]

13 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Rick310 I like how you crafted that curved piece. It definitely matches that depicted in the chinese painting. I thought this image would interest you, while it's contradictory to both "Flying Fish" pieces of artwork, here's the actual rear quarter rail ending as seen on "Glory of the Seas". It appears to be an elegantly curved piece of wrought iron which is inserted into the top of the rail on one side and straight down into the hull on the other.  

I think you'll find that curved diminishing walls will look more sensible once installed. As for the wider quarter rails, I was wondering since most of the lines are terminated inside the missen shrouds, according to how Rob is rigging his Glory, would the extra belaying pins be necessary? 

There are plenty of similarities between the Fish and Glory.  The only true issue I will be struggling with is the availability of belaying points for all the sail control lines on the mizzen.  Lifts and their purchases are not the issue...the bunt and sheets for five yards will be the issue.  Rick has taken a clean approach by adding extended rail portions to the quarter rail to accommodate this similar issue.   I just wish I had a close up image of the actual means by which Glory belayed her sail control lines for the mizzen.  To keep the rail clear.....I am opting to fashion floating pin rails that will attach to the inboard portion of the shrouds.  This practice was prolific at this time and times... before Glory.  So it is not unheard of and has as much validity as Rick310's approach.

Close up views of Glory's aft, straight on image, of her in Alaska....just isn't clear enough and can be imagined that some lines are draped over the rail....but nothing definitively congruent.

 

Time to rely on my license.  I still have time to make any lasting decisions.

 

Rob 

[Rick310]

Jared,

Here is the catalog picture of FF.  It sold in 2007 for a total price of $87000. This was an exceptionally large painting, measuring 31.5 x 47.5 inches not including the frame.    I was told that the original Chinese laquored frame had latered  been painted gold.

Truely remarkable to see!

[Rick310]

•  

ClipperFan,

Once again thank you for your input.  The curved end of the taffrail could certainly be brass although it appears to be wood on the Chinese painting, something I have wondered about.  What is concerning is that the rail on the aft cabin roof is poorly depicted-wood or brass.  I agree with you that it is probably brass although the end of the rail is awkward and doesn’t look right.  I prefer the depiction by Buttersworth and intend to model it out of brass as painted by Buttersworth.

Interestingly, curved metal rails 

At the fore end of a wood rail as shown on the Glory photo is frequently seen in photos and paintings of some of the large 4, 5, 6, masted schooners built in the late 1800s and early 1900s.

 

Rob, 

I completely agree with you about the mizzenmast pin rails.  What I modeled on FF, was seen on ships built many years later.  Was this a new innovation or one that persisted from earlier times?  I think your solution is every bit as plausible as mine.  I just don’t know and I still don’t know if there are any other alternative that make sense.  It is so frustrating to have photos or paintings that don’t quite show the detail you are looking for.  What ever you decide, your model of Glory sets a standard other models will be compare too. 

[rwiederrich]

14 hours ago, Rick310 said:

Rob, 

I completely agree with you about the mizzenmast pin rails.  What I modeled on FF, was seen on ships built many years later.  Was this a new innovation or one that persisted from earlier times?  I think your solution is every bit as plausible as mine.  I just don’t know and I still don’t know if there are any other alternative that make sense.  It is so frustrating to have photos or paintings that don’t quite show the detail you are looking for.  What ever you decide, your model of Glory sets a standard other models will be compare too. 

The rail extension that you pictured is of a closed rail....and you and I are tackling an open rail.  The open rail only permits belay pins to be within the space between stanchions...causing a particularly odd pattern.  In my unique situation...I have no data that Glory actually used the rail as the pin rail...though I have seen this practice on other ship models.....(The Lightning comes to mind), and particularly on my last build...Great Republic...where all I had was a complete weather deck rail to affix all belaying pins too.  There was no other option there, and I'm sure that had to have been the practice on the GR.

 

Here I see no clear depiction.....and the rail is quite short as well....hitting the average man at the mid thigh.  By placing the auxiliary belaying pin rails to the shrouds...the pins are just about at mid chest level......mimicing the height of the main bulwark pin rail down on the main deck. 

 

One thing is clear, from images, especially Glory's fitting out image.  Just below each shroud fairlead the bunt control line is belayed and neatly coiled at the shroud.....probably awaiting direction for the final belay point...or final touch up finishes to the main rail.  Its only speculation.

The fairleads are relatively high within the shrouds...so the bunt line belay points could have even terminated on the house rail.

Decisions, decisions......

 

Best part is...there is no true expert who can lend any true criticism of any decision I make.  I have the same data they have....and the most notable expert on Glory of the Seas is Michael Mjelde and I'm fully confident he would concur with my decision.

 

Again...thank you for your fine compliments...there are many fine examples of exquisite clipper models, I would never include myself on the list of standards to attain.   I'm generally a hack builder too apt to compromise on fit-n-finish.

 

Again...thank you.  Your own build of FF is noteworthy of much acclaim itself.

 

Rob

Edited April 1, 2022 by rwiederrich

[ClipperFan]

On 3/30/2022 at 10:02 PM, Rick310 said:

ClipperFan, I agree that the rail on top of the aft cabin is probably brass. That is how I intend to model it as shown on the Buttersworth painting.  I hope to model the aft cabin as you suggest, curving towards the stern.

Rick310 two facts about the rear house rail on "Flying Fish" which differ from other McKay Clippers. First and this unusual element is confirmed by two contemporary pieces of work, there's no surrounding safety rail for the roof of the rear structure; second the front overhang (3' on Glory) and about 6' of both corners are protected my a metal rail. As we've both concluded, Buttersworth depicted this lovely rail as brass. His portrayal of the graceful curving ends feels correct too.

Modeling a curving wall should be relatively easy. Just get a small flat piece of wood like a tongue depressor. Measure the distance from quarterdeck inner bulkhead wall to outside corner of the rear house front fascia. Drill a hole and insert a pencil vertically through it. Trace floor lines consistently distant from bulkheads. Done properly this results in two walkways equidistant while the house walls match the same pattern as the rear quarter deck bulkheads.

 

[ClipperFan]

On 3/31/2022 at 6:38 PM, Rick310 said:

Jared,

Here is the catalog picture of FF.  It sold in 2007 for a total price of $87000. This was an exceptionally large painting, measuring 31.5 x 47.5 inches not including the frame.    I was told that the original Chinese laquored frame had latered  been painted gold.

Truely remarkable to see!

Rick310 thanks for sharing this ultra rare contemporary depiction of "Flying Fish". Before you mentioned it, I had no idea such an impressive piece even existed. In the 2nd image, the left side has a beautiful blue sky. The rest of the painting has more of a golden hue. I was wondering if the true colors of the piece are that blue area?

[Rick310]

 

Clipper Fan, 

Thanks again for your input and suggestions. Really appreciated.  

When I saw the China painting, I was at the preview of the auction and the room was pretty cramped and dark.  That is why I was unable to get a full picture of FF. I believe the colors are fairly accurate given how good the photos for the catalog were.

[ClipperFan]

2 hours ago, Rick310 said:

 

Clipper Fan, 

Thanks again for your input and suggestions. Really appreciated.  

When I saw the China painting, I was at the preview of the auction and the room was pretty cramped and dark.  That is why I was unable to get a full picture of FF. I believe the colors are fairly accurate given how good the photos for the catalog were.

Rick310 if by any chance you still have that 15 yr old catalog, can you scan & share the same painting from it? There's some distortion in photos, probably from an inability to get a decent angle and the large size of the piece. I'd really appreciate seeing how it appeared in the catalog, if at all possible.