Flying Fish by Wawona59 - Model Shipways - 1:96

[Wawona59]

Log entry No. 1
Well, I'm going to take the plunge and start a build log.  I could probably name this build log after one of my favorite Dr. Suess books I had as a child;  One fish, Two fish, Red fish, Blue fish.  There are several Flying Fish builds on MSW, so why not one more.
I started this Model Shipways build in 1998 when my kids were small and had grand ideas of building the Fish as a grand piece for my office.  Despite working as carefully as I could, I got frustrated with all of the mistakes I was making and put it aside in 2000.  This was not the first ship model I've built.  I just made a lot of careless mistakes rushing the build.
Reading through the Fixing Mistakes thread on MSW gave me the motivation to take on the Fish again.  The first order of business will be to fix all of the mistakes I've made.  Here's some of the mistakes I will need to fix:
1.  Did not fair bulkheads 5 and 6 enough resulting in a kink in the planking rather than a smooth run.  I will need to remove the planking I've done and fair the bulkheads properly.
2.  Sanded the planks as I went before I attached the stem.  This resulted in a misshapen bow and too thin planks.  Need to repair and bow and properly fit the stem.
3.  Broke bulkheads 1 through 3 in the forecastle.  Need to properly trim the replacement bulkheads I made from scrap basswood.
4.  Did not properly taper the planks and installed stealers when I didn't need to.  I will be removing the incorrect planks and re-installing them.
5.  Need to replace the stern part of the planksheer that I ineptly carved.
6.  Cut the stern part of the keel off too short so that it doesn't extend below where the rudder will be installed.
I work exclusively with hand tools.  I do not use so much as a dremel or air brush. One of the reasons is that I like to work at night when it is quiet.  I don't want to disturb the admiral with the noise of machinery.  The second reason is that I love working with hand tools.

 

Surprisingly, despite sitting in an unheated garage for 20+ years, the hull is still true with no twist.

I'll be working slowly and methodically and will post progress periodically.

Please wish me luck.
Wawona59 (John)
 

[gak1965]

Welcome to the Flying Fish (and I suppose McKay clipper) club! It's always nice to see another Fish.

 

George K

[Wawona59]

Thanks George,

 

I've been following your Fish build with great interest.  In fact, I've got your build long on my computer screen right now while I'm working on my fish.  I'm currently working on removing the messed up parts so I can start building her up again.

 

Wawona59 (John)

 

Current Build:  Flying Fish, Model Shipways, 1:96

[Wawona59]

Build Log No. 2
The first task was to remove the battens and the unwanted/incorrect planking.  Close examination revealed that things really went south when I started adding stealers.  I have no idea of what I was thinking at the time.  I also used bamboo dowels made with my drawplate.  A sharp chisel was used to cut through the dowels.
The garboard strakes seemed okay, so I left them alone plus three strakes from the keel.  Using a metal straight edge, I determined that the keel was straight and true although I haven't trued up the remaining planks to make them symmetrical port and stbd.
Next, I checked the surface of the deck level bulkheads for proper sheer and camber.  Many of the bulkheads were not true with multiple gaps which need to be addressed and fixed.  I'm starting to view restoring this hull as working on a piece of miniature furniture rather than a ship model.
I hope some of you will stay tuned.  My next log will go over truing up the deck bulkheads, fitting the stem, and stern pieces and fixing the bulkheads 1 and 2 forward that I had to replace.
 

[rwiederrich]

Wonderful rework....glad you are progressing.

Following along closely.

 

Rob

[Wawona59]

Hi Rob,

 

There's a lot of fixing I need to do to make the hull and deck bulkheads true.  I really did a crappy job way back when 20+ years ago.  LOL  

Once I get the hull and deck bulkheads true to my satisfaction, I'll start the hull planking.

 

BTW, what is the difference between a naval board and a trail board?  The Boston Atlas article by Duncan McLean says that the flying fish did not have any trail boards.  What is the difference??  Another topic or a future discussion I think.

 

If anyone else has any insight to the difference, please let me know.  ClipperFan, I hope you can enlighten me. 

  

Thank you for your post.  Greatly appreciated.

 

Wawona59 (John)

[gak1965]

A trailboard is a decorative piece of wood, often (but certainly not always) with the ship's name, usually attached to the cutwater. As @ClipperFan can provide details for, there is every reason to believe that the Flying Fish had a set of Naval Hoods, which unlike a a trailboard are structural elements. He has shared a reconstruction/diagram in several of the Fish build logs of what the hoods (and the prow generally) would look like based views of other McKay clippers, particularly Glory of the Seas.

 

Regards,

George K

[Wawona59]

Thank you for the clarification George.  When I get to that point, I will follow the drawings that Clipperfan posted as well as your Flying Fish build.  Thank  you

 

Wawona59 (John)

[ClipperFan]

2 hours ago, gak1965 said:

A trailboard is a decorative piece of wood, often (but certainly not always) with the ship's name, usually attached to the cutwater. As @ClipperFan can provide details for, there is every reason to believe that the Flying Fish had a set of Naval Hoods, which unlike a a trailboard are structural elements. He has shared a reconstruction/diagram in several of the Fish build logs of what the hoods (and the prow generally) would look like based views of other McKay clippers, particularly Glory of the Seas.

 

Regards,

George K

Wawona59 John, George K gave a very good clarification. I would add that, unlike trailboards, which are basically attractive decorative pieces, if you look carefully at the prow of Glory of the Seas, you'll see that both naval hoods and cutwater are in fact significant integral components of the hull itself. Rob and I have concluded that these fascinating structures are unique to McKay's vessels. The head on image, you can see how tightly these hoods mount to the hull, then they gracefully blend together to a sharp point, at the same time creating a secure mounting area for the figurehead just below. The cutwater attaches directly to the stem and is neatly sandwiched between the naval hoods. The "Boston Daily Atlas" author Duncan MacLean observed that these rugged components were so durably constructed that if her cutwater was to be washed away, the bow would still be seaworthy. 

For extreme clipper Flying Fish, I overlayed how the naval hoods and cutwater integrated with the stem using the actual ship's lines copied from McKay's which are used to create modern blueprints. Figurehead carving was a high art in the 1900s, so I sketched a more natural looking fish. 

Another mystery Rob cleared up for me was the exterior depth of the main bulwarks compared to the interior. Due to the interior height of the waterways, the exterior dimension was a foot shorter than the interior. Since the  bulkeads were 4 & 1/2' her exterior would have been 3 & 1/2'. That makes her naval hoods 3'. Then the anchor hawse hole mounts directly below the very base of the hood ends. 

 

[ClipperFan]

Wawona59  John, here's an actual contemporary photograph of the large American clipper ship Great Admiral. The ornately carved, gilded bow is basically a simple cutwater. There are no naval hoods similar to those on the McKay clippers.

[Wawona59]

Clipperfan,

 

Thank you so much for your explanation.  Now, I'm starting to understand and will definitely incorporate this detail in the bow of the Flying Fish I'm working on.   These have been filed away for future reference.  Thank you again for your explanation.

 

Wawona59 (John)

[rwiederrich]

13 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

Wawona59  John, here's an actual contemporary photograph of the large American clipper ship Great Admiral. The ornately carved, gilded bow is basically a simple cutwater. There are no naval hoods similar to those on the McKay clippers.

Perfect example...astonishingly similar to the Amy Turned

[rwiederrich]

On 10/5/2022 at 6:39 PM, Wawona59 said:

BTW, what is the difference between a naval board and a trail board?

Here is a picture of a trail board....it is the top boards on this vessel.  Cutty Sark/ aka Ferreira  had trail boards that supported her nameboard.

[Wawona59]

Thank you Rob,

The nautical terms Naval Hood, Cutwater and Trailboard are new to me.  I've learned quite a bit about these features this week.  It's clear to me now that I will have to either modify or replace the kit's stem piece.

 

Now, back to fixing my previous 20 year old mistakes.

 

thank you

 

John

[ClipperFan]

2 hours ago, Wawona59 said:

Thank you Rob,

The nautical terms Naval Hood, Cutwater and Trailboard are new to me.  I've learned quite a bit about these features this week.  It's clear to me now that I will have to either modify or replace the kit's stem piece.

 

Now, back to fixing my previous 20 year old mistakes.

 

thank you

 

John

 

http://www.bruzelius.info/Nautica/News/BDA/BDA(1851-11-04).html

John, all McKay clipper lines plans I've seen usually only display the stem. Rob and I have come to the conclusion that Donald himself considered this unique hull construction almost like  copyright issue. If you want to see the extreme that he went to, just look at the bow of the clipper Lightning which simply leaves this area an open space!

My suggesrion is add the cutwater to the stem and overlay the naval hoods just like McKay himself designed. I suspect the reason we haven't seen naval hoods on other clipper ships is due to the very complicated twisting form of these nautical devices. In fact, when Rob did his replication, he used thin metal to represent them. Just remember to thin the naval hoods cutwater to replicate actual scale. 

Other observations I have about Flying Fish have to do with her figurehead and bowsprit. The link opens up to Duncan MacLean's November 4th, 1851 "Boston Daily Atlas" in-depth description of Flying Fish. Since her bowsprit length from hull to inside of her cap is 18' that means she would have 6 wrought iron bands each 3' apart from the centers of those bands. That leaves 18" from the bow to the 1st band and 18" from the center of the 6th band to the inside of the cap. The inner 18" of the bowsprit isn't round but oblong as it enters the hull. Outboard of the cap, she has a 40' jibboom, divided at 20' and 15' with a 5' end. It too becomes oblong as it enters the ship's hull. In addition, the jibboom gets thinner at the top a short distance before entering the hull. Observing the beautifully clear starboard close up of Glory's bow and figurehead, you can see how we arrived at these figures. Glory's figurehead is documented as being 90". Since Flying Fish was a much smaller vessel, her flying fish figurehead would have been about 7'. Figurehead carving was a very ornate art form, so my sketch reflects that. The head would be positioned looking straight forward while the rest of her body would angle down sharply to accomodate the angle of the bowsprit. Her wings would flare out as if in flight and probably over layed a good portion of the naval hoods. 

Both Rob and Vladimir had to redo the height of their forecastle bulkheads. That because actual photos of Glory's forecastle revealed a much higher bulkhead. The forecastle deck should actually be mounted on top of the monkey rail molding. Looking the fore of Glory's forecastle shows a lovely curving piece which Rob concluded housed belaying pins. It's not simply a straight piece. You can also see that her splashrail extends nearly to the front of her foremast shrouds.

Another rare Glory of the Seas stern photo reveals that her rear coach house curves inward to match the narrowing hull. It's hidden by her enlarged wheelhouse but originally her rear gangway was offset to the port side. Meanwhile, based on a famous JE Buttersworth Flying Fish painting commissioned by her owners, to commemorate her win of "The Great Atlantic-Pacific Sea Derby" it's clear her rear coach house had a more elaborate front fascia than on current plans. There were two large windows, most likely being 3' tall x 30" wide with sculptured moldings and a single sliding door in the center. The recessed areas would have been painted pearl and raised areas white. There are ornately sculpted and carved arch bracket supports at each end for the roof deck overhead. At the fore of the coach house is a thin brass railing which only covers the front of the house and terminates in graceful curves at each end. If you like, I can sketch this out for you.

 

 

[Wawona59]

Thanks Clipperfan,   

 

Thank you for your input.  If I understand your drawing correctly, the curved cutwater piece begins about the waterline and moves upward in a sweeping curve.  At the top, behind the figurehead I assume that the curved cutwater piece is then sandwiched between the two naval hoods.  I think I remember reading something to this effect in one of your posts.  I must admit, this addition really enhances the profile of the bow into a more graceful shape..

 

John

[Wawona59]

Build Log entry No. 3
Well, I'm continuing to work on fixing my previous errors.  This week, since none of the bulkheads lined up properly I added a wooden strips to the top of each bulkhead.   I will then transfer the sheer from the plans to a sanding stick.  I'll use this sanding stick to correct the bulkheads for proper sheer and deck curvature.
The challenge this week was to make new forward bulkheads as i was not happy with my previous lame attempt.  Fortunately, I kept the basswood sheet where the bulkheads were removed from.  I used the sheet to as a pattern to make new bulkheads.  
After I attached the replacement bulkheads I started the fairing process.  As you can see from one of the attached photographs, I managed to incorporate some of my DNA into this model.  I'm fairing the bulkheads using files and chisels only.  I've got a way to go but I think these replacement bulkheads are much better than the ones that I started with.
After I get the bulkheads faired I'll be adding the keel, stem piece and cutwater following the drawings posted by Clipperfan.  After that about a month of planking will commence. 

 

Thank you to those who are following this build/restoration.  See you next time.

 

John
 

[Rick310]

Welcome to the club, those of us building the Flying Fish and other McKay vessels!

I certainly sympathize with the frustration of building the Flying Fish and being unhappy with my results.  This led me to abandon the project for several decades until I was able to come to terms with the fact that this was not going to be a “museum quality” model and the only way to get better was to go back and correct what mistakes I could and then move on, hopefully getting better as I gained more experience.  I still see all my mistakes and wish I could have done better.  Fortunately, most people can’t see them and almost no one cares like we do.  I also told myself that when I finished this model, I would build it again and correct all my mistakes.  So I purchased the plank on bulkhead version ( mine is the old solid hull version).  Now I just hope to get this one finished before I pass away or my wife and family murder me as they are sick and tired of me obsessing on it.  LOL.

[Wawona59]

Hi Rick310,

 

I think fixing errors to make something better is part of this wonderful hobby/pastime.  I know my Fish will not be museum work of art either.  I'm just trying to do the best that I can and learn from my mistakes.  I really like the Model Shipways POB Flying Fish kit.  The plans and instruction book are very well done in my opinion.  The Britania fittings leave much to be desired though.

 

My wife has not given me too much pushback yet on my Flying Fish project since I'm in the process of selling off many of my plastic and balsa airplane kits. Take Care and keep on prodding forward on your Flying Fish project.  I'll be following your build log.

 

John

aka

 

Wawona59 

[gak1965]

On 10/14/2022 at 10:36 AM, Wawona59 said:

This week, since none of the bulkheads lined up properly I added a wooden strips to the top of each bulkhead

This happens to everyone, more or less always. There are always things that need adjustment, often due to the manufacturing process, not error. My (and everyone else's) Niagaras had an issue where if you follow the instructions and plans you will wind up with improperly fitting cannons. Fortunately, I saw a build log and could adjust.

 

You said you are fairing with files and chisels. I think sandpaper would work better The wood is softer than you think and it generally doesn't require that much fairing. At my limited skill level, anyway, I appreciate the fact that sandpaper limits the amount that I can remove at once. A rotary tool is useful when you need to remove a ton of material (e.g. in filler blocks), but most places you probably want something that removes wood more slowly (and goodness knows I've thrown away pieces I've hand sanded into oblivion)

 

For the cutwater, I wound up adding it after planking with no I'll effects, although you could do so at any time during the early stages of the build. In retrospect, I might have added more filler, but as I'm the only one that will see it, c'est la vie.

[Wawona59]

Hi gak1965,

 

Yes, I agree the files can be very aggressive which I found out on the forward bulkheads I replaced.  I really got carried away with the fairing and shaping and now I think they resemble "rabbit ears".  I will replace these and use a less aggressive method, such as sandpaper as you suggested.

 

As I mentioned to Rick310, fixing errors to try to make things better is part of this wonderful hobby/pastime.  I've really enjoyed following your build by the way.

John

aka

 

Wawona59

[Rick310]

All of our models have errors.  My frustration was that when I attempted to correct those errors, I often made them worse requiring more time to correct errors with little expertise to do so.  I eventually became frustrated and hesitant to move forward.  What I have learned is to slow down and constantly check my measurements.  I also find that writing things down really helps.  Most of all I think is just accepting the fact that this is not perfect and realizing when good enough is good enough.  I constantly have to remind myself that while striving to do my best, that the worst enemy of good is better.

[ClipperFan]

Wawona59 remember this when you get to building your solid tops. This is an area where the MSW Flying Fish plans are wrong. This has caused issues for other modelers which I hope to help you avoid. The first 3 pics are of the foremast top from Glory of the Seas, courtesy of 3 time author Michael Mjelde. The 4th is directly below the solid top of the Whaler Charles W Morgan, 5th and 6th are of the Frigate USS Constitution "Old Ironsides." Finally, the last 2 show how another modeler Jared, is right now documenting his problems following wrong advice! All actual vessels show a large, unobstructed lubbers hole which covers the entire inner solid top on the merchant vessels and most of it on the military one. Meanwhile, the inacurrate FF Mastini plans show crosstrees bisecting the lubber hole which doesn't match any pics of the real ships. The clipper ship's trestle trees blend in harmoniously with her solid tops above and does not project awkwardly in front like the plans incorrectly show. In this case, accurately reproducing these features will make it easier to rig shrouds too.

Edited September 1, 2023 by ClipperFan
added info

[Wawona59]

Thank you so much for this info Clipperfan.  I recently noticed the issue with the lubbers hole on Jared's build log.  The photos you shared are definitive that the lubbers hole on the Glory are larger that shown in the plans and other references I've gathered.  I assume that all of McKay's other clippers were similar.  I've posted this to my "Fish File" which will be very useful when I get to that point. 

 

I've been on a hiatus from the Fish pending replacement parts and other more urgent projects. I'm making a gift for a friend using a discarded MS Phantom solid hull that I was given as a rough guideline.  I'm also restoring/completing an inherited Mamoli Golden Hinde as a donation to the college library where I used to teach.   After that I'll return to the Fish build log as soon as I can.  Meanwhile, I'm enjoying the progress that others on MSW members are making.

Thank you for keeping me in the loop on the clipper projects.

 

 

[Jared]

My ship has also been on hyatius for various reasons.  Best to take your time and work on it when you are in the right frame of mind.  I look forward to seeing your progress!

[Wawona59]

Hi all, I realize that I've fallen off the planet with regards to my "Fish" build log. I have not been well for a long while to the point that I have trouble walking without assistance. As a result, I no longer drive.  My hands and eyes are still okay to build models though.  Good!

I've decided to put my "Fish" project on hold until I improve my skills.   I'll be starting some new, less challenging projects before I return to the "Fish". 

 

My "Admiral", who we all know is always right, has strongly suggested that I finish the incomplete models in my collection before starting a new project. 

 

I'm thinking of finishing the Mamoli Golden Hinde that I inherited before starting anything new.  I'm not really that interested in the subject or time period but it should give me an opportunity to improve my skills.  I'll probably just end up giving it away to someone.  

 

What say You, my ship modeling online friends? 

 

I'm sorry for letting you all down on my "Fish" build but I sincerely hope to redeem myself in the future.

 

 

[Rick310]

John, 

Sending best wishes for a full recovery.  
Certainly understand the frustration when results don’t match expectations.

Just keep moving forward and be patient.  Redo things any time you think can do better and accept that some things are as good as you can do.  As George says, we are much harder on ourselves,  no body will see the mistakes that we see.  I have found that with time, I like my results betters than when I first made something as nothing ever seem to match my expectations.

Look forward to you getting back to the Fish .

Rick

 

[Roger Pellett]

Wives are right about most things but not everything.  People who do not build ship models cannot understand the drive that keeps us moving forward to create a masterpiece.  Unfortunately, none of us have unlimited years to spend doing this so it behaves us to spend the time that we do have wisely.  There is little point in working on a model that does not inspire you just so that you can cross it off of your list.  If clipper ships in general and Flying Fish in particular is your interest, don’t give up.  You’ll surprise yourself!

 

Roger

[Wawona59]

Thank you Rick310 and Roger for your kind and encouraging words. I'll be back on deck soon.

[gak1965]

Hi John,

      I tend not to weigh in on these sorts of questions - there is only one person whose opinion matters a whit, and that is you. I will say a couple of things here though. First, sorry to hear about your health issues. I hope they improve, or at least don't get worse. Second, I'm with Roger here, these things take so long that I can't imagine wasting any time building a model that doesn't interest you. And, FWIW, it seems to me that the Golden Hind will be as fiddly than the Fish, although in a different way. The thing has a lot of sheer, complicated decoration, and lot of unpainted wood. Most of the Fish is painted (and a rather simple scheme at that) and it hides a multitude of sins. The Hind is at a larger scale,  but still three masts in about half the length. Something to think about.

 

And there is no question of "letting us down", we are just here to share what we are doing and help each other along. Whatever you decide is the right move, mate.

 

Regards,

George

Edited January 13 by gak1965