Staghound 1850 by rwiederrich - 1/96 - Extreme Clipper

[rwiederrich]

From Great extensive research Richard Jones (Clipperfan), and I have determined that the term (Post the clipper ship era), that time after Donald McKay built his clippers...the term evolved.  The examples you have presented are of vessels, that post date 1869.  McKay was adamant about his bow secrets on his clippers and his *Naval Hood* as we have described it is only found on McKay clippers.  His unique application of this structure greatly strengthened the cutwater and stem of the bow.  It is not unrealistic to assume, McKay would utilize this feature on all of his vessels....if he used it on his last.  Clippers like the Great Admiral  and the clipper frigate Admiral Webb were typical of the clipper bow of the time.  NO McKay *Naval Hood*, supporting the stem.  Damage from high seas regularly occurred, but with Mckay's designed *(Hood)*...such disaster was avoided.  Not forgetting to mention, that the Hood also added greatly to the support of the figurehead.

[rwiederrich]

On 4/18/2025 at 6:32 PM, BANYAN said:

Hi Rob, I am speaking with experience from a much later period (late 20th century).  We also referred to 'naval hoods' as the metal hoods (covers) put over the top of the naval pipes once the cable was stowed/run out.  Some ships had an angled entry/cover built-in as part of the pipe which simply required a cover plate put on.  Other ships had a full hood that was partially inserted into the upper part of the pipe over the cable at the upper deck level. They were used to stop/minimise water entering the cable lockers through the naval pipes (metal trunks from deck through the deck(s) to the lockers).  Perhaps an 'interpretation thing?

 

cheers

 

Pat

Pat...Hi.  Yes I have heard of these Howes *Hoods* that you are speeking of.  However, as I mentioned to Scott...this term probably underwent a bit of  transformation, since McKay's use, and Duncan McLeans description of it on McKay clipper bows.

Photographic evidence proves, McKay clippers possessed this unique feature.....all else did not.  It is also very reasonable to assume since McKay used this feature on his last clipper...he used it on all or most of his clippers....with the extreme exception example of his massive Great Republic.

 

Rob

[sob]

if that is the case, what exactly is the hold that McKay used - i.e. what does it look like - the only think iI see in the two pictures you show is maybe

an enlarged bow below the figurehead?

 

the drawing of the bow of the Flying Cloud in Hall's report (which he may have gotten form Mary McKay) is this:

and the McKay drawing itself is this:

I'm trying to figure out what you are referring to 

 

are you referring to A or B or something else?

 

thanks

 

[rwiederrich]

Scott...all those drawing are not showing the location of the Naval hood in proximity to the stem of the cutwater.  McKay never drew the hood on any of his drawings...probably to protect it). Here is our drawing of Glory of the Seas...you can see the large Hood under the bowsprit and above the cutwater.  Below the hood (with its carved liefing's) is the ornate cheek that adorns the stem and is under the feet of the figurehead 

[rwiederrich]

The top trim of the Hood is the trim of the planksheer.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Champion of the Seas 1854 definitely shows a structure above and behind the figurehead .  Not super clear, but evidence the figurehead is not simply pressing up against the bowsprit.  there is evidence of ornate cheeks as well.....similar to Glory of the Seas.

 

Rob

 

 

[sob]

Thanks, now I understand what you are referring to on the Glory - harder to see on the two photos you posted

none of the contemporary paintings of the Flying Cloud are clear enough to see if she had a substantial hood as the Glory did

but, if the McKay hull drawing is to be accepted ether was not room for a substantial hood - maybe enough room for

a thin one with the planksheer brought forward over the figurehead (as is shown in the first photo)

 

 

[sob]

sorry - just reread your text 0- the photos were to show not having a hood

 

but the rest of what I wrote stands - the McKay outline does not leave enough room for a substantial hood

 

[rwiederrich]

McKay left off all the bow details from his drawings......even from his half hull lofting models.  here is a rendering made by Rich Jones....of Fling Clouds bow with the hood.

 

Rob

[sob]

for what its worth - the model of the Flying Cloud in the Boston MFA (from about 1916) does not show a hood - the figurehead is pressed right up to the bowsprit 

 

the Currier & Ives litho also shows the figurehead up against the bowsprit (as best as I can tell)

 

[sob]

I can see how it could have been done but I've seen no evidence that McKay put such a hood on the Flying Cloud - maybe he figured out the hood's 

strength after he built the Flying Cloud (the FC was quite early in his clipper days)

 

Scott 

[rwiederrich]

Even Mckay's own hand drawings of Star of Empire and Chariot of Fame...shows an extended stem far outside the typical reduced version seen on line drawings.  It is unclear from this image...ut it can be devised it is a more pronounced and curved prow then on other protypical line drawings. Notice the extended *Beek* underneath the bowsprit?

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

4 minutes ago, sob said:

I can see how it could have been done but I've seen no evidence that McKay put such a hood on the Flying Cloud - maybe he figured out the hood's 

strength after he built the Flying Cloud (the FC was quite early in his clipper days)

 

Scott 

There is strong evidence the Naval Hood was on the Staghound....prior to Flying Cloud.  We cannot be distracted by bias , blindly ignoring a practice that was clearly evident on his last clipper.  Proof evident.  And no other shipwright employed this unique structure.  This is why Rich Jones and myself have dedicated over 18 years of our time to researching and re-imagining the secret structures of Donals McKay's fantastic clippers.  Richard Jones (Clipperfan) is more of a zeolite then I am concerning this overlooked structure.   Maybe he'll pipe in......

 

Rob

[sob]

here is a close-up of that dwg

It is hard to tell because the hull is drawn as transparent - the planksheer does seem to extend up the back pf the figurehead 

but it sure does not leave much room for a strong hood

 

Scott 

[sob]

can you point me to the evidence about the staghound

 

ps - I'm not a zealot either way but remain to be convinced

[sob]

this (crude) drawing is most likely from life - I do not see anything that would indicate a strong hood

 

[rwiederrich]

32 minutes ago, sob said:

here is a close-up of that dwg

It is hard to tell because the hull is drawn as transparent - the planksheer does seem to extend up the back pf the figurehead 

but it sure does not leave much room for a strong hood

 

Scott 

One of the difficulties we are having with this interpretation is that the bowsprit is flexible and to secure the figurehead to it, would surely mean you may lose the figurehead during bad weather...due to extreme flexure and sheer.

[sob]

I do not see any evidence that the figurehead is secured to the bowsprit in the Flying Cloud

[rwiederrich]

16 minutes ago, sob said:

I do not see any evidence that the figurehead is secured to the bowsprit in the Flying Cloud

The difficulty with it NOT being...if it could be. would be the feet of the angel are the only things securing the figurehead to the stem...that and possible a bit of the aft of the wings.  Atheana, the Indian goddess figurehead of Glory of the seas is secured from her back to the naval hood and her feet to the prow of the stem.  Securing her very well.  This is in part why we feel the hood was a very significant structure to the entire security of the stem and cutwater. Simply sticking the figurehead to the tip of the stem is hardly secure.  Duncan McLean's very detailed descriptions of Flying Cloud and Stag Hounds structures is our source, in part.

 

Rob

[sob]

yes, Duncan McLean's article mentions that the Flying Cloud had "navel hoods" that have carved work on them but it says

"where the line of the planksheer and the carved work on the navel hoods terminate, she has the full figure of an angel on the wing" i.e., the 

figurehead starts where the navel hoods end

 

which does indicate some sort of framing that carried up the back of the figurehead

 

Scott 

[rwiederrich]

1 minute ago, sob said:

yes, Duncan McLean's article mentions that the Flying Cloud had "navel hoods" that have carved work on them but it says

"where the line of the planksheer and the carved work on the navel hoods terminate, she has the full figure of an angel on the wing" i.e., the 

figurehead starts where the navel hoods end

 

which does indicate some sort of framing that carried up the back of the figurehead

 

Scott 

So, just follow the line of the planksheer up that forms the top edge of the hood....there is where the figurehead is located.  Look at the image of Glory of the Seas Atheana.  she is under the hood and she is where the planksheer and hood leading edge terminate.  the figurehaed must firmly be secured to the bottom of the hood is if is to survive....just like GotS.

 

Rob

[sob]

what I think you are referring to as the hood in the Glory photos go past the feet of the figurehead which is not 

how I read the McLean article and I still do not see enough space in the McKay drawing for anything like what Glory has