Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Clipp[er Fan said " the complex curving navel hoods described by Duncan McLean in more than one article."

 

can you give a pointer to such an article?

 

thanks

 

Scott

Posted
1 hour ago, ClipperFan said:

Trevor, of all the vessel ship lines I've seen, there has been no other where the forward lines of the bow are left completely blank by the draftsman himself. You can dispute my conclusion and I'm fine with that...but I would love to know a sensible alternative explanation. Meanwhile, I suggest a "what if." There are decades of Flying Cloud, Flying Fish & Sovereign of the Seas going back to the early 1900s. All have simple bare stems with figureheads awkwardly tacked on below the bowsprit. None have even a hint of a cutwater let alone the complex curving navel hoods described by Duncan McLean in more than one article. We're just trying to display an alternative interpretation based on empirical evidence.

You have studied the primary evidence concerning McKay's ships and, from what I can discern here, you have studied the material closely. I'm interested in the conclusions you have reached but not interested enough to drop other research and delve into the evidence myself. So I can comment (hopefully helpfully!) on what you say but I'm limited and, in the end, can only defer to your judgement.

 

As to why a draughtsman leaves something blank: There are probably too reasons. Either he thinks it very important and does not what to reveal his secrets (and I could point to examples of that) or else the thing left out had no interest for him, at least in the particular drawing (and lots of examples of that too!). The image you posted last evening, labelled "original plans", shows the lines plans. Maybe McKay simply didn't want to engage with purely decorative detail when drawing the lines of his creation. 

 

I do agree that any figurehead must be firmly fastened to the hull, or it would swiftly be lost. (Attached to the hull and not, I strongly suspect, to the bowsprit -- though if someone produces evidence to the contrary, I would not be shocked.) 2D imagery can fudge the details of the connection but 3D models should have some realistic structural link. If you find that past models lack that (maybe have only an angel's feet resting on solid timber), then they are clearly deficient. I applaud your efforts to do better!

 

A thought: Some figures, once moved to museums and examined off their ships, prove to be sort of 3-sided, with a deep slot running where a human spine should be. If one of the various pieces that make up the upper stem (the stem itself, gammon knee, cutwater etc.) was extended forwards, it would be possible to insert that piece into the slot in the figure, bolt all together and have the figure well attached without a casual viewer noticing how the attachment was achieved.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Kenchington said:

You have studied the primary evidence concerning McKay's ships and, from what I can discern here, you have studied the material closely. I'm interested in the conclusions you have reached but not interested enough to drop other research and delve into the evidence myself. So I can comment (hopefully helpfully!) on what you say but I'm limited and, in the end, can only defer to your judgement.

 

As to why a draughtsman leaves something blank: There are probably too reasons. Either he thinks it very important and does not what to reveal his secrets (and I could point to examples of that) or else the thing left out had no interest for him, at least in the particular drawing (and lots of examples of that too!). The image you posted last evening, labelled "original plans", shows the lines plans. Maybe McKay simply didn't want to engage with purely decorative detail when drawing the lines of his creation. 

 

I do agree that any figurehead must be firmly fastened to the hull, or it would swiftly be lost. (Attached to the hull and not, I strongly suspect, to the bowsprit -- though if someone produces evidence to the contrary, I would not be shocked.) 2D imagery can fudge the details of the connection but 3D models should have some realistic structural link. If you find that past models lack that (maybe have only an angel's feet resting on solid timber), then they are clearly deficient. I applaud your efforts to do better!

 

A thought: Some figures, once moved to museums and examined off their ships, prove to be sort of 3-sided, with a deep slot running where a human spine should be. If one of the various pieces that make up the upper stem (the stem itself, gammon knee, cutwater etc.) was extended forwards, it would be possible to insert that piece into the slot in the figure, bolt all together and have the figure well attached without a casual viewer noticing how the attachment was achieved.

@Kenchington probably the best evidence we have been able to reliably evaluate is a treasure trove of Glory of the Seas historic images. Author Michael Mjelde quite generously shared many rare and in some cases never seen before images of her. Included were multiple views of her complex bow structure. Elements Rob and I interpret to be navel (not naval) hoods are very tight configured devices which are literally an extension of the upper hull. They gracefully twist from a "V" configuration to gradually arrive at a vertical curving point. Contrary to more decorative moldings on other clipper bowed ships and barques, these are three times as big and offer a substantial perch for the large bowsprit-jibboom spars installed just above. Both @rwiederrich and @Vladimir_Wairoa build logs feature many of these crystal clear images. In fact, true to Duncan McLean's evaluation of the unique toughness of these structures, clipper Glory of the Seas survived a collision when a steam ship accidentally backed into her bow. The only damage she sustained was a cracked upper starboard rail and loss of some cutwater carvings. In his description of the bow construct on Flying Cloud McLean stated that the ship would remain seaworthy even with loss of her cutwater. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...