Staghound 1850 by rwiederrich - 1/96 - Extreme Clipper

[ClipperFan]

12 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

Riiight.

 

While you're at it...can you tell me the length of the Stadhound.....much like Atheana?  7ft? or so?

 

Rob

@rwiederrich

Rob, what? You've never heard of negative space? As I said, that's the real impression I got from looking a photos of the front fascia. I'll look again. Still, even if they were projections, they would only be slight and wouldn't interfere with anything.

As for the figurehead, from memory it's supposed to be 7 feet. There's a scale on my original sketch so you can double check it.

[rwiederrich]

11 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

@Luis Felipe good catch on those winches. Maybe Rob can let us know if these would have been installed on fore and main masts. That particular item isn't illustrated on the mizzen, so it makes me wonder if it had to do with the smaller yardarms on the mizzen?

Rich..it was I who noticed these on Chapelle's drawing.  Unlike British clippers that had large deck winches before the fore and main masts...American clippers tended to use other means to lift heavy items.  I'm gathering that these drawings of Champelle are something similar to the image I presented.   Makes sense.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

4 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

@rwiederrich

Rob, what? You've never heard of negative space? As I said, that's the real impression I got from looking a photos of the front fascia. I'll look again. Still, even if they were projections, they would only be slight and wouldn't interfere with anything.

As for the figurehead, from memory it's supposed to be 7 feet. There's a scale on my original sketch so you can double check it.

Your drawing did not include the fife rail from the front....and its insertion into the portico.  I was wondering if that would interfere with the pillars?

 

Rob

[ClipperFan]

26 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

Your drawing did not include the fife rail from the front....and its insertion into the portico.  I was wondering if that would interfere with the pillars?

 

Rob

Rob,

The front view only shows the rail itself, since the turned rail stanchions are a few feet away, there wasn't enough room to illustrate them. Side view is where you would see them too.

[rwiederrich]

3 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

Rob,

The front view only shows the rail itself, since the turned rail stanchions are a few feet away, there wasn't enough room to illustrate them. Side view is where you would see them too.

Oh no, not the railing itself...but the mizzen fife rail or pin rail.  Did you draw a forward image with the fife pin rail in place showing where it inserts into the portico front...and possibly where you might include those pillars?

 

Rob

[ClipperFan]

1 hour ago, rwiederrich said:

Oh no, not the railing itself...but the mizzen fife rail or pin rail.  Did you draw a forward image with the fife pin rail in place showing where it inserts into the portico front...and possibly where you might include those pillars?

 

Rob

@rwiederrich

to be honest, it was late last night that I decided to pause work and share my progress. As a result. I forgot to include the mizzen fife rail front view. I did mention the sketch was "in progress." My apologies for the confusion 

[ClipperFan]

Just now, ClipperFan said:

 

@Luis Felipe

Thanks for this find. Most of it is a duplicate of the Boston Daily Atlas with some added observations. Maybe I missed it but I didn't find a mention of the 6 ft fore rake of the stem or 2 ft aft rake of the sternpost. That added 2 feet in the stern, makes a difference of the poop deck front being an accurate 7 feet away from the mizzenmast instead of an inaccurate 5 feet away. Meanwhile Rob and I discussed a 

39" vs 30" outer keel projecting clear of the garboards. Since the total depth of keel, including shoe is described as being 46" then a 39" outer keel means the inner one would have to be a mere 7"! That simply doesn't make sense. However, an external 30" keel leaves room for a 16" inner one. I also reviewed all handwritten notes by Henry Hall and found no mention of a 39" keel.

The body plan in this article looks very close to other body plans. On the other hand, bow and stern appear too stylized. Contrast them to the Cornelius McKay model, which is far more precise, in my observation.

 

[ClipperFan]

4 hours ago, Luis Felipe said:

Als o, I try to compare the lines of the several references, pls forgive my poor use of digital tools. The lines are those of the Monthly Nautical Magazine, Chapelle,  & Crotters. More or less the lines somehow coincide.

 

@Luis Felipe

you and @Vladimir_Wairoa are both working on the same project and doing beautiful computer work. I noticed that an overlay of the McKay model is missing. So I've re-posted Vlad's overlay of that Cornelius McKay Stag Hound model bow. We've determined it's the most accurate rendition of this ship. That's due to historic provenance provided by McKay's own son. He confirms that his large 4' 8 & 1/4ths" 1:48th scale hull model was built from his father's mould lines directly off the lofting floor as the ship herself was under construction. Missing on his model is a 30" lower keel and 18" upper monkey rail, as well as an 18" splashrail. While a drawing done by Cornelius also exists, which might have a body plan too, I have yet to find it. Thanks again for your helpful contributions!

[druxey]

I read that at 16" wide (sided). Two pieces: upper 20" high (moulded) and the lower 12"high. Total 32".

[ClipperFan]

13 minutes ago, druxey said:

I read that at 16" wide (sided). Two pieces: upper 20" high (moulded) and the lower 12"high. Total 32".

@druxey

That can't possibly be the 1850 extreme clipper Stag Hound as it's settled fact that her keel was actually moulded 46". The vessel you're reading about is a much smaller ship with a 14" shallower keel. 

I repeatedly go back to the December 21, 1850 Boston Daily Atlas article, written by publicist Duncan McLean. It's obvious from the wealth of construction specifics that they were supplied to him directly by his close friend Donald McKay and his shipyard. 

 

"Her depth of keel is 46 inches, dead rise at half floor 40 inches, rounding of sides 4 inches, and sheer 2 feet 6 inches."

Later in the same article, McLean repeats this fact:

"Her keel is of rock maple and oak, in two depths, which, combined with the shoe moulds 46 inches and sides 16."

 

Thanks to the Cornelius McKay letter, we know the exterior depth of keel was 30" as he specifically says that's the precise dimension which should be added to his fine model. That leaves 16" for the internal keel.

We've determined a 39" keel must be a transcription error as that leaves only an impossible 7" for internal keel. 

[rwiederrich]

Good work everyone.  
 

We’ll I began making chips,…….we’ll small chips. I carved the Staghound figurehead.  Here are some pics

[druxey]

Ah! "...with the shoe moulds 46 inches..." that/those are the false keel(s). So, 46 - 32 = 14". Not unreasonable to have a double false keel in  7" thicknesses.

[ClipperFan]

10 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Good work everyone.  
 

We’ll I began making chips,…….we’ll small chips. I carved the Staghound figurehead.  Here are some pics

@rwiederrich

Rob,

Wow! now THAT'S a Stag Hound!! So, to be 7 scale feet, that's 7/8ths inches long. Amazing carving at such a tiny scale. I can't wait to see her in gilded gold.

[ClipperFan]

9 hours ago, druxey said:

Ah! "...with the shoe moulds 46 inches..." that/those are the false keel(s). So, 46 - 32 = 14". Not unreasonable to have a double false keel in  7" thicknesses.

@druxey

Now you have me even more curious. If you don't mind, can you share the source you're getting these figures from? It sounds like you're saying the outer keel was 32" including double false keels of 14" total, making her outer keel 18" (+ 14" double shoes; false keels) for a total 32" beyond garboards and her inner one 14" for a combined total of 46"? Everything I've found refers to a 39" keel beyond garboards, yet still maintains 46" total. That would make the inner one 7" which I find too thin. Handwritten notes by Hall (shared excerpts of; including sobco.com site link) show no such 39" outer keel mentioned. That leads me to conclude the Cornelius McKay stipulation of 30" to be most reasonable. 32" only adds 2" but I'd just like to know the source of those figures.

Edited July 27 by ClipperFan
additional information

[Rick310]

Beautiful figurehead Rob!!  Incredibly well done!!

Rick

[rwiederrich]

1 hour ago, Rick310 said:

 

1 hour ago, Rick310 said:

Beautiful figurehead Rob!!  Incredibly well done!!

Rick

Thanks.   I’m going to work on the jaw, ears and make some corrections next.

once done I will guild or paint her and leaver her on her mounting.  I’ll remove her just before adding her to the cut water.  When I get there.     
 

Like I did with Glory of the Seas, I’ll begin making the  railing stanchions now too.  
 

I like to get as much detail work out of the way while I wait for hull conclusions.  
 

Rob

Edited July 27 by rwiederrich

[druxey]

Rich: re post #164, I took this quote from post #119, first page of the manuscript at the top.

[ClipperFan]

2 hours ago, druxey said:

Rich: re post #164, I took this quote from post #119, first page of the manuscript at the top.

@druxey the heading of the second two pages, after the title, handwritten  refer specifically to the clipper ship Donald McKay. After that, it changes to a spread outline, where it's important to follow the narrative on the top left column. Honestly, this introduces even more confusion. Unless I'm reading it wrong, the sequence goes upper keel, lower keel, shoe. For Stag Hound figures are 20", 12" & 4 & 1/2".... which means beyond her garboards, including shoe, her outer keel would have been 16 & 1/2"... Meanwhile the total of all 3 components are 36 & 1/2" not 46" as recorder and publicized by McLean. To avoid getting even further "in the weeds" my recommendation is stick to Cornelius McKay's 30"....

[KeithAug]

20 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

I carved the Staghound figurehead.

Beautifully done. Does fido have a name?

[Snug Harbor Johnny]

  There's a racing dog like that on the sides of Greyhound buses ... better in 3D.

[ClipperFan]

2 hours ago, Snug Harbor Johnny said:

  There's a racing dog like that on the sides of Greyhound buses ... better in 3D.

 

[ClipperFan]

3 hours ago, Snug Harbor Johnny said:

  There's a racing dog like that on the sides of Greyhound buses ... better in 3D.

@Snug Harbor Johnny

True. But since the dashing dog on the bus line was introduced in 1929 and McKay's clipper Stag Hound launched in 1850, it could be said that they drew their inspiration from the earlier ship. 

Here is possibly the.earliest depiction of McKay's famous ship, from "Some Ships of the Clipper Ship Era" State Street Trust Co, Boston, MA 1913. Look closely, you'll see a sprinting dog reminiscent of those on modern buses. 

As you can see from Rob's delicate miniature carving, it's patterned after a real staghound photo. 

When I came up with my stag hound figurehead, it required more than a few sketches to capture the right feel. That's due to the fact that the figurehead's body needs to correspond with the navel hood it's attached to above. Meanwhile, the dog's head needs to face directly forward. To get this pose requires a pooch that realistically simulates leaping up at an angle. Draw a horizontal line at the base of their paws and you'll see what I'm describing. All this and it needs to look totally natural too. Trickier than it looks.

Edited July 28 by ClipperFan
additional information

[rwiederrich]

Indeed you are correct. The head needs to be slightly elevated to accommodate the curve of the hood.   
 

I finished guilding the Staghound.  
what ya think?

[druxey]

Excellent result. You now only need a ship to attach it to.

[druxey]

My apologies for confusing the issue of the depth of keel.

[ClipperFan]

4 minutes ago, druxey said:

Excellent result. You now only need a ship to attach it to.

@druxey picky-picky..... Maybe if you stop obsessing with structural minutia like the @#$$ size of the keel... 😉 real progress can be made!

[ClipperFan]

15 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

Indeed you are correct. The head needs to be slightly elevated to accommodate the curve of the hood.   
 

I finished guilding the Staghound.  
what ya think?

@rwiederrich

Rob, man you work fast! I love the fine details, tiny eyes, ears and open jaw. This is going to look dazzling against a black background embellished with more gold carvings...

Suddenly, I'm thinking back to a stunning golden girl, splayed out on bed while Shirley Bassey belts out a powerful tune....

[ClipperFan]

18 minutes ago, druxey said:

My apologies for confusing the issue of the depth of keel.

@druxey no apology necessary. You're just trying to help out. I take no offense. I am just truly grateful that Cornelius McKay left us exact dimensions. 

Edited July 28 by ClipperFan
grammar correction

[BANYAN]

Hi Rob, I go away for a couple of week's holiday and return to find another wonderful clipper project on the go.  Sorry to latch onto the coat tails of the project so far along, but it looks like this will be another entertaining log and great build.  I hope there is still room to jostle into the peanut gallery?

 

cheers

 

Pat

[ClipperFan]

14 minutes ago, BANYAN said:

Hi Rob, I go away for a couple of week's holiday and return to find another wonderful clipper project on the go.  Sorry to latch onto the coat tails of the project so far along, but it looks like this will be another entertaining log and great build.  I hope there is still room to jostle into the peanut gallery?

 

cheers

 

Pat

@BANYAN Welcome aboard! We're much closer to nailing this vessel's hull down. We have two very talented computer programming artists, @Vladimir_Wairoa and @Luis Felipe working hard to reconcile conflicting body plans. Once that's resolved, Rob will be off to the races! Just remember to bring enough popcorn for everybody.... 😉