Staghound 1850 by rwiederrich - 1/96 - Extreme Clipper

[rwiederrich]

54 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

Clipperfan pushed me over the wall. Vlad wanted to tackle another American clipper, so we settled on McKay’s first.  
 

Many talented folks are helping from the back room.   
 

Glad you’re aboard.   
It’s gonna be fun. 
 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

I probably would have used  Champelle’s lines…….but too many smart people are reconciling all the drawings…..an I want to get this right ……so I’m hanging till Vlad , Luis and  Rich all concur.  
 

So , now I’m gonna make dozens of railing stanchions.  
 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

2 hours ago, druxey said:

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

That will materialize soon enough.  
 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Still…..does anyone know how to put this log in the right time frame?   I’ve tried myself but no luck.  
Admin help would be nice……..unless it doesn’t matter to anyone.   
 

Rob

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

good day. 

 

finally good news. My suspicion turn out true. it was distorted pic indeed. How could I have not thought of that? I wated so much time by doing useless things. 

it matches waterways and ship perfectly now after scanning at all levels having bulwark height correct etc...There curves are just more completed from Cornelius model... Please give me few days guys to make out bulkheads. all should be finished this week. 

Meanwhile I need to mentally recover from reading book about Vietnam war and Nixon America. it was soo gut punching and hearth wrenching that will take me at least one day to recover from impact...:)

meanwhile, scan pic aligned provided. it will go fast from here now    

have good end of weekend. 

 

V. 

[ClipperFan]

On 7/26/2024 at 5:06 PM, ClipperFan said:

@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 

@rwiederrich

Rob,

This is a 1:24th scale rendition of the 7' square portico. Height is just enough to allow fore poop rail to mount into the upper molding. Note: I include placement of a side rail turned stanchion so you can see how it mounts on poop deck front. Uppermost oval represents how the rail matches portico height exactly. A neat development is how the portico sides divide into two halves. The front half side door portion, as I envision it, projects just slightly forward to give an impression of a potico section. Two tall pillars surround the door and support the arch. The rear section is the real wall but appears recessed in comparison. Three short pillars support smaller dual arches and the upper section also projects just slightly to continue the profile of the fore section. I call these "faux" pillars since they're basically half profiles. You can also see that the door molding has been lowered to match the fife-rail intersecting beam. That will allow enough room for both fife rail beams to mount in front to. I will do that illustration next. I see a central ladder in back, since the structure is only 7' wide, with similar faux pillars supporting the same arches. To me, this definitely gives an impression of a portico, with a lot of gothic elegance in a surprisingly small space. Interestingly enough, it gives an impression of being a larger house than it really is. Incidentally, in the description of the three decked packet ship Staffordshire there's actually a large skylight that's 13' long. I think that would fit on the rear poop deck of Stag Hound.

[druxey]

What would be the  rise and tread of those steps, Rich? Also, how does that upper rail look in plan view? Does it extend in a straight fore and aft line, or is it cranked?

[ClipperFan]

3 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

good day. 

 

finally good news. My suspicion turn out true. it was distorted pic indeed. How could I have not thought of that? I wated so much time by doing useless things. 

it matches waterways and ship perfectly now after scanning at all levels having bulwark height correct etc...There curves are just more completed from Cornelius model... Please give me few days guys to make out bulkheads. all should be finished this week. 

Meanwhile I need to mentally recover from reading book about Vietnam war and Nixon America. it was soo gut punching and hearth wrenching that will take me at least one day to recover from impact...:)

meanwhile, scan pic aligned provided. it will go fast from here now    

have good end of weekend. 

 

V. 

 

[ClipperFan]

@Vladimir_Wairoa

That's great news! I hate to be a "gadfly" about this but, oh well, here goes. As long as we're sticking with the Cornelius McKay Stag Hound sheer profile, I will be thrilled to see these replicas realised. It just bothers me to see the more stylized but inaccurate Crothers bow alongside the body plan. Again, I reiterate my reasoning for wanting to adhere as closely as possible to the McKay half-hull is the documented fact that the son stated emphatically that his model was built directly from the mould lines taken right off the lofting floor even as the ship herself was under construction. Cornelius also stated that no other authentic builder's models existed, since they all had been destroyed. To me, this is a gift from 274 years ago. I wish I could locate the drawing that he confirms was done at the same time, because that would most likely include an authentic body plan too. If you need my help to further reconcile the Crothers body plan with the McKay sheer plan, just let me know.

[ClipperFan]

1 hour ago, druxey said:

What would be the  rise and tread of those steps, Rich? Also, how does that upper rail look in plan view? Does it extend in a straight fore and aft line, or is it cranked?

@druxey

today's residential standard is 7" rise x 11" tread. If you're familiar with older homes, stairs were steeper. I would think 8" rise × 10" tread would be more in keeping. As for upper portico rails, since all 4 sides have a 6" overhang, they're straight, with a break in rear for steps. I'm still working on front and rear and will have them done soon.

[ClipperFan]

7 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Still…..does anyone know how to put this log in the right time frame?   I’ve tried myself but no luck.  
Admin help would be nice……..unless it doesn’t matter to anyone.   
 

Rob

@rwiederrich

Rob, at the risk of being redundant, did you have any success in your attempt to enact instructions given in post #13 from @Knocklouder ?

[rwiederrich]

3 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

@rwiederrich

Rob, at the risk of being redundant, did you have any success in your attempt to enact instructions given in post #13 from @Knocklouder ?

Yep. Tried that. No means to change it from there.  

[rwiederrich]

7 hours ago, Vladimir_Wairoa said:

good day. 

 

finally good news. My suspicion turn out true. it was distorted pic indeed. How could I have not thought of that? I wated so much time by doing useless things. 

it matches waterways and ship perfectly now after scanning at all levels having bulwark height correct etc...There curves are just more completed from Cornelius model... Please give me few days guys to make out bulkheads. all should be finished this week. 

Meanwhile I need to mentally recover from reading book about Vietnam war and Nixon America. it was soo gut punching and hearth wrenching that will take me at least one day to recover from impact...:)

meanwhile, scan pic aligned provided. it will go fast from here now    

have good end of weekend. 

 

V. 

You’re awesome Vlad.   Can’t wait.  
 

I know the whole debacle of the Vietnam war sucked.    I hope you enjoy some needed mental rest. 
 

Rob

[ClipperFan]

1 hour ago, rwiederrich said:

Yep. Tried that. No means to change it from there.  

Rob, 

The only other step to take is contact moderators and ask for their assistance. Meanwhile, your title does refer to an 1850 vessel. Besides, being lauched 10 days before year's end just about puts this into 1851 anyways.

[ClipperFan]

1 hour ago, rwiederrich said:

You’re awesome Vlad.   Can’t wait.  
 

I know the whole debacle of the Vietnam war sucked.    I hope you enjoy some needed mental rest. 
 

Rob

@Vladimir_Wairoa

One of my favorite quotes comes from late, brilliant Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill. I'm quoting from memory but this was essentially his sentiment "I love the Americans, they always do the right thing, after they've tried everything else!"

The late, legendary nightly CBS newscast anchor Walter Cronkite, after witnessing the carnage of the 1968 "Tet Offensive" by the Viet Cong eloquently concluded that the Vietnam War was unwinnable. Turns out, "the most trusted man in America" was also our national conscience. As a high school, later university student I participated in nationwide Anti-Vietnam War protests. After bloody carnage at Kent State it actually galvanized the Peace Movement and stiffened our spines. "Four dead in Ohio!" was just one of our emotional slogans. We knew momentum was changing when John Kerry, leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War testified to Congress asking his memorable question "How do you ask a man to be the last person to die for a mistake?" Ultimately increasing public pressure succeeded and USA finally withdrew entirely from Vietnam.

Winston Churchill was right.

[BANYAN]

What a collaboration of minds this project is!  I am convinced you guys will arrive at the most probable hull form and equipment fit with this sort of preparation and contributions. 

 

@druxey and @@ClipperFan, I am not 100% sure of this, but I seem to recall a discussion on the subject of stairs and ladders in one of the pdf copies of wood ship construction or wood joinery (ship related) books written about this era.  As soon as I have caught up on the neglected chores etc. resulting from my trip I will have a look and see if I can find it.

 

cheers

 

Pat

[ClipperFan]

While trying to find the elusive Stag Hound lines plan described by Cornelius McKay in his letter to Captain Arthur H Clark, I came acrosd this nice rendition of her by Edward Zeliff on his website.

[Vladimir_Wairoa]

9 hours ago, ClipperFan said:

@Vladimir_Wairoa

That's great news! I hate to be a "gadfly" about this but, oh well, here goes. As long as we're sticking with the Cornelius McKay Stag Hound sheer profile, I will be thrilled to see these replicas realised. It just bothers me to see the more stylized but inaccurate Crothers bow alongside the body plan. Again, I reiterate my reasoning for wanting to adhere as closely as possible to the McKay half-hull is the documented fact that the son stated emphatically that his model was built directly from the mould lines taken right off the lofting floor even as the ship herself was under construction. Cornelius also stated that no other authentic builder's models existed, since they all had been destroyed. To me, this is a gift from 274 years ago. I wish I could locate the drawing that he confirms was done at the same time, because that would most likely include an authentic body plan too. If you need my help to further reconcile the Crothers body plan with the McKay sheer plan, just let me know.

Rich, 

we already adjusted Crothers bow to our outline drawing if you remember. Necessary corrections have been made. I follow your progress guys about portico etc...by the way brilliant sketching as usually...

[BANYAN]

Hi all, I found the discussion I referred to.  It is in a book titled 'Ship Joinery' by S.G. Duckworth (1923) - see chapter X (page 118).   PDF copies can be found online. While it is not truly describing vessels of the 19th century, I think the essentials of the joinery practices will not have changed much, if at all.  In this he states:

Ladders are made in various sizes, the spread being usually from 1 ft. 6 in. to 2 ft. 6 in.; the rise to be comfortable should not be greater than 9 in.; and the slope should be such that the angle between the ladder side and a plumb-line will not be less than 37°.

Later, starting at page 126, he discusses stairs which is far to large a section to paraphrase here.  Essentially he writes that  the 'straight' stairs' typically had a rise of 7" and a going (horizontal distance between the faces of two risers) as 9".  He also provides excellent drawings of the style and parts of the staircases and associated companionways.

 

I hope this helps

 

cheers

 

Pat

[ClipperFan]

2 hours ago, BANYAN said:

Hi all, I found the discussion I referred to.  It is in a book titled 'Ship Joinery' by S.G. Duckworth (1923) - see chapter X (page 118).   PDF copies can be found online. While it is not truly describing vessels of the 19th century, I think the essentials of the joinery practices will not have changed much, if at all.  In this he states:

Ladders are made in various sizes, the spread being usually from 1 ft. 6 in. to 2 ft. 6 in.; the rise to be comfortable should not be greater than 9 in.; and the slope should be such that the angle between the ladder side and a plumb-line will not be less than 37°.

Later, starting at page 126, he discusses stairs which is far to large a section to paraphrase here.  Essentially he writes that  the 'straight' stairs' typically had a rise of 7" and a going (horizontal distance between the faces of two risers) as 9".  He also provides excellent drawings of the style and parts of the staircases and associated companionways.

 

I hope this helps

 

cheers

 

Pat

@BANYAN

Pat,

Thanks for a new reference source. In this case, as height is 32" divided by 8" = 4 steps, so actually 3 with the last being the top itself. Unless Rob and Vlad disagree, I think that's how I'll illustrate it.

[rwiederrich]

I had already planned on using 3 steps for that ladder myself.    Good works. 
 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

Started to make stanchions today.   They are a lot smaller then your average stanchions.  
A lot narrower too.

 

I’m gonna make 50.

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

There……all done.  
 

I’ll probably make a dozen more for safekeeping…….just in case.  
 

Rob

Edited July 29 by rwiederrich

[rwiederrich]

I hope everyone doesn’t think I am a miracle worker.  I started those stanchions before I posted the first post. I just finished them, then posted again.   😅

Edited July 29 by rwiederrich

[ClipperFan]

37 minutes ago, rwiederrich said:

There……all done.  
 

I’ll probably make a dozen more for safekeeping…….just in case.  
 

Rob

 

[ClipperFan]

1 minute ago, ClipperFan said:

 

@rwiederrich

as usual your work is delicate, beautiful and quite consistent. I believe these will be for the outer rail surrounding the poop deck? Those in front and on the portico roof should be 28" tall, giving 4" for rail depth totalling 32".

[rwiederrich]

22 minutes ago, ClipperFan said:

@rwiederrich

as usual your work is delicate, beautiful and quite consistent. I believe these will be for the outer rail surrounding the poop deck? Those in front and on the portico roof should be 28" tall, giving 4" for rail depth totalling 32".

Correct.  I’m wondering if I should use the same design or go with something different?  
Like on Glory?

 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

I just opted to keep the same design, but make them longer.    
 

Im finishing up 11. 
 

Rob

[rwiederrich]

On 7/28/2024 at 10:30 AM, ClipperFan said:

@rwiederrich

Rob,

This is a 1:24th scale rendition of the 7' square portico. Height is just enough to allow fore poop rail to mount into the upper molding. Note: I include placement of a side rail turned stanchion so you can see how it mounts on poop deck front. Uppermost oval represents how the rail matches portico height exactly. A neat development is how the portico sides divide into two halves. The front half side door portion, as I envision it, projects just slightly forward to give an impression of a potico section. Two tall pillars surround the door and support the arch. The rear section is the real wall but appears recessed in comparison. Three short pillars support smaller dual arches and the upper section also projects just slightly to continue the profile of the fore section. I call these "faux" pillars since they're basically half profiles. You can also see that the door molding has been lowered to match the fife-rail intersecting beam. That will allow enough room for both fife rail beams to mount in front to. I will do that illustration next. I see a central ladder in back, since the structure is only 7' wide, with similar faux pillars supporting the same arches. To me, this definitely gives an impression of a portico, with a lot of gothic elegance in a surprisingly small space. Interestingly enough, it gives an impression of being a larger house than it really is. Incidentally, in the description of the three decked packet ship Staffordshire there's actually a large skylight that's 13' long. I think that would fit on the rear poop deck of Stag Hound.

Your drawing is lovely…….but I think something is wrong.  Isn’t the height of the poop deck, the height of the main rail??????

About 5 ft and then the monkey rail (an additional 18”) which the exterior stanchions rest upon.  
This would mean your rail should be 18” above where you have it.  Making the rail NOT flush with the portico rail.   
 

Am I missing something?

 

Rob

Edited July 29 by rwiederrich

[ClipperFan]

4 hours ago, rwiederrich said:

Your drawing is lovely…….but I think something is wrong.  Isn’t the height of the poop deck, the height of the main rail??????

About 5 ft and then the monkey rail (an additional 18”) which the exterior stanchions rest upon.  
This would mean your rail should be 18” above where you have it.  Making the rail NOT flush with the portico rail.   
 

Am I missing something?

 

Rob

@rwiederrich Rob,

As I read it, poop deck height is 5 feet. The additional 18 inch monkey rail surrounds the ship's hull but not the front of the poop deck. Outer turned stanchions should be 10", rail above 4" added to 18" monkey rail brings total height to 32". As far as I know, that's standard height for safety rails. Meanwhile, since the poop deck front lacks a monkey rail, as does the portico roof, those turned stanchions would, of necessity be taller at 28", plus 4" rail on top for 32". Makes sense now?