Clipper Ship Build Thoughts

A day of sailing, so a good day for research. BTW, the captain said that last night we had winds of 70mph and 30 foot sea’s. I didn’t think it was that bad.

I have been rereading the article on the Flying Cloud by Lars Bruzelius. It always amazes me how much more information I can pick up rereading something. I will have to find the information from Duncan McLean to see how it compares with Bruelius.

Bill
 
Research is fun. It becomes..Funner...when you can couple that research with actual building....and then...that in of itself can be a hoot...especially if your research was wanting and things don't fit or look right. Then your research requires the employment of demolition experts.....and MORE research. Sometimes you may need to measure eight times, before you cut once. And sometimes that isn't enough...cuz new information comes to light.

Been all over that...seen the movie and got two T shirts extra large.

Rob
 
Hi Rob,

I agree completely. In the past, my motto was “The information becomes clear right after I glue the piece into place”. That’s another reason why I don’t use CA.

Would you or anyone else know where I could find a copy of the Duncan McLean Flying Cloud article?

Thanks,
Bill
 
At least you and Bill M. have plenty of lead time to incorporate all of the Flying Cloud Revelations that have come to light of late. Some reaaaally of late!;)
All to the best. No demolition and reconstruction required!
I hope you have great results!
Happy modeling (AND researching!)

Pete
 
At least you and Bill M. have plenty of lead time to incorporate all of the Flying Cloud Revelations that have come to light of late. Some reaaaally of late!;)
All to the best. No demolition and reconstruction required!
I hope you have great results!
Happy modeling (AND researching!)

Pete
Pete, the great thing about revelation...is that it comes to everyone at different times.
My own experiences with Glory of the Seas is that, My first build of her was Waaaay off, on many details. Sure...I had the *General* Idea, but I couldn't live with that, after Rich and I first met and began digging deep. My first attempt was around 2009....I even showed it to Michael Mjelde....who held his tongue quite professionally and respectfully.

Your own personal experience can only add to your toolbox of knowledge and experience on the subject. You can redo, or simply let it be. My own experience, is that I had to let the first model go....converting her into a fictitious clipper of my own doing...naming her after my wife. There still remains....even after all I've learned, about Glory of the Seas...slight errors I am aware of. But these will not diminish the overall correctness of the model, to the prototype.
I hope you continue to be mailable and correct what you can and have done......and then just let other things be.

Those who follow after.....simply get to enjoy the hard work you and others have put into their models, to make them as accurate as can be. Progressive revelation.
You've done yourself proud with your creation.

Rob
 
Pete, the great thing about revelation...is that it comes to everyone at different times.
My own experiences with Glory of the Seas is that, My first build of her was Waaaay off, on many details. Sure...I had the *General* Idea, but I couldn't live with that, after Rich and I first met and began digging deep. My first attempt was around 2009....I even showed it to Michael Mjelde....who held his tongue quite professionally and respectfully.

Your own personal experience can only add to your toolbox of knowledge and experience on the subject. You can redo, or simply let it be. My own experience, is that I had to let the first model go....converting her into a fictitious clipper of my own doing...naming her after my wife. There still remains....even after all I've learned, about Glory of the Seas...slight errors I am aware of. But these will not diminish the overall correctness of the model, to the prototype.
I hope you continue to be mailable and correct what you can and have done......and then just let other things be.

Those who follow after.....simply get to enjoy the hard work you and others have put into their models, to make them as accurate as can be. Progressive revelation.
You've done yourself proud with your creation.

Rob
Thanks, Gorgeous weather and a beautiful front porch conspired to get me out of the basement and away from the workbench. So, I parked it on the porch in a comfy chair, with my wife knitting in another, and I finally cracked open my Crother's American-Built Clipper.

I could have saved myself a LOT of trouble if I had done so before relying on the various kit plans and instructions that I had collected.
Kit plans are a lot like buying a lottery ticket. They only marginally improve your chances of success.
One thing I did learn from Crothers was that the forecastle deck on Flying Cloud was set up to the monkey rail height. (So far so good) But it was closed, not open to the elements. The weather deck arrangement diagram shows a capstan, no windlass. So far comporting with your and Rich's research. In a later chapter he describes Flying Cloud as having Allyn's patent capstans. So, Crothers pretty well supports your ideas on that. I'll just pass that along for what it's worth.
I'm not ready to dive into the carnage it would take to make the necessary changes on my model. I can live with what I have without cringing whenever I look at it. Otherwise, I might start seeing all the cringeworthy aspects of my other models. I'll go with the Beatles on this and "Let it be". I'm pretty happy with the other changes I was able to make.
I found a bunch of other contradictions in Crother's book concerning other ships, or even chapter to chapter. So, the information in this book, as very useful as it may be, still isn't the final word. It is most certainly worth close scrutiny before starting a model of any of the ships addressed between its' covers. Especially where Flying Cloud is concerned. The information on that ship comports largely with that of Rob and Rich where the forecastle deck is concerned in particular.
I found no mention of the naval hoods. That is something that otherwise would never have made it onto my model without their fortuitous and timely input.

Pete
 
I was nearly finished with the fore mast elements...when I decided it was time to remodel the forecastle. It was just wrong. If left it would NOT represent the true Glory of the Seas. It had to be done.

Here are some pics of before... a comparative...and the after the work was finished and before the forecastle was fully rigged. And one all finished up.

1726058964976.png

Comparative....
1726059051681.png


And finished


And one all completed.

1726059804430.png

1726059987753.png
 
I asked myself "Why am I making excuses? I can do this." After poring over Crothers book, I decided to go for it. Between you guys and Crothers, I want a Flying Cloud that includes at least a semblance of the evidence presented by both, even though there are slight differences in the two sources. The convergence is undeniable. I shouldn't be any more fearful of jumping in and trusting in my abilities than you. Good example. Thanks.

Pete
 
Just keep track of the items that are reusable....and, awaaay you go....

If you noticed...I struggled with that problem for quite some time....I had just completed the fore mast yards and sail install...but had not glued the mast in place yet....when I took the plunge. My model was 99% complete when I remodeled the forecastle. I just could procrastinate any longer....and I'm so much happier...since I had set out from the beginning to make the most accurate Glory of the Seas yet. Couldn't let myself and the project down.

You'll do fine.

Rob
 
Just keep track of the items that are reusable....and, awaaay you go....

If you noticed...I struggled with that problem for quite some time....I had just completed the fore mast yards and sail install...but had not glued the mast in place yet....when I took the plunge. My model was 99% complete when I remodeled the forecastle. I just could procrastinate any longer....and I'm so much happier...since I had set out from the beginning to make the most accurate Glory of the Seas yet. Couldn't let myself and the project down.

You'll do fine.

Rob
I feel ya! Thanks. Thumbsup ;)
 
There is much to be gained by correcting this issue.
One...you make your model more accurate to the prototype....
Second...you gain valuable building experience.....
Thirdly.....you help overcome any trepidation you've developed, by educating yourself and by not fearing failures the realities of rework overrides. It happens.

As a model builder you want to grow...fine tune your skills. What better way than to start over sometimes. Because the outcome outweighs the fear of trying.;)

Rob
 
I feel ya! Thanks. Thumbsup ;)
Rob,
What shocked me most about the tear down and rebuild you and Vlad both had to do was that, for lack of paying attention to detail, none of it would have been necessary. The 6 foot high fo'c'sle deck hight was actually specified by Duncan McLean in an article that I carefully copied and shared each page with the group. Not that I'm fully responsible for missing it but pity not one of us caught this one simple line. Fortunarely, in our round about way of paying close attention to contemporary photos, we caught it and you both fixed it. Back to "measure twice, cut once." Bottom line, more thorough the research, more accurate results will be. I'm redoubling my efforts to ensure our research is well documented in advance as service to all.
 
Rob,
What shocked me most about the tear down and rebuild you and Vlad both had to do was that, for lack of paying attention to detail, none of it would have been necessary. The 6 foot high fo'c'sle deck hight was actually specified by Duncan McLean in an article that I carefully copied and shared each page with the group. Not that I'm fully responsible for missing it but pity not one of us caught this one simple line. Fortunarely, in our round about way of paying close attention to contemporary photos, we caught it and you both fixed it. Back to "measure twice, cut once." Bottom line, more thorough the research, more accurate results will be. I'm redoubling my efforts to ensure our research is well documented in advance as service to all.
Further reflection of the incident.....reminds me that I initially evaluated it...but was lulled into accepting the original mistake....hoping that I was wrong somehow. It appears, critical thinking can find its way to the back seat, when the finish line is in sight.
A perfect example, to NEVER let your guard down...regardless of your ability to overlook the obvious, in exchange for expediency.

All being said...one must never lose the goal of accuracy....even if it means tearing out what you've mistakenly done(whatever the cause or reason)....and remaking it all over again.
Your own experience demonstrates your best friend at times is a good quality....ERASER.:cool:

Rob
 
Hello everyone,

I have been doing some reading on clippers, more specifically extreme clippers. In reading various articles, the term “extreme clipper” is used to describe a number of possible ships while leaving others out. This has caused a lot of confusion, mainly myself, as to what a extreme clipper was. Is there a specific set of guidelines that extreme clippers follow or is this a more loosely used term.

Thanks,
Bill
 
Back
Top