- Joined
- Jun 17, 2021
- Messages
- 2,363
- Points
- 488
"Flying Cloud " by Mamoli - kit bash
- Thread starter Peter Gutterman
- Start date
- Watchers 25
Good morning Peter. I certainly have seen plenty…myself includedI wonder how many of us have pictures of our toes in our build logs?
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2021
- Messages
- 2,363
- Points
- 488
Finally got all the deadeyes mounted in the channels (each step in the process x72).
After trying several aftermarket capstans, I settled on these from Modeler's Central in boxwood. They aren't as detailed as I'd like but they are in scale, so I bought extra to make two double action capstans out of four, with two single actions as they came in the package. Some careful cutting with a razor saw and some creative use of needle nose Vise-Grips and a vise. I cut the drums off two and glued them onto another pair after cutting the domes off and flattening them. No room for do-overs here.
Since the "Flying Fish" and the "Flying Cloud" were both designed and built by Donald McKay in the same yard in the same year, 1851, I decided to add freeing ports to my "Flying Cloud". To the best of my knowledge there is no evidence for or against "Flying Cloud" having them, but since they do appear on the " Flying Fish"at about the same time I thought I would include some on the "Cloud" as per the "Flying Fish" plans. They are unobtrusive (practically invisible even) and make a lot of sense when rounding the horn as the "Flying Cloud" was designed to do. I sure as hell would want them under those circumstances. What the heck! My model, so sue me! And, as I said they're almost invisible, even though I made them a little darker inside their frames, inboard.
A LOT of hours adding up to not very dramatic progress. I'm eager to get to some super structure. But there's no rushing it.
Oh yes, I started finishing and mounting the display stand, which at least looks and feels like more progress than it actually is. I'm starting to like the way she looks. The patina on the copper is pretty nice. All Mr. Natural. (For you old counterculture fans out there " Keep on truckin'..."
)
Pete
After trying several aftermarket capstans, I settled on these from Modeler's Central in boxwood. They aren't as detailed as I'd like but they are in scale, so I bought extra to make two double action capstans out of four, with two single actions as they came in the package. Some careful cutting with a razor saw and some creative use of needle nose Vise-Grips and a vise. I cut the drums off two and glued them onto another pair after cutting the domes off and flattening them. No room for do-overs here.
Since the "Flying Fish" and the "Flying Cloud" were both designed and built by Donald McKay in the same yard in the same year, 1851, I decided to add freeing ports to my "Flying Cloud". To the best of my knowledge there is no evidence for or against "Flying Cloud" having them, but since they do appear on the " Flying Fish"at about the same time I thought I would include some on the "Cloud" as per the "Flying Fish" plans. They are unobtrusive (practically invisible even) and make a lot of sense when rounding the horn as the "Flying Cloud" was designed to do. I sure as hell would want them under those circumstances. What the heck! My model, so sue me!
And, as I said they're almost invisible, even though I made them a little darker inside their frames, inboard.A LOT of hours adding up to not very dramatic progress. I'm eager to get to some super structure. But there's no rushing it.
Oh yes, I started finishing and mounting the display stand, which at least looks and feels like more progress than it actually is. I'm starting to like the way she looks. The patina on the copper is pretty nice. All Mr. Natural. (For you old counterculture fans out there " Keep on truckin'..."
)Pete
She's stunning! You are making me want to buy one! You are building a real beauty out of what you once denounced as a "pig".
Bill
Bill
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2021
- Messages
- 2,363
- Points
- 488
Thanks! As they say: (whoever "they" are ) "Only a poor craftsman blames his tools" (Kit, materials, etc.) I keep plugging away at it and thinking of ways to improve it (and me). It's a voyage of discovery, after all. There are better clipper kits than the Mamoli "Flying Cloud". All require a lot of skill, imagination and improvisation, which is, after all, a good thing.
Clippers were noble and beautiful craft and well worth memorializing (the checkered history of their operation notwithstanding
).
Pete
) "Only a poor craftsman blames his tools" (Kit, materials, etc.) I keep plugging away at it and thinking of ways to improve it (and me). It's a voyage of discovery, after all. There are better clipper kits than the Mamoli "Flying Cloud". All require a lot of skill, imagination and improvisation, which is, after all, a good thing.Clippers were noble and beautiful craft and well worth memorializing (the checkered history of their operation notwithstanding
).Pete
True, but there are few of the Flying Cloud. I really wish that Bluejacket would re-release their old solid hull kit!Thanks! As they say: (whoever "they" are
Clippers were noble and beautiful craft and well worth memorializing (the checkered history of their operation notwithstanding
Pete
Bill
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2021
- Messages
- 2,363
- Points
- 488
Ebay had a complete BlueJacket kit awhile back. Pretty nice, but at $400, a big ask! The Mamoli is the only one I know of currently available, but a kit in need of a LOT of modification. You're almost better off starting from scratch! BlueJacket and A.J. Fischer have good plans at1:96. The MS Flying Fish plans and book are invaluable. BlueJacket still supplies the figurehead and they and Fisher supply a lot of the fittings at 1:96 scale. I have the Bluejacket roughed out "pre-carved" hull if you are interested. Good quality! I wish I had started there. But you have to like to whittle, rasp and sand. A huge task no matter what you start with.
Pete
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2021
- Messages
- 2,363
- Points
- 488
Just enough to cover the postage. I'll send you whatever extra plans I have as well. I have extra copies of the BlueJacket plans, and I can have copies made of the AJ Fisher plans for you as well at cost. I advise getting all the Flying Fish plans and instruction book from Model Shipways as they are invaluable. Except for the Spencer sails the Flying Fish rig is identical, and the MS plans show every line and belaying point. I'll pm the details tomorrow.
Peter,
Where do you live?
Bill
Where do you live?
Bill
- Joined
- May 21, 2023
- Messages
- 358
- Points
- 168
Pete,
Rob Wiederrich, myself and a few others recently finished an exhaustive, in-depth reconstruction of Donald McKay's final Medium Clipper Glory of the Seas. Rob's finished model is shared on this site too. Why I'm sharing this background with you is to hopefully help you be the very first person ever to properly model the famous Flying Cloud bow accurately. When she was first launched, she had a Cutwater which overlapped her bare Stem and both were then partially covered by Naval Hoods. Lars Bruzelius has an excellent resource for many Clipper Ships. Flying Cloud, since she was the largest merchant vessel in the world at her launch was given a highly detailed description by Duncan McLean, journalist of The Boston Daily Atlas. Here's his entire write up:
http://www.bruzelius.info/Nautica/News/BDA/BDA(1851-04-25).html
In it you'll find two references to these long lost nautical devices. I've included some rare picture references, including an 1871 painting from an Australian Maritime Museum which shows Flying Cloud with her ornate gold embellished Naval Hood, carved Cutwater and white winged trumpet bearing angel. The second pic is of the Starboard Bow of Glory of the Seas in 1913 and comes from author Michael Mjelde. Her Naval Hood is just above her Athene figurehead which rests on the Cutwater. Other pictures show her Starboard profile in 1907. The last two pics are of Rob's Bow and included are my reconstructed sketch based on using published diagrams of Flying Cloud. Since you're putting so much effort into your model, I thought you might appreciate knowing these facts about the true appearance of the beautiful vessel you're modeling
Rob Wiederrich, myself and a few others recently finished an exhaustive, in-depth reconstruction of Donald McKay's final Medium Clipper Glory of the Seas. Rob's finished model is shared on this site too. Why I'm sharing this background with you is to hopefully help you be the very first person ever to properly model the famous Flying Cloud bow accurately. When she was first launched, she had a Cutwater which overlapped her bare Stem and both were then partially covered by Naval Hoods. Lars Bruzelius has an excellent resource for many Clipper Ships. Flying Cloud, since she was the largest merchant vessel in the world at her launch was given a highly detailed description by Duncan McLean, journalist of The Boston Daily Atlas. Here's his entire write up:
http://www.bruzelius.info/Nautica/News/BDA/BDA(1851-04-25).html
In it you'll find two references to these long lost nautical devices. I've included some rare picture references, including an 1871 painting from an Australian Maritime Museum which shows Flying Cloud with her ornate gold embellished Naval Hood, carved Cutwater and white winged trumpet bearing angel. The second pic is of the Starboard Bow of Glory of the Seas in 1913 and comes from author Michael Mjelde. Her Naval Hood is just above her Athene figurehead which rests on the Cutwater. Other pictures show her Starboard profile in 1907. The last two pics are of Rob's Bow and included are my reconstructed sketch based on using published diagrams of Flying Cloud. Since you're putting so much effort into your model, I thought you might appreciate knowing these facts about the true appearance of the beautiful vessel you're modeling
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2021
- Messages
- 2,363
- Points
- 488
Wow! thanks for your interest!
Very inspiring! I think you ascribe a lot to my model that I'm not sure she deserves. I wish I had spent more time on the moldings along her hull which had two nicely scribed grooves along the edges, and the counter should have two knuckles. I don't know of the "naval hoods" of which you speak but it isn't too late for that. I carved my own figurehead with which I took some artistic license. The various plans I have disagree on her deck furniture, so I 'm using the Horace Bucher plans, from BlueJacket. I'm currently building the deck houses (finally the fun part).
I started with Mamoli. I wish I had used a BlueJacket hull which I inherited, which I have sent that along to Bill Morrison. Maybe he'll do a better job than I in the end. There's always somebody who does. I am relying heavily on Scott Bradner's plans. I must say I don't care for the bright blue for the cabin roofs. I plan to use a blue (Payne's) gray over planking covered with "canvas" for a "non-skid" surface. I mixed a pearl color form a very light gray mixed with porcelain white. Still looks pretty white, however. Who knows what designer pearl looked like in 1851. Even Martha Srewart ain't that old. judging from the use of mahogany and satinwood she must have been incredibly elegant. The Train family made a fortune, Poor old Donald died broke, purportedly a worker's boss, though who didn't mind getting his calloused hands dirty.
I had Enoch Train's great-great grandson for an antique restoration customer years ago. They had what might have been the builders model. This was before I had taken up the modeling obsession and I missed out on the chance of a lifetime not taking pictures. Oh well, time and tide...
You certainly have lit a fire under me. Except for Bill Morrison and Jimsky, interest in my build seems underwhelming
I'll make the effort to live up to your expectations! The "Glory of the Seas" is an inspiration!
Thanks, keep in touch!
Pete
Very inspiring! I think you ascribe a lot to my model that I'm not sure she deserves. I wish I had spent more time on the moldings along her hull which had two nicely scribed grooves along the edges, and the counter should have two knuckles. I don't know of the "naval hoods" of which you speak but it isn't too late for that. I carved my own figurehead with which I took some artistic license. The various plans I have disagree on her deck furniture, so I 'm using the Horace Bucher plans, from BlueJacket. I'm currently building the deck houses (finally the fun part).I started with Mamoli. I wish I had used a BlueJacket hull which I inherited, which I have sent that along to Bill Morrison. Maybe he'll do a better job than I in the end. There's always somebody who does. I am relying heavily on Scott Bradner's plans. I must say I don't care for the bright blue for the cabin roofs. I plan to use a blue (Payne's) gray over planking covered with "canvas" for a "non-skid" surface. I mixed a pearl color form a very light gray mixed with porcelain white. Still looks pretty white, however. Who knows what designer pearl looked like in 1851. Even Martha Srewart ain't that old. judging from the use of mahogany and satinwood she must have been incredibly elegant. The Train family made a fortune, Poor old Donald died broke, purportedly a worker's boss, though who didn't mind getting his calloused hands dirty.
I had Enoch Train's great-great grandson for an antique restoration customer years ago. They had what might have been the builders model. This was before I had taken up the modeling obsession and I missed out on the chance of a lifetime not taking pictures. Oh well, time and tide...
You certainly have lit a fire under me. Except for Bill Morrison and Jimsky, interest in my build seems underwhelming
I'll make the effort to live up to your expectations! The "Glory of the Seas" is an inspiration!
Thanks, keep in touch!
Pete
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2021
- Messages
- 2,363
- Points
- 488
"Naval Hood"! Oh yeah! Now I get it! I think it's doable!
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2021
- Messages
- 2,363
- Points
- 488
Looking at your splendid drawing and comparing it to the period schematic of the Flying Cloud (speculative as well, no actual drawings or models of the ship by Mckay exist) the stem and cutwater on my model are closer to the more limited dimensions of the schematic, which leaves just enough room for an upper "naval hood" which I have mocked up, but not a lower one. I think the one I have mocked up will work. I don't want to alter the proportions I have to accommodate the lower ornamental element.
I'm glad you like the model. All suggestions are welcome. Plenty of room to improve. I just hope to get a good-looking model out of it and a nod to the Romantic era clippers. Thanks so much for all the interest, research and effort.
Pete
I'm glad you like the model. All suggestions are welcome. Plenty of room to improve. I just hope to get a good-looking model out of it and a nod to the Romantic era clippers. Thanks so much for all the interest, research and effort.
Pete
- Joined
- May 21, 2023
- Messages
- 358
- Points
- 168
Hi Pete,
Donald McKay's large, beautiful clippers are a favorite of mine. Recently, I had the honor of touring the Hyland Granby Antiques, Hyannis Port, Cape Cod, Mass. Alan Granby gave me a personal tour and on his insistence I was actually able to touch Athene, the Grecian goddess figurehead which adorned Glory of the Seas. She's documented to be 7 & 1/2' tall and is impressively beautiful to see in person. What is so tricky in maintaining scale accuracy is keeping proportions accurate. Having oversized elements diminishes the overall size of a vessel. I mean no disrespect to your beautifully executed angel but unfortunately she's about double the size and too large to be in scale. She's your model, your build, I'm just giving you my observations.
The other issue I see is that your Bowsprit and Jibboom are too low in the Hull. If you look at the Starboard broadside of the figurehead, these two spars are up higher in the Bow. We also saw that the upper Jibboom gets more slender and squares out about 7' before entering the Hull. The Bowsprit beneath does the same thing, only maybe 4' before entering the Hull. This design make sense as it would prevent these massive spars from rotating. Rob's model replicates these features faithfully. Since yours are so low it prevents you from being able to fit in the Naval Hoods and Cutwater which are precisely described in McLean's write up. I guess it depends on how faithful you want to be to the authentic ship.
In the two years I spent with Rob evaluating everything to do with Glory's Hull, I did comparisons of a few other McKay clippers. What I learned is that Flying Cloud had the most aggressive prow of any of the rakish Clippers he built. I will follow your build with enthusiasm.
Donald McKay's large, beautiful clippers are a favorite of mine. Recently, I had the honor of touring the Hyland Granby Antiques, Hyannis Port, Cape Cod, Mass. Alan Granby gave me a personal tour and on his insistence I was actually able to touch Athene, the Grecian goddess figurehead which adorned Glory of the Seas. She's documented to be 7 & 1/2' tall and is impressively beautiful to see in person. What is so tricky in maintaining scale accuracy is keeping proportions accurate. Having oversized elements diminishes the overall size of a vessel. I mean no disrespect to your beautifully executed angel but unfortunately she's about double the size and too large to be in scale. She's your model, your build, I'm just giving you my observations.
The other issue I see is that your Bowsprit and Jibboom are too low in the Hull. If you look at the Starboard broadside of the figurehead, these two spars are up higher in the Bow. We also saw that the upper Jibboom gets more slender and squares out about 7' before entering the Hull. The Bowsprit beneath does the same thing, only maybe 4' before entering the Hull. This design make sense as it would prevent these massive spars from rotating. Rob's model replicates these features faithfully. Since yours are so low it prevents you from being able to fit in the Naval Hoods and Cutwater which are precisely described in McLean's write up. I guess it depends on how faithful you want to be to the authentic ship.
In the two years I spent with Rob evaluating everything to do with Glory's Hull, I did comparisons of a few other McKay clippers. What I learned is that Flying Cloud had the most aggressive prow of any of the rakish Clippers he built. I will follow your build with enthusiasm.
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2021
- Messages
- 2,363
- Points
- 488
Thanks. I'm aware of all the scale proportional dilemmas that I have already built into my model. A product of wrestling with a mashup of trying to reconcile disparate resources, none of which are entirely compatible with the other. Bluejacket plans, A,J. Fisher plans, Mamoli plans (none of which show the naval hood) Mamoli hull, using the Mamoli figurehead as a proportional basis for my carving, failure to consult the available resources, over reliance on my eyeball. I looked at Scott Bradner's model today. He left off the bowsprit, jibboom and naval hoods. The arrangement of and specific items of deck funiture differ in all the plans I have. BlueJacket still produces and I bought their figurehead. Proportions are better but it's not very pleasing aesthetically. So that's where I'm at. Do I have a pleasingly aesthetic folk model in the end, declare victory and move on. Or do I make a hash of it trying to whack away at what I've got trying to force a size 9 foot into a size3 glass slipper?
One thing is a given in any artistic endeavor. There's always someone who knows more, is a better craftsman and will create the definitive model (painting, sculpture, symphony, fill in the blank) no matter how hard you try. Just following any number of artists on this forum is an,eeeeeeeeeeee, painful exercise in humility.
I knew I was in trouble when you said you would share the above information with me to help me be " the very first person to properly model the famous Flying Cloud".
Well, I'm in no small way flattered that (despite what were already, in my estimation, insurmountable hurdles built into that objective) you saw that outcome as a possibility.
I appreciate your enthusiasm. I'll do the best I can with what I've got. I look forward to your continued interest and encouragement.
Pete
One thing is a given in any artistic endeavor. There's always someone who knows more, is a better craftsman and will create the definitive model (painting, sculpture, symphony, fill in the blank) no matter how hard you try. Just following any number of artists on this forum is an,eeeeeeeeeeee, painful exercise in humility.
Well, I'm in no small way flattered that (despite what were already, in my estimation, insurmountable hurdles built into that objective) you saw that outcome as a possibility.
I appreciate your enthusiasm. I'll do the best I can with what I've got. I look forward to your continued interest and encouragement.
Pete
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2021
- Messages
- 2,363
- Points
- 488
YIKES! I have NO idea how all that whole post got crossed out!!!
Ignore it if you can. Computer gremlins, no doubt!
Maybe Jim or some other expert knows how to fix it.
Ignore it if you can. Computer gremlins, no doubt!
Maybe Jim or some other expert knows how to fix it.
- Joined
- May 21, 2023
- Messages
- 358
- Points
- 168
Pete,
After carefully studying the very grainy specific details supplied directly to Duncan McLean by Donald McKay's shipyard for years, I've come to the shocking conclusion that none, not one of today's commercially produced McKay clippers are true to the actual vessels as historically described. Here are verbatim excerpts from The Boston Daily Atlas, April 25, 1851 describing not only the unique McKay bow construction but also the rugged nature of these important nautical devices: ..."She has neither head nor trail boards, but forming the extreme, where the line of the planksheer and the carved work on the naval hoods terminate, she has the full figure of an angel on the wing, with a trumpet raised to her mouth"... (italics to emphasize terms)
Later on Duncal McLean describes the importance of the innovative McKay Bow design ..."Her hood ends are bolted alternately from either side, through each other and the stem, so that the loss of her cutwater would not affect her safety or cause a leak."...
Honestly, Rob and I have come to the conclusion that Donald McKay's jealous protection of his inventive bow design led to it having been lost for centuries. We rediscovered it from remarkable photos of these exact nautical devices, still in use in 1869, eighteen years later! Only due to Glory of the Seas lasting so long did we get a chance to actually see how these three components: stem, cutwater and naval hoods combined to form a practically indestructible bow. In fact a steamer accidentally collided with McKay's last clipper and hit her bow. Damage was minimal, it can be seen on the starboard fancy rail which has cracks in it.
What you do with this information is up to you but I thought the modeling community would appreciate finally knowing the historically factual truth.
After carefully studying the very grainy specific details supplied directly to Duncan McLean by Donald McKay's shipyard for years, I've come to the shocking conclusion that none, not one of today's commercially produced McKay clippers are true to the actual vessels as historically described. Here are verbatim excerpts from The Boston Daily Atlas, April 25, 1851 describing not only the unique McKay bow construction but also the rugged nature of these important nautical devices: ..."She has neither head nor trail boards, but forming the extreme, where the line of the planksheer and the carved work on the naval hoods terminate, she has the full figure of an angel on the wing, with a trumpet raised to her mouth"... (italics to emphasize terms)
Later on Duncal McLean describes the importance of the innovative McKay Bow design ..."Her hood ends are bolted alternately from either side, through each other and the stem, so that the loss of her cutwater would not affect her safety or cause a leak."...
Honestly, Rob and I have come to the conclusion that Donald McKay's jealous protection of his inventive bow design led to it having been lost for centuries. We rediscovered it from remarkable photos of these exact nautical devices, still in use in 1869, eighteen years later! Only due to Glory of the Seas lasting so long did we get a chance to actually see how these three components: stem, cutwater and naval hoods combined to form a practically indestructible bow. In fact a steamer accidentally collided with McKay's last clipper and hit her bow. Damage was minimal, it can be seen on the starboard fancy rail which has cracks in it.
What you do with this information is up to you but I thought the modeling community would appreciate finally knowing the historically factual truth.
You can fix it Peter. On the bottom of that post you will find an 'edit' button - and then if you click on the three vertical dots next to the paint palate (upper left corner of the box containing the post) you will find a strike-through option...highlight your text and 'un-strike-through'.YIKES! I have NO idea how all that whole post got crossed out!!!
Ignore it if you can. Computer gremlins, no doubt!
Maybe Jim or some other expert knows how to fix it.
Hope this makes sense.
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2021
- Messages
- 2,363
- Points
- 488
When the great portrait artist John Singer Sargent was asked "What is the definition of a portrait?" he replied, " A portrait is a picture of a person with a little something wrong around the eyes." These kits give just you enough to get in trouble sometimes.
So maybe I can put the angel, bowsprit and jibboom on a diet, raise the bowsprit assembly a little and finagle enough space to properly fit at least the upper naval hood and do justice to McKay's genius for making a uniquely sturdy bow. Won't be perfect, mind you, but perhaps there's enough wiggle room for improvement. Hopefully without allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good. The whole project has too many flaws built in already for that.
Sounds like the figurehead itself may actually have contributed to the structural integrity of the bow! Pretty clever guy, old Donlad Mckay!
I did do a portrait of the old man about a year ago. It's on this forum somewhere.
I hope your confidence is not misplaced. I consider myself nudged. No promises.
Pete
So maybe I can put the angel, bowsprit and jibboom on a diet, raise the bowsprit assembly a little and finagle enough space to properly fit at least the upper naval hood and do justice to McKay's genius for making a uniquely sturdy bow. Won't be perfect, mind you, but perhaps there's enough wiggle room for improvement. Hopefully without allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good. The whole project has too many flaws built in already for that.
Sounds like the figurehead itself may actually have contributed to the structural integrity of the bow! Pretty clever guy, old Donlad Mckay!
I did do a portrait of the old man about a year ago. It's on this forum somewhere.
I hope your confidence is not misplaced. I consider myself nudged. No promises.
Pete
Last edited: