The Great Republic 1:48

[Norgale]

They may be the same plans that are in Crothers book but I don't know that for sure. The page I have says the scale is "full size" What the heck does that mean? It could be anything. I'm hoping to get the rigging plan and the deck plan from this. So how are you doing? Summer is here and it's up to the 90's now. Time for me to hibernate in the hobby room. Ha!

 

[Norgale]

Hey Ya'll! How's everybody doing? Hope you're having a nice Memorial Day weekend and don't forget to fly the flag. Got some more work done on the Great Republic. I hve the masts built now and that was a chore. Ran into one problem with this "proportion" thing and that was the spanker boom. When I measeured for the spanker mast footing I didn't take into consideration the extended length of the top deck past the end of the keel without the rudder. So now when I'm building the boom, it's about 16 feet longer than the forty feet that the book says it should be. If I leave it at forty feet then the boom ends at the taff rail in the stern. If I build it by the proportional figure of 2/3rds of the boom is over the deck and 1/3 is out over the stern, then I have to add 16 scale feet to the boom length because the spanker mast is now forward of where it should be with the finished deck. The proportional figures were developed so that the ship would LOOK better and that's all. It does look much better with the longer boom but I don't have it attached yet. Need the jaws for where the boom meets the mast. However the proportional figures worked well with the top platform and the higher cross trees so I think the masts are coming out ok.My one mistake there was the pain over the whole Skysail mast when the middle section was supposed to stay natural wood color. So the middle section is now painted black on the fore,main and mizzen masts. Not too big a deal but a mistake never the less. The main mast stands right at six feet from the bottom of the keel.
I also worked on the deck cabins by adding siding to them in the clapboard style and windows and doors from Blue Jacket I only bought a few windows and doors to see how they look and they are fine. Need to get the rest now and see what other deck things I need too. Getting closer to starting with the rigging and I'll probably need to rope walk what I need for that. The shrouds will be a full 1/4" thick and the rest thinner. Thread just doesn't come in big enough diameters so I'll have to make them. That should be fun.Took some pics so hope you enjoy the GR. Pete

 

[Magic Mike]

Pete, the GR looks very nice and so does your work shop! Magic Mike

 

[GrantTyler]

Good morning Pete- what magic Mike said. Cheers Grant

 

[rwiederrich]

Moving along nicely. I too considered clapboarding the deckhouses...but upon further study, I opted on paneling the cabins. Following the practice I found on other McKay clippers. The deck houses look well proportioned as well. Tall masts.........aren't they?
Super progress......

Rob

 

[rwiederrich]

Pete, are the plans you are using found in this publication?

 

[rwiederrich]

One deck plan from the article.

Rob

 

[Norgale]

You guys are funny. I appreciate the GR compliment but my work shop need a little attention. All my Stuff is finally under one roof but I still can't find anything. Been looking for my soldering gear for three days now and I know it's there but where? An out side shed is in my future and then a lot of the Stuff will go away-into the shed.

 

[Norgale]

Rob; I don't think I'm using those plans but maybe I'm using the pictures if they are the same as in Crother's book. I'm looking for the rigging plans from that set. the rigging plans in Crother's book just aren't clear enough for me so I thought these from Mechanics mag would be clearer. The pics above will be very useful for completing the top dack. Thanks for posting them.Pete

 

[Norgale]

Rob,
Here's a Ten Pound Island Bookseller ad for an original McKay booklet retailing for $1,500.00. The illustration is authentic and matches exactly the one I shared.

View attachment 537518

View attachment 537521

View attachment 537522

Hi Rob' Just been rereading some of the posts on here and I wonder how you have determined that "the illustration is authentic" in the Ten Pound Island Booksller ad. Are you taking the bookseller's word for it or is there other proof? What other information is available in this pamphlet? I'm not doubting your word or Clipperfan's and thinking that there must be some way to make a decision on the rigging before and after the fire. Personally I'm leaning toward the Forbes rig with the single topsail but then I think I read where Forbes himself denied that his rig was used first on the GR. Its all pretty confusing for a newby on the subject. Pete

 

[rwiederrich]

Hi Rob' Just been rereading some of the posts on here and I wonder how you have determined that "the illustration is authentic" in the Ten Pound Island Booksller ad. Are you taking the bookseller's word for it or is there other proof? What other information is available in this pamphlet? I'm not doubting your word or Clipperfan's and thinking that there must be some way to make a decision on the rigging before and after the fire. Personally I'm leaning toward the Forbes rig with the single topsail but then I think I read where Forbes himself denied that his rig was used first on the GR. Its all pretty confusing for a newby on the subject. Pete

Pete. McKay wanted the most up to date rigging for the GR and when she was launched she was fitted with a modified Forbe’s topsail. He didn’t set the top mast abaft the main mast doubling as is found in the mechanics magazine. So Forbes was right , his design was not fully employed on the GR. But a modified version. Still a non fixed topsail yard that traveled up and down the top mast doubling. Unlike the Howes double topsail design with a fixed lower topsail. McKay was bridging the gap. Between a Forbe’s design and that of Howes. Which became standard practice after about 1853…ish. Duncan McClean claimed when GR was in New York she flew no higher than sky sails. On a single topsail rig, that is 5 sails. When she was re rigged with Howes rig, after the fire , She has 6 sails high. Main, L top, U top, topgallant, royal, and sky.

 

[Norgale]

Well it sure is a confusing mess I'd say. Guess I'll just go with five sails on each primary mast and hope that's accurate enough. I'm amazed ,that with all the hoopla and publicity that this ship created ,that there should be so many discrepancies on how she was rigged and nobody now knows for sure. it'll just have t be an educated guess.

 

[rwiederrich]

Well it sure is a confusing mess I'd say. Guess I'll just go with five sails on each primary mast and hope that's accurate enough. I'm amazed ,that with all the hoopla and publicity that this ship created ,that there should be so many discrepancies on how she was rigged and nobody now knows for sure. it'll just have t be an educated guess.

The best part of this, is that in many of her original etchings(No photos), she is depicted with 5 sails. Remembering that she didn't need these skysails (though she could have had a skysail on her main mast design)...because her original sail plan was enormous. The average main yard on most clippers of the time was 90ft....GR carried enormous 120ft main yards. Keeping the sail wind load as low to the hull as possible reduces damage to the most top sails and their supporting yards and rigging structures. Remember....GR was designed and built originally for the Australia trade. McKay built her to endure the brutal lower latitudes of the roaring 40's...where the winds and waves could reach staggering proportions.
Simply put, McKay altered the sail plan on GR mid stream, from Forbes original topmast abaft the main mast doubling to the more efficient design where the topsail road up and down the forward placed topsail mast.. Always looking for improvements to his designs. She was originally crewed with 130 men....but with the new Howes design installed after the fire....that number was reduced significantly.
As you can see from the etchings , paintings and Duncan McClean's first hand accounts, that I provided...I chose to rig her with 5 sails per yard. Since her masts were shortened over 20ft and her yards reduced in similar fashion...adding the 6th sail to each yard was Captain Palmer's solution to make up for the sever sail plan reduction. It was a choice I'm sure that was made to get her large hull moving in a clipper fashion. With all that said, I'm convinced she came into NY harbor with 5 yards...caught fire and burned...removing all real evidence.....And what we have is only what she looked like (With photographs) after she was rebuilt. THAT is what people remember. In researching(with any vessel of old), you, at times, have to glean from the slightest implications and even evaluate habits (Namely from McKay) that would suggest a course of action. You use what you know...to aid in discovering what you don't know. If an educated guess is all you have....than you have more than most.

Rob

 

[Norgale]

Tanks for that analysis Rob. It makes more sense when it's presented that way. I have given this a lot of thought and one thing keeps nagging me; As you say, she probably entered NYC harbor with five sails on each mast but she was under tow. In that case I'm thinking that she didn't need the skysails for the tow so they wern't there. If she had come down to NY under her own, there is plenty of room at the top of the masts for the skysail and even a moon sail to boot. Being under tow she didn't need them Would that be anything worth considering? Pete

 

[rwiederrich]

Tanks for that analysis Rob. It makes more sense when it's presented that way. I have given this a lot of thought and one thing keeps nagging me; As you say, she probably entered NYC harbor with five sails on each mast but she was under tow. In that case I'm thinking that she didn't need the skysails for the tow so they wern't there. If she had come down to NY under her own, there is plenty of room at the top of the masts for the skysail and even a moon sail to boot. Being under tow she didn't need them Would that be anything worth considering? Pete

Possibly. When considering her with a single topsail in illistrations with 6 sails...you're gonna have a problem. That means she will be flying a main course....a single topsail....a topgallant....a Royal...a kysail and a moon sail. She never flew moon sails. If you look at her photographs, you will see, she is running a main course....a L topsail...an U topsail...a topgallant...Royal and a skysail. 6 sails...just as we would expect after her rebuild. Just remember.....her sail area was much larger when she had single topsails and no moons as she eventually retained after the fire. She needed those sails to make her competative...do to her enormous size,
Note the early sailing card. Notice she has her weather deck railing. She only had that as originally designed. It burned up and her weather deck was removed, and a bulwark was added. She is flying 5 sails per mast. The photo, shows her with 6 yards and no railing. This was surely taken after the rebuild.

 

[rwiederrich]

Now get ready for some serious errors. Note this so called McKay sail plan drawing. It shows 6 sails on the fore and main masts , it shows the long lower mast doublings of the Forbes single topsail design....for a single movable topsail. Here are the errors. One,...if this is supposed to be a McKay drawing...why did he draw her without the weatherdeck railing....a main feature of her design? Why did he draw her with Howes double topsails...before they were ever employed on a McKay vessel? Did he prophesy she would be altered? If this drawing is to represent her after the fire(Cuz there are no railings) ... she's now sporting the Howes double topsail design(Kinda) with the lower topsail also movable, it appears.(Not fixed to the mast cap)...then McKay could not have drawn it.
This drawing literally mixes and matches features only found on the original and adds some features only found on the rebuild (Like a forecastle splash rail) and Howes double topsails.

To me, this drawing is so unreliable and represents neither the original....nor the rebuild.

Rob

 

[rwiederrich]

Personally, I think this image of GR is the most accurate...despite she is flying a moon sail on the main mast(Though that has not really been made conclusive either way). Everything else about this image points to her original configuration. She's just beautiful.

 

[rwiederrich]

This is the painting I used as a model for my GR. I think this represent GR the closest for modeling with sails set.

 

[rwiederrich]

OK...after rattling this subject around in my brain for what seams like years....I would like to point out an area of misunderstanding...most have, concerning the double topsail configuration. To begin with...prior to 1853 the double topsail issue had been partially tackled by Forbes...in or around 1844. Up to that point, The large single topsail was standard on clippers. The topsails root was just under the topmast topgallant mast doubling. The sail would be lowered about half way down the mast to reduce its area...causing the topsail to be double reefed....permitting the topsail to flop over the main course. Forbes idea was to split the topsail and have both the Upper and lower portions to be lowered separately. The image above shows the GR having the Forbes extra long main mast doubling...so the lower topsail could run down the topmast doubling. Remember the topsail proper is both sails....because the old designed topsail went from topmast doubling to main mast doubling.
Now if we count the sails in the above image...we count...the main course, the split double topsail, a topgallant and a royal. That's it.

Since this image is of GR when she was first build...due to the main rail present...we can conclude the topsails are of a modified Forbes design....which matches Duncan McClean's description. Again...in this image GR has no higher sail then Royals, on all masts.

The confusion comes...when GR was converted to the now more modern Howes design(after 1853)...which spit the topsail into the upper and lower topsails(Like Forbes...but). Difference is that Howes made fast the lower via an iron crane mounted to the lower mast top....preventing its movement. You then reduced the upper topsail by simply lowering it to the lower. At this time, in her modification, came the addition of a skysail...making 6 sails per mast.

Knowing the evolution and time frame of GR's course of modifications....you can properly interpret the different images and paintings we see her rigging represented differently in. This process, helps eliminate as much error that has been falsely introduced over time.

I hope this analysis helps.