The Schooner Bluenose Plans discrepancies - which is most accurate?

[Peter Voogt]

A invitation to Mr. M. Tocco @massimotocco .
As a noted in --> this post <-- in the build-log of Bill, I got the idea "That have I read and seen before".
And as a amateur model builder, I’m not used to immediately switching to the informal 'Dear Massimo' when first contacting a professional model builder.
You introduced yourself in --> this post <-- as building a commissioned build of the BN-II in the Group Build Area for the YuanQing build of the 'original 1912' BN. A further discussion ensued in that thread. Later, an invitation was also extended to continue the discussion in this BN Main Support Area. Although it was started for the YQ PoF kit, later on we also discussed the BN-II and other manufacturers.

Your tekst and photo shote was almost the same as in this build-log's:
--> Build-log bij Nomad <--
--> Build-log by Pierro <--
And you got here the --> Invitation <-- and --> Invitation <-- here.

That is why I am extremely curious to hear more about the reasoning behind what you have already written three times. Is it because, as a professional builder, you feel unheard—thinking, "They just keep building models of the BN that aren't accurate"?
But in many of the build-logs we already indicate that for us it is also a 'Artistic-Lysence (AL) and Free-Interpretation (FI). So, we build with the help of AL-FI. And the 'studies' from H. Chapelle, L.B. Jenson, B. Langford and P.F. Eisnor are also for a great deal 'interpretation'. With all their differences from one another.
I’m not a moderator either. But ever since the start of the YQ-BN Group Build, I’ve been trying to collect everything posted about the construction of a BN.
And made also the --> BN-List <-- to made a overview off all the BN's here on the SoS.

At 1st I have 2 question about your model, shown in your pictures:
1: Why did you make the lanyards between the deadeyes so long that the upper deadeyes rise above the main boom?

On the BN-II in the harbor of Nova Scotia those deadeyes are much lower:


2: Why have you 'over-dimensioned' 'some' ropes? For instance on the Main Boom and Gaff:

Fore a 'commissioned' model I would have asked this question.

As a amature model maker for over 40 years I do also 'some' study when I started with a new model.
Also for my Bluenose I did also 'some' Literature and Photo study.
For the blocks and lines, I compared the necessary aspects between the studies of H. Chapelle, L.B. Jenson, B. Lankford and P.F. Eisnor.
And made a --> excel-sheet <-- See bottom post #1) with all the noted dimension of Mast/Booms/Gaff - Blocks and Lines.

Hoping for a response from you of anyone,
Regards, Peter

 

[Heinrich]

@Peter Voogt Peter, I have to agree with you. I fail to see the point of comparing two distinctly different ship models to one another. The original Bluenose as built by you and most of the members in the Bluenose Group Build cannot and should not be compared to Bluenose II. I appreciate that @massimotocco has done his research on Bluenose II but fail to see how this has anything to do with or how it places it in a superior category over the original Bluenose models - each with its own research behind it. I cannot imagine that anyone could have researched the original Bluenose in more detail than you have. Certainly, if I compare the two models base on complexity, interior detail, rigging and overall appearance, I have no doubt as to where my vote will go ...

 

[Peter Voogt]

@Peter Voogt Peter, I have to agree with you. I fail to see the point of comparing two distinctly different ship models to one another. The original Bluenose as built by you and most of the members in the Bluenose Group Build cannot and should not be compared to Bluenose II. I appreciate that @massimotocco has done his research on Bluenose II but fail to see how this has anything to do with or how it places it in a superior category over the original Bluenose models - each with its own research behind it. I cannot imagine that anyone could have researched the original Bluenose in more detail than you have. Certainly, if I compare the two models base on complexity, interior detail, rigging and overall appearance, I have no doubt as to where my vote will go ...

Thanks for your response, Heinrich. Of course I appreciate your compliments, but for me it's not about what is good, better, or best. It is about the way you communicate and the intention behind what you are building and write about it. And if you claim to have built something correct and post about it, you’re entitled to have an opinion on it. Not to mention that a dedicated build log of your own build allows you to articulate your views better and remain open to feedback.
Regards, Peter

 

[TexBilly]

Thanks for your response, Heinrich. Of course I appreciate your compliments, but for me it's not about what is good, better, or best. It is about the way you communicate and the intention behind what you are building and write about it. And if you claim to have built something correct and post about it, you’re entitled to have an opinion on it. Not to mention that a dedicated build log of your own build allows you to articulate your views better and remain open to feedback.
Regards, Peter

Thanks, Peter. What I enjoy most about forums like SOS is the knowledge other members bring to the table, especially through build logs. This is especially valuable for someone very new like me. We may not always agree on other members' suggested styles, methods or even "what's accurate" but these bits of feedback all add to our library of knowledge. When no value is presented, how does it benefit anyone?

 

[Peter Voogt]

Thanks, Peter. What I enjoy most about forums like SOS is the knowledge other members bring to the table, especially through build logs. This is especially valuable for someone very new like me. We may not always agree on other members' suggested styles, methods or even "what's accurate" but these bits of feedback all add to our library of knowledge. When no value is presented, how does it benefit anyone?

Thanks for your reply, Bill. It’s also my opinion that we are here on this SoS for each other. To help, learn, educate etc. And of course you may show your results.
And posting just for the posting …….. indeed, what’s te value.
Of course, it's not about ‘reaching the top’ but enjoying ‘the journey to the top’. But once you're ‘at the top’, you're allowed to enjoy the view. And others are welcome to enjoy it too, as long as it's not about jealousy.
Regards, Peter

 

[Roger Pellett]

Just happened on to this. The original post involved building a model of the ORIGINAL Bluenose and discussed use of drawings for Bluenose II as a reference. Bluenose II is claimed by her promoters to be an exact replica of the original because drawings made to build her were based on the original vessel’s half model.

It is possible that the half model does not represent the original Bluenose as built since designs were often changed on the mold loft floor once her designer was able to see her lines laid down full size. Designers sometimes then prepared a new table of offsets for a record of the as built hull. If that was done the new table of offsets, not the half model would be definitive.

Roger