Flying Cloud

built by

Donald McKay

launched

April 15, 1851

by Bruce M. Lane

Introduction to the web version

Bruce M. Lane developed this manuscript in the 1950s and 1960s. He deposited a copy in the Peabody Essex Museum Library in 1967.

I tracked Mr. Lane down in 2013 based on a footnote in Margaret Lyon and Flora Elizabeth Reynolds, The Flying Cloud and Her First Passengers. Via email he said that all of his Flying Cloud materials were packed into boxes in preparation for him selling his house but gave me permission to get a copy of the manuscript from the museum. But it turned out that museum policies limit the amount of material that can be copied from any one work to 10 pages at a time so obtaining a copy from the museum was infeasible. I did view the manuscript in the library reading room in August 2013 and found that it is now faded and fragile. I let Mr. Lane know this.

Two years later in July 2015 Mr. Lane contacted me to say that he had uncovered his copy of the manuscript and offered to send it to me so I could copy it. I took him up on his offer and scanned and OCRed the manuscript. I met with Mr. Lane in person in September 2015 and showed him some pages of the resulting material, edited to fix OCR errors and reformatted for better presentation. Mr. Lane gave me permission to post this copy of his manuscript. I have only included Mr. Lane’s original illustrations and those images where I found copies on the Internet that appeared to be out of copyright.

Mr. Lane told me that he had not found a copy of Henry Hall’s Notebooks for shipbuilding in the United States, 1881-1883 - Volume II, Models and Measurements when he wrote the manuscript so some of the information in the manuscript is incorrect.

This document is copyright © Bruce M. Lane 1967 and 2016.

Scott Bradner, May 2016

Table of Contents

I. Introduction........................................................................................................... 12

II. Clipper Ship Era.................................................................................................. 14

III. Donald Mckay.................................................................................................... 16

IV. History of the Flying Cloud.............................................................................. 26

V. Construction of the Flying Cloud.................................................................... 47

1. LAYING OFF.................................................................................................... 54

2. HULL CONSTRUCTION.............................................................................. 56

1 KEEL................................................................................................................... 56

2 SHOE.................................................................................................................. 61

3 MAIN KEELSON............................................................................................ 62

4 SISTER KEELSONS........................................................................................ 65

5 STEM, APRON, STERN TOST, INNER POST, DEADWOOD........... 66

6 SQUARE FRAMES.......................................................................................... 68

7 BULWARK STANCHIONS......................................................................... 73

8 CANT FRAMES............................................................................................... 75

9 KNIGHT HEADS............................................................................................ 76

10 HAWSE PIECES............................................................................................ 76

11 STERN FRAMING....................................................................................... 77

12 GARBOARDS................................................................................................ 78

13 BOTTOM PLANKING................................................................................ 80

14 WALES............................................................................................................. 84

15 PLANKSHEER.............................................................................................. 84

16 BULWARK PLANKING............................................................................. 86

17 MAIN RAIL.................................................................................................... 87

18 MONKEY RAIL............................................................................................. 88

19 FLOOR CEILING.......................................................................................... 89

20 LIMBER STRAKES....................................................................................... 90

21 BILGE KEELSONS....................................................................................... 90

22. HOLD CEILING.......................................................................................... 91

23 HOLD STRNGER......................................................................................... 92

24 LOWER DECK BEAMS............................................................................... 93

25 BETWEEN DECK WATERWAYS............................................................ 94

26 BETWEEN DECK CEILING...................................................................... 97

27 UPPER DECK CLAMPS.............................................................................. 97

28 UPPER DECK BEAMS................................................................................. 97

29 UPPER DECK WATERWAYS................................................................... 98

30 DECK FRAMING.......................................................................................... 99

31 HATCHES.................................................................................................... 101

32 MAST HOLES.............................................................................................. 102

33 SKYLIGHTS................................................................................................. 102

34 BITTS.............................................................................................................. 103

35 DECK PLANKING..................................................................................... 105

36 KNEES........................................................................................................... 107

37 HOLD STANCHIONS.............................................................................. 110

38 BETWEEN DECK STANCHIONS......................................................... 111

39 POINTERS AND HOOKS........................................................................ 111

40 HULL ORNAMENTAL WORK............................................................. 113

41 FIGUREHEAD............................................................................................ 113

42 PAINTING................................................................................................... 114

3. DECK ACCOMODATIONS....................................................................... 115

1 CONSTRUCTION........................................................................................ 115

2 TOPGALLANT FORECASTLE................................................................. 116

3 DECK HOUSE................................................................................................ 119

4 POOP DECK AND AFTER CABIN......................................................... 122

5 CABIN ORNAMENTAL WORK.............................................................. 128

4. FITTINGS, ETC.............................................................................................. 131

1 RUDDER......................................................................................................... 131

2 BOATS.............................................................................................................. 133

3 GROUND TACKLE...................................................................................... 138

4 CAPSTANS..................................................................................................... 142

5 STEERING APPARATUS.......................................................................... 144

6 PUMPS............................................................................................................. 145

7 WINDLASS.................................................................................................... 146

8 BINNACLE..................................................................................................... 147

9 WATER CASKS............................................................................................. 147

10 LIGHTS......................................................................................................... 147

11 VENTILATORS........................................................................................... 148

12 AIR PORTS................................................................................................... 148

13 SCUPPERS.................................................................................................... 149

14 HAWSE HOLES.......................................................................................... 149

15 CHAIN STOPPERS.................................................................................... 150

16 LIGHTNING CONDUCTORS............................................................... 151

17 CATHEADS................................................................................................. 151

18 CHANNELS................................................................................................. 152

19 LADDERS..................................................................................................... 153

20 GANGWAY................................................................................................. 153

21 FIRE BUCKETS........................................................................................... 153

22 COMPANIONS........................................................................................... 154

25 CABIN WINDOWS................................................................................... 154

24 SALTING...................................................................................................... 154

25 CHAINS LOCKERS................................................................................... 154

26 WATER TANK............................................................................................ 154

27 SHEATHING............................................................................................... 157

5. DEFINITIONS............................................................................................... 160

6. SPARS............................................................................................................... 164

1 MASTS............................................................................................................. 166

2 YARDS............................................................................................................. 170

3 BOWSPRIT..................................................................................................... 171

4 JIB BOOM........................................................................................................ 172

5 FLYING JIB BOOM...................................................................................... 172

6 DOLPHIN STRIKER.................................................................................... 172

7 SPANKER (DRIVER) BOOM..................................................................... 173

8 SPANKER GAFF........................................................................................... 173

9 MAIN SPENCER GAFF.............................................................................. 174

10 STUDDING SAIL BOOMS & YARDS.................................................. 174

7. RIGGING........................................................................................................ 176

1 STANDING RIGGING............................................................................... 176

2 RUNNING RIGGING................................................................................. 183

3 BELAYING PINS.......................................................................................... 187

4 BLOCKS........................................................................................................... 187

5 FLAGS.............................................................................................................. 187

VI Model of the Flying Cloud.................................................................................. 198

VII Bibliography....................................................................................................... 203

Appendix I – Paintings and Plans...................................................................... 205

Appendix II – Revisions and Additions........................................................... 206

List of Figures

Figure 1 - Matthew Fontaine Maury...................................................................... 15

Figure 2 - Donald McKay at the age of 20............................................................ 17

Figure 3 - Donald McKay at the age of 54............................................................ 18

Figure 4A - Maps of East Boston 1851, 1856....................................................... 19

Figure 5 - Front (North East) side of monument................................................ 23

Figure 6 - Back (South West) side of monument................................................ 23

Figure 8 - Left (North West) side of monument................................................. 24

Figure 7 - Donald McKay monument................................................................... 24

Figure 9 - Right (South East) side of the monument......................................... 25

Figure 10 - Launch of the Flying Cloud, April 15th, 1851................................ 28

Figure 11 - Map of East River Waterfront, New York....................................... 29

Figure 12 - Loading of the Flying Cloud................................................................ 29

Figure 13 - Boston Daily Atlas Report of the New Clipper Ship Flying Cloud 31

Figure 14 – Record of Stevedore Service for Flying Cloud while in San Francisco 35

Figure 15 - Captain Josiah Perkins Cressy.......................................................... 36

Figure 16 – Sailing Card of the Flying Cloud....................................................... 37

Figure 17 - Code Flags for Flying Cloud - 2636................................................... 38

Figure 18 - "Scientific American" article - February 13, 1858........................... 39

Figure 19 - Captain Alexander Winsor................................................................ 40

Figure 20 - Map of the World................................................................................... 46

Figure 21 - "Key locked scarf".................................................................................. 58

Figure 22 - "Key locked scarf" Chariot of Fame & Great Republic.................... 58

Figure 23 - Flying Cloud keel scarfs........................................................................ 59

Figure 24 - Rabbet....................................................................................................... 61

Figure 25 - Keelson Arrangements........................................................................ 62

Figure 26 - A Clinch Ring......................................................................................... 64

Figure 27 - Keelson Fastening Arrangement...................................................... 65

Figure 28 - Molding of midship frame - Champion of the Seas....................... 70

Figure 29 - Molding of midship frame - Charriot of Fame............................... 71

Figure 30 - Molding of midship frame - Great Republic.................................. 71

Figure 31 - Molding of midship frame- Flying Cloud....................................... 71

Figure 32 - Dimensions of Garboards and Thick Bottom Planking............ 81

Figure 33 - Planksheer and Rail Molding............................................................ 86

Figure 34 - Topgallant Forecasstle....................................................................... 118

Figure 35 - Topgallant Water Closets................................................................. 119

Figure 36 - Galley Range........................................................................................ 121

Figure 37 - Cross Section of Poop Deck Cabin................................................. 123

Figure 38 - Deck Cabin............................................................................................ 123

Figure 39 - Aft Cabins.............................................................................................. 124

Figure 40 - Forward Cabin..................................................................................... 125

Figure 41 - State Room Arrangements............................................................... 128

Figure 42 - Flying Cloud After Cabins................................................................. 128

Figure 43 - Stag Hound After Cabin...................................................................... 130

Figure 44 - Rudder.................................................................................................... 131

Figure 45 - Principal Dimensions of Launches & Cutters............................ 135

Figure 46 - Lines of a 28 foot Cutter..................................................................... 135

Figure 47 - Sail Plan of 28 Foot Cutter................................................................ 136

Figure 48 - Sail Plan of 30 Foot Launch............................................................. 137

Figure 49 - Lines of 30 Foot Launch.................................................................... 137

Figure 50 - Size of Anchors for Launches and Cutters.................................. 138

Figure 51 - Weight of Anchors.............................................................................. 139

Figure 52 - Chain Size vs Anchor Weight......................................................... 140

Figure 53 - Fluke of Common Anchor................................................................ 141

Figure 54 - Anchors.................................................................................................. 142

Figure 55 - Fly Wheel Pump.................................................................................. 145

Figure 56 - Windless................................................................................................ 146

Figure 57 - Scuppers................................................................................................ 149

Figure 58 - Water Tank Foundation.................................................................... 156

Figure 59 - Probable Nail Arrangement in Yellow Metal Sheathing........ 159

Figure 60 - Sheathing Mallet and Punch........................................................... 160

Figure 61 - Fife Rail.................................................................................................. 170

Figure 62 - Stay Arrangement............................................................................... 178

Figure 63 - Shroud Diameter vs Deadeye Diameter....................................... 180

Figure 64 - Bowsprit Rigging................................................................................ 181

Figure 65 - Patent Truss.......................................................................................... 182

Figure 66 - Bulwark Fairlead................................................................................. 186

Figure 67 - Flags of the Flying Cloud.................................................................... 188

Figure 68 - Position of Reef Points....................................................................... 193

Figure 69 - Construction of Jibs............................................................................ 195

List of Tables

Table 1 - Paintings, Pictures, Models, Plans, and logs of the Flying Cloud 43

Table 2 - Ships Described in the Boston Daily Atlas........................................ 49

Table 3 - Table of Offsets........................................................................................... 55

Table 4 - Comparison of keels of McKay ships.................................................. 56

Table 5 - Lengths of Keel Scarfs.............................................................................. 59

Table 6 - Floor Timber Molding.............................................................................. 69

Table 7 - Size of "top timbers".................................................................................. 74

Table 8 - Dimensions of garboards........................................................................ 78

Table 9 - Mortise Arrangement............................................................................... 96

Table 10 – Knee Materials...................................................................................... 107

Table 11 - Hanging Knees - Size and Fastening.............................................. 108

Table 12 - Dimensions of Hold Stanchion........................................................ 110

Table 13 - Size of Between Deck Stanchions..................................................... 111

Table 14 - Deck House Accommodations......................................................... 121

Table 15 – Stateroom Passenger Accommodations....................................... 126

Table 16 - Lloyds Regulation for Ground Tackle............................................ 139

Table 17 - Capstan Material.................................................................................. 143

Table 18 - Number of Water Tanks and their Capacity................................ 155

Table 19 - Sheathing Requirements.................................................................... 159

Table 20- Number of Sheathing Nails per Pound.......................................... 160

Table 21 Dimensions of Masts and Yards........................................................ 165

Table 22 Taper of Masts......................................................................................... 167

Table 23 - Size of Top Stanchions for a Ship of the Line............................... 169

Table 24 - Diameter of Yards................................................................................. 170

Table 25 - Bowsprit Diameters............................................................................. 171

Table 26 - Jib-Boom Diameters............................................................................. 172

Table 27 - Dolphin Striker Diameters................................................................. 172

Table 28 - Whisker Boom Diameters.................................................................. 173

Table 29 - Spanker Boom Diameters................................................................... 173

Table 30 - Gaff Diameters....................................................................................... 174

Table 31 - Important Spar Dimensions of the Flying Cloud....................... 175

Table 32 Size of Standing Rigging...................................................................... 177

Table 33 - Location of Shrouds............................................................................. 179

Table 34 - Size of Chain for a Ship of 1000 Tones........................................... 185

Table 35 - Position of Reef Points......................................................................... 191

Table 36 - Sail Dimensions.................................................................................... 191

Table 37 - Location of Spanker Reefs (Ft)........................................................... 196

Table 38 - Sail Construction Details.................................................................... 198

I. Introduction

Although there have been several very successful attempts at presenting the history of the clipper ship era, most outstanding of which are Fairburn's "Merchant Sail" and Cutler's "Greyhounds of the Sea", it seems that no one has sought to compile the material facets of the ships which made the era, i.e. how a clipper ship was constructed. It was first thought that ships of the entire era could be considered, but shortly after commencing the investigation it was decided that an evaluation of this magnitude would be unwieldy, and it became apparent that only a single ship could be considered in detail.

The two outstanding builders of the time were William H. Webb of New York and Donald McKay of Boston. The choice between these two was one of expediency rather than any decision of relative stature. Much of the information required in a study such as this is local, and the time required to discover much of it necessitates being in close proximity to the source for an extended length of time. Living in Boston at the time it was therefore most expedient to be concerned with Donald McKay and his ships.

As the Flying Cloud is probably McKay's most famous ship, she was chosen as the most appropriate to investigate. In looking for the details of the Flying Cloud it was discovered that no one had compiled the known facts concerning this ship, or for that matter, any clipper ship. The author does not pretend to know anything about the Flying Cloud that others do not; however, this paper does attempt to assemble the known facts and presents reasonable assumptions where, the facts are unavailable. The paper has been completely referenced, not for the ease of reading (which is undoubtedly hindered) but so that the sources may be evaluated by those interested in so doing. Virtually every informative publication consulted has been listed in the Bibliography.

The plan of this book is to first present a short history of the era in order to provide the background and setting of the building of this ship. Section II is a biography of Donald McKay which gives a picture of the man who was responsible for the Flying Cloud, while the third- section is a history of the Flying Cloud. The fourth section is a detailed description of' the Flying Cloud; how she was built, what materials were used, what accommodations were provided, her rigging, sails, etc. This section has been the object of most of the time spent in this study since it is the subject generally not covered by others. The last sections present miscellaneous model information and large scale plans (½" = 1') of the Flying Cloud.

In doing any type of historical literature survey it is necessary to weigh the evidence gathered from different sources against the reputation and supposed knowledge of the author. Thus a reconstruction is based on what is believed to be the most reliable sources, filling in the unknowns as best as is possible. This method undoubtedly results in many inaccuracies, but the author knows of none better.

It is an odd quirk of societies that certain eras of history are disregarded until all of the people who lived at the time have passed on. Perhaps it is the fear of being contradicted by someone who "was there" and knows what happened; perhaps, as, long as people can remember an era there is no compulsion to write it down. Regardless of the cause, the effect is equally unsatisfactory. If this paper helps anyone in the future to trace this era a little better, then it has served its purpose.

II. Clipper Ship Era

Of the large number of accounts of merchant shipping during the period 1850 to 1860, William Fairburn's monumental six-volume work "Merchant Sail" is by far the most scholarly work. Cutler's "Greyhounds of the Sea" is excellent account, while Clark's "The Clipper Ship Era" has long been looked upon as the classic light account of the period. Since there are such excellent accounts of this period we feel it unnecessary to summarize them in more than a cursory manner

According to Robinson and Dow, the word "clipper" as applied to a fast vessel is supposed to have originated in the Pennsylvania-German word "klepper" meaning a fast horse. There is some question as to the actual dates of the clipper ship era, but it is evident that the extreme clipper ship was an economic success only between the years 1850 through 1854. Ships were built on clipper lines before 1850, and clippers were sailed after I854, but we have taken the word "era" to mean the period during which this certain type of ship was optimum for the existing conditions.

Although the so-called Baltimore clippers had been constructed for some time, these vessels were not ships in the strict sense of the word since they were often schooners and never had more than two masts. However, they were the forerunner of the future clippers, particularly in the form of the bow. The first ship of clipper form is generally regarded to be the Rainbow, a 750-ton vessel launched by Smith & Dimon of New York, in 1845. John Willis Griffiths designed this ship, and he can justifiably be called the originator of the clipper ship form.

For any change, there must be a cause and the clipper ship era came to America because gold was discovered in California. With the overwhelming demand for transporting people and goods to San Francisco, fast ships were a necessity. With inflationary gold dust in abundance, freight rates rose so high that the capacity of a ship became minor in importance; speed commanding the premium. Thus high speed, low capacity, ships like the Flying Cloud were built which, in any other period, would have been folly.

Because of the expense of operating these low tonnage Vessels, the first slight quiver in the economy relegated the extreme clipper to a historical rather than contemporary position. This quiver came with the slight recession of I854, which saw New York to San Francisco freight rates fall to one half their previous value. Although the events of I854 signaled the finish of the extreme clipper, it took the general depression of 1856-7 to end the extreme clipper era, with the medium clipper, a high capacity ship with fuller lines than the extreme clipper, taking its place.

The clipper era was outstanding in sailing history; it was a romantic period which will live on and be remembered for the sailing records that were set. Although much must be said for the shape of the clipper in setting these records, it was Lieutenant Matthew Fontaine Maury, U.S.N., a celebrated hydrographer, who made many of these records accomplished facts. He believed that it' was possible to make current and weather charts which ships could follow to reduce sailing times. He asked every ship's captain to fill in reports concerning the strength and direction of the wind and water currents, the temperature of the air and water, and any unusual weather which was observed. He compiled these into a four-volume work entitled "Sailing Directions", which if followed enabled days and sometimes weeks to be cut off the Cape Horn voyage.

With this brief outline we will leave a subject better covered else where, but this should provide some background for the following sections and should explain some of the events to be mentioned in Section IV.

Figure 1 - Matthew Fontaine Maury

III. Donald Mckay

Although not of primary importance to this study, a biographical sketch of Donald McKay has been included for the sake of completeness. Richard C. McKay has given us an excellent biography of his grandfather in "Some Famous Sailing Ships and their Builder Donald McKay" and much of the material presented in this paper has been drawn from his book. An even better source from which to obtain an insight into the true significance and accomplishments of the men of the clipper ship period is "Merchant Sail" which we have drawn upon heavily. This work evaluates the men and their deeds rather than being simply biographical.

Donald McKay was born in Shelburne, Nova Scotia, on September 4, 1810, His most famous ancestor, another Donald McKay, died at Tain, Ross County, Scotland, in 1395. His grandfather, also named Donald, was a British Army officer who emigrated to Nova Scotia after the close of the American Revolution, and his father, Hugh McKay, raised a family of seven sons and a number of daughters here. In 1826, when 16, Donald McKay traveled to New York, then the leading shipbuilding center of the United States, where he found employment as a day laborer in Isaac Webb's yard located along the East River between 5th and 7th Streets. On the 2lth day of March, 1827, Donald became "indentured" to Isaac Webb for a term of four years, six months, and eleven days, at a wage of $2.50 per week plus $40 per year. At the age of 21, Donald McKay had finished his apprenticeship; but by modern standards his wages were little indication of his increasing social status; at work 15 hours a day, he had one hour for breakfast and two hours for lunch for $1.25 a day. Webb agreed to release Donald before his indenture time was complete, whereupon he joined the firm of Brown & Bell of New York. In 1832, while still in the employ of Brown & Bell, McKay married Albenia Martha Boole, daughter of another East River shipbuilder, and on February 1, 1834, their first child, Cornelius Whitworth McKay was born. McKay's next job was with the Brooklyn Navy Yard at the suggestion of his friend Jacob Bell, but strong native American feelings prevalent at the time forced him to look elsewhere.

Mr. Jacob Pell then sent McKay to Wiscasset, Maine, to superintend the building of some ships for New York houses. While visiting Newburyport, he finished the U21 ton ship Delia Walker for John Currier, Jr., and it was here that McKay met the owner of this vessel, Dennis Condry, who was to play an important role in McKay's future.

In l84l McKay entered into partnership with William Currier, forming' the firm of Currier & McKay in Newburyport, Massachusetts, and moved his family from New York. However, after building three vessels the partnership was dissolved, models and moulds being divided with a saw. Next McKay joined with William Pickett, of Newburyport, to form the firm of McKay & Pickett. This firm built the packet ships St. George and John R. Skiddy during 1843-44. Upon the recommendation of Dennis Condry, Enoch Train, at the time leading shipping merchant of Boston, visited McKay and contracted for the 620 ton ship Joshua Bates, pioneer ship of Train's Liverpool line. The ship was completed during 1844, and at Train's request, and with his financial help (which McKay continued to receive off and on), Donald McKay, now age 34, moved to East Boston where he opened his own shipyard at the foot of Border Street. His first ship, the Washington Irving was launched on September 15, 1845. This yard produced ships until 1852.

After McKay became settled in East Boston, he brought his relatives around him to share his prosperity.

Figure 2 - Donald McKay at the age of 20

Figure 3 - Donald McKay at the age of 54

As far as these relatives are concerned, we have information on only four of his brothers and none of his sisters. Duncan McLean, in his description of the ship Barreda Brothers, mentions the fact that all seven of the "brothers McKay" were shipbuilders. Laughlin McKay, who had learned the shipbuilding trade also under Isaac Webb, was to be come known not as a shipbuilder, but as the captain of the clipper Sovereign of the Seas. Simon McKay is known ^BDA to have built the 350 ton ship Wildfire in 1853 and Hugh McKay built ^BDA the 750 ton ship Parreda brothers in l85h. The fourth and youngest brother was Nathaniel who evidently at some later time joined Donald in the last Boston shipyard and managed many of its affairs during the later years.

McKay as well as producing some of the most famous sailing vessels the world has known, devised new ways of "doing" things.1 He developed a saw which could be tilted while sawing, thereby enabling him to cut complicated twists and turns in a fraction of the time it would take to hew the timber by hand. His also was the first yard to use a crane rather than manpower to lift timbers into place.

In December, 1848, Donald's wife Albenia died after a brief illness.

Late in 1851 the city authorities notified McKay that the land at the foot of Rutaw Street^B113 occupied by his shipyard was to be taken over for an extension of Border Street, so he established himself a short distance north of the former yard on Border Street between Monmouth and White Streets (Figure 4A).

Figure 4A - Maps of East Boston 1851, 1856

1851 1856

In July 1852, the Sovereign of the Seas, the first product of this new yard was launched.

It was customary after the launching of a ship that McKay's friends would return to his house at 80 White Street in the Eagle Hall section of East Boston to celebrate the event. Although he had first lived on Princeton Street, he later moved to White Street and continued residence there until retirement. A picture of this house as it looked in 1928 is presented below.

Figure 4B Donald McKay’s house at 80 White Street in East Boston

It was with the Sovereign of the Seas that McKay entered mercantile as well as mechanic affairs. This ship, costing an estimated $95,000 was built with his own money, and for her first voyage he placed in command his brother Laughlin.

In June of 1853, Donald and his second wife, Mary Cressy Litchfield of East Boston, sailed aboard the Sovereign of the Seas for Liverpool. It was this wife who has been given credit as the originator of many of the names to McKay's ships.

During 1853 McKay was completing for his own account what he considered to be his greatest masterpiece‚ The Great Republic. This 4555 ton ship was launched October 4, 1853, and sent to New York. However, the ship was burned after being loaded, and being underinsured, McKay was almost ruined.

We have already seen that in 1854 there ceased to be a necessity for ships of great speed. The surplus of ships and the business depression which followed the California inflation saw New York to San Francisco freight rates drop to one-half, causing many ships to lay idle, while there was little incentive to build new ones. To aggravate the situation steamers began to offer serious competition to packets. James Baines, however, kept McKay going by ordering a number of ships for his Australian Black Ball Line. According to an article in the Boston Daily Atlas of December 18, l854, Baines paid about $80 per registered ton for these ships.

In 1854 Donald McKay made a determined effort to meet the decline in California trade by establishing his own line of European packets. How ever, only two ships, the Commodore Perry and the Great Tasmania (later known as the Japan) were put into this service and these were soon sold abroad. In February, 1855, McKay again went abroad in one of his ships, this time in the Donald McKay. However, for all his effort, in the autumn of 1856, McKay failed, along with many other Boston businessmen. Since sale of his assets would not have benefitted his creditors greatly, he was allowed to keep the yard. But from the end of 1856 through 1857 the yard lay idle, as did most of the ships already on the sea. Sometime in 1858, work was begun on the 1,097 ton ship Alhambra, remaining on the stocks over a year. This is significant when contrasted with the building of the Stag Hound, which reportedly required sixty days. During the next two years, McKay and his son, Cornelius, turned out only four schooners for Cape Cod fishermen.

This brings us to the Civil War and McKay's yard began to turn out monitors, iron clad gunboats, and various other craft. Since there was an unpredictable evolution of ship construction with the introduction of these "iron clads", contracts were written to provide for any changes necessitated by altered methods of warfare. However, reimbursement for the added expenses got mixed up in politics and it was not until long after McKay was dead that his claim was settled. Francis B. C. Bradlee, in his booklet, "The Ship Great Republic and Donald McKay, Her Builder", discusses McKay's efforts after the war to build iron ships, marine engines, and railroad locomotives, the business being carried on under the name of McKay & Aldus.

McKay made one last bid for the clipper ship when he built the Glory of the Seas in 1869 for his own account. It is known that this under taking hurt him financially, and it is partly because of this that in the same year the firm of McKay and Aldus sold out to the Atlantic Works. However, the launching of the Glory of the Seas has given us the only photograph yet discovered of McKay's shipyard. Mr. McKay is standing in the foreground, but unfortunately is back-to. At this time it was Nathaniel McKay who was the leading spirit of the firm. The yard must have been at least partly dismantled for we are told that the saw mentioned earlier was sold to a shipyard in Bath, Maine. There are, how ever, still records of McKay ships built after this time so that evidently McKay continued to work even though he no longer owned the yard. In l875 the McKay yard constructed the sloop o' War Essex, and the last job of the McKay yard was to repair the yacht America for General Benjamin F. Butler. Work on this ship was completed about June 15, 1875, providing a fitting end for this yard. It was in 1851, the year McKay became so famous as the builder of the Flying Cloud, that the America won a contest which was noted around the world‚ the first America Cup Race. Donald McKay retired to Hamilton, Massachusetts, where he died September 20, 1880. He lies buried in Oak Hill Cemetery in Newburyport, Massachusetts. We are told^T288 that McKay's second yard on Border Street was afterwards the site occupied by George McQuesten & Co., hard pine lumber dealers.

Although McKay was not a technical man, and found no new principal or theory of ship design (rather following Pook, Griffiths, and Webb), he did have an excellent feeling for the form of a ship. Boston and New York, as the two foremost shipbuilding centers of the 1850's, had considerable competitive feeling toward each other. McKay was adopted by Boston and his ships were publicized at the expense of those of the other Massachusetts builders, even though some of these builders are now considered to have produced better ships. Outstanding among those who whom history has slighted is Samuel Pook whose Red Jacket is considered by some to be the best clipper ship ever produced. New York acknowledged many builders of clipper ships, considering William H. Webb as outstanding, but adopted no one. Thus, we see why McKay is better known than other builders of clipper ships, and many say unjustly so, for he produced fast vessels but generally did not create ships that could make money in competitive trade under ordinary commercial conditions. The outstanding example of this was the Great Republic, which drew so much water it could have entered very few ports. McKay was a product of an age -- but an age so short lived hat he was lifted to its heights and broken by it, all in the course of only four years.

To commemorate this man, and the ships he built, a group of interested persons decided to erect a suitable monument. The 52-foot granite monument was erected in 1933 on the north side of Castle Island where it stands today (1958). The following pictures show the setting of this monument and the inscriptions on each side.

Figure 5 - Front (North East) side of monument

Figure 6 - Back (South West) side of monument

Figure 8 - Left (North West) side of monument

Figure 9 - Right (South East) side of the monument

IV. History of the Flying Cloud

The history of the Flying Cloud is perhaps not a necessary part of this study. However, what is included here is more than just history; it is the personality of a ship. Subsequent to the record making runs of McKay's Flying Cloud, the name became world famous, and was even the name of an early automobile. Although no attempt was made to discover all of the American vessels named Flying Cloud, six were found. In 1851 there was a 21 ton schooner built at Machiasport, Maine; in 1852 a 109 ton schooner/built at Bristol, Maine; also in 1852 a 350 ton bark was built in Williamsburg, New York; in 1851, a 190 ton brig built in Brewer, Maine; and in 1859 a 222 ton brig built in Biddeford, Maine; all were christened the "Flying Cloud". There was also a sloop named the Flying Cloud which was among the ships that tested the blockade of the Gulf ports during 1861-1865.

The following history has been compiled from many books; primarily from Fairburn, Howe & Matthews, McKay, American Neptune,' and the papers of S. Griffitts Morgan, the supercargo for Grinnell, Minturn & Co. in San Francisco whose papers are in the Harvard Business School. These papers evidently include all the crew advances, bills, bills of lading, invoices, freight lists, letters, etc. concerning the ship while in San Francisco.

The only appropriate starting point for a history of the Flying Cloud is with the man who first conceived the ship, George Francis Train, Jr., partner in Enoch Train & Co. In his biography he tells us of the early history of this ship in the following way.

When the gold fever was getting the country frantic, and everyone apparently wanted to go to California, I said to McKay, "I want a big ship, one that will be larger than the Ocean Monarch." McKay replied, "Two hundred tons bigger?" "No", said I, "I want a ship of 2000 tons." McKay was one of those men who merely ask what is needed. He said he would build the sort of ship I wanted. "I shall call her the Flying Cloud", I said.

The half-model of the Flying Cloud is no longer in existence. When Donald McKay retired, his models were moved from the East Boston yard and stored in his barn. It was after McKay's death in 1880 that his eldest son, Cornelius, discovered that, with the exception of the Stag Hound, all of the models had been used as firewood during a shortage of coal. Richard McKay claims that in 1869 Donald gave the model of the Great Republic to his daughter then living in Saxony. In 1928 Richard McKay had the only other original McKay model known to exist‚ the Glory of the Seas. Attempts to locate Richard McKay, last known to reside in Brooklyn, New York, have failed.

The construction of clipper ships was evidently of considerable interest to Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, and George Train claimed that Longfellow's poem‚ "The Building of the Ship"‚ was written in 1850 to commemorate the construction of the Flying Cloud, then on the stocks.

Although George Train desired a 2000 ton ship, when the Flying Cloud was designed she measured only 1782½ tons (most often recorded as 1782 but sometimes 1783).

While still on the stocks, Enoch Train & Co. sold the Flying Cloud to Grinnell, Minturn & Co. of New York. Details of this transaction are given by George Train.

Not only shipbuilders but the whole world was talking of the Flying Cloud. Her appearance in the world of commerce was a great historic event. No sooner was the Flying Cloud built than many shipowners wanted to buy her; among others the house of Grinnell, Minturn & Co. of the Swallow-Tail Line of Liverpool asked what we would take for her. I replied that I wanted $90,000 which meant a handsome profit. The answer came back immediately‚ "We will take her." We sent the vessel to New York under Captain Creesy while I went on by railway. There I closed the sale, and the proudest moment of my life, up to that time, was when I received a check from Moses H. Grinnell, the New York head of the house, for $90,000.

McKay²³⁸ reports that the Flying Cloud cost $50,000. The ship was launched April 15, 1851, the event being mentioned in the April 16 issues of the Boston Daily Atlas and the Boston Semi-Weekly Atlas. This undoubtedly much publicized event was also recorded in a woodcut (Figure 10).

Figure 10 - Launch of the Flying Cloud, April 15th, 1851

The ship was sent in tow of the tug Ajax to New York under command of Captain Josiah Perkins Creesy³⁷, having been born in Marblehead, Mass. in l814. Arriving April 28, it was turned over to Grinnell, Minturn & Co., to sail under their California line house flag where she remained for six years.

McKay¹⁴⁴ claims that Train & Co. had appointed Captain Creesy to command the Flying Cloud, but as he also enjoyed a high reputation in Now York, he was retained by Grinnell, Minturn & Co. The ship was insured with the Atlantic Mutual Insurance Co. of New York, holding an Al rating for her first four voyages. She was loaded at Pier 20, East River (See Figure 11). Figure 12 is a reproduction of a picture presented by McKay.

Figure 11 - Map of East River Waterfront, New York

Figure 12 - Loading of the Flying Cloud

The morning edition of the New York Herald of May 10, 1851, carried following story:

NEW CUPPER SHIP FLYING CLOUD‚ This beautiful specimen of naval architecture is now receiving her freight at the foot of Maiden Lane, preparatory to her departure on the 24th inst. for California and China. She is owned by Messrs. Grinnell, Minturn & Co., who also own the Sea Serpent, to which she in some respects bears a lone resemblance. The Flying Cloud is a very sharp vessel, and bids fair to take as good a voyage as any of her predecessors. She registers 1,782 tons, and is constructed mostly of white oak, and is copper-fastened throughout. She was built at East Boston, by Mr. Donald McKay.

The New York Commercial Advertiser of May 9, 1851, also carried a description of the Flying Cloud but it was essentially a copy of the Boston Daily Atlas report of April 25, 1851, given in Figure 13.

The Flying Cloud sailed from New York June 2, 1851, on her first voyage to San Francisco. This ship excelled in whole sail breezes (admittedly it was often bettered in light airs), and arrived in San Francisco August 31, 89 days and 21 hours from New York (anchor to anchor), a new record for the run. The abstract log of this voyage is reproduced in the Appendix. Once in San Francisco, most of the crew left for the gold fields, requiring that the voyage to China be made with only one steward, one ordinary seaman, and 18 seamen. The mate, who had been suspended from duty for cutting up rigging made plans to bring a suit against Creesy for damages. It might be of interest to include here a receipt for the various stevedore services rendered while in port. We also know that at this time the ship was painted outside by Lilly & Davis for a "fee of $90.00" (See Figure l4). The Flying Cloud left San Francisco October 20th, arriving in Hong Kong December 5, 1851.

It was on the return trip from Whampoa (Hong Kong) (sailed January 6, 1852) to New York that Captain Creesy had the rare opportunity of reading his own obituary. In exchanging food for New York newspapers with a ship outward bound, he found reports that he had died on the second day out of San Francisco. This announcement was advantageous inasmuch as it induced his late mate's sea lawyer to drop his proceedings. It was said later that this was an intentional rumor started by Creesy‚ probably a very valid assumption. McKay¹⁵¹ says that Grinnell, Minturn & Co. had the log of this voyage printed in gold upon white silk for distribution among their friends, although none of these was discovered during this study. When in New York, at Captain Creesy's insistence, the Flying Cloud's fore and main masts and spars were replaced, the yards on the foremast being made the same dimensions as those on the main, thereby increasing her sail area slightly. She was also fitted with new rigging.

The second voyage of the Flying Cloud began May 14, 1852, under the command of Captain Creesy; she arrived in San Francisco September 10th. It was on the first leg of this trip that the N. B. Palmer, under Captain Charles P. Low, having left New York eight days after Creesy, caught up with the Flying Cloud being 40 days out. Creesy was extremely impolite to Low but the truth is Crersy depended more on his luck than he did on Maury's sailing directions and often went off the recommended track searching for wind. However, Low had a mutinous crew and subsequent to the meeting was forced to put into Valparaiso, arriving in San Francisco a full three weeks behind Creesy. On April 28, 1853, the Flying Cloud left New York on her third voyage, again under Captain Creesy. It was on this occasion that the Flying Cloud was beaten by the Hornet. The vessels were in company off Sandy Hook, the Flying Cloud was seven days ahead at the Horn, but Creesy again discarded Maury's sailing directions on the latter part of this voyage and arrived in San Francisco only to see the Hornet at anchor. He was so aware of his misjudgment that he refused to turn over his complete log to Lieutenant Maury. Thus only the run from New York to the Atlantic equator, where he knew he had soundly beaten the Hornet is available today. Creesy was not a humble man.

Figure 13 - Boston Daily Atlas Report of the New Clipper Ship Flying Cloud

The New Clipper Ship Flying Cloud, of New York.

If great length, sharpness of ends, with proportionate breadth and depth, conduce to speed, the Flying Cloud must be uncommonly swift, for in all these she is great. Her length on the keel is 208 feet, on deck 225, and overall, from the knight heads to the taffrail, 235 -- extreme breadth of beam 41 feet, depth of hold 21½, including 7 feet 8 inches height of between-decks, and she will register about 1750 tons. Her keel is of rock maple, in three depths, sided 16 inches, and moulded 44 or 37 inches clear of the garboards; dead rise at half-floor 30 inches, rounding of sides 6 inches, and sheer about 3 feet.

Her bow, below the planksheer, is slightly concave, and at the load displacement line may be about 2 inches concave from a straight line. As it rises, however, the lines are gradually modified until they assume the convex, to correspond with her outline on the rail. At eighteen feet from the apron, inside, on the level of the between-decks, she is only eleven feet wide. She has the sharpest bow we ever saw on any ship, although she is ten inches fuller on the floor than most of the other large clippers which have been built here.

She has neither head nor trail boards, but forming the extreme, where the line of the planksheer and the carved work on the navel hoods terminate, she has the full figure of an angel on the wing, with a trumpet raised to her mouth. The figure is finely designed and exceedingly well executed, and is a beautiful finish to the bow. It is the work of Mr. Gleason, who made the figure-head of the Shooting Star.

Her name in gilded letters is let into the curve of her bow, between the mouldings of the rails; and it also ornaments the quarters.

Her great length and boldly defined sheer, give her a splendid appearance broadside on. Her lines aft are fuller than those forward; and her stern, which is elliptical, is small and neat, and is formed from the line of the planksheer. Her name and port of hail are carved and gilded upon it, surrounded by finely designed ornamental work. In her general outline, she bears some resemblance to the Stag Hound, but though her bow is somewhat sharper, yet she is 10 inches fuller on the floor than that splendid ship.

Her bulwarks are 5 feet high from the deck, or rather her main rail is that height, surmounted by a monkey rail of 16 inches.

She has a topgallant forecastle 30 feet long amidships, fitted for the accommodation of one watch of her crew, and in its after wings are two water closets. Abaft from the foremast is a house 41 feet long by 18 wide, and 6½ high, which contains quarters for the other watch of the crew; also the galley, and other apartments. Her poop deck is the height of the main rail, 68 feet long, and is surrounded by an open rail supported on turned stanchions. In the front of the poop is a small portico, which protects the entrance to the cabins, of which she has three. The first contains the pantry and state-rooms for the officers, and the second, or great cabin, is beautifully wainscotted with satin wood, mahogany and rose wood, set off with enamelled pilasters, cornices, gilt work, etc. The panels are of satin wood, gothic in their form, and are set in mahogany frames edged with rose wood. The after cabin is small, and is fitted in the same beautiful style. It contains two useful apartments, and is otherwise neatly arranged.

A few particulars of the style of her construction will show that she is a very strong vessel. We have already stated that her keel was in three depths, moulded 44, and sided 16 inches; her floor timbers average 12 by 17 on the keel, and are bolted in the usual style with 1¼ inch copper and iron, and she has 3 depths of midship keelsons, which combined are moulded 45 inches, and sided from 17 to 15, making her nearly 9 feet through the backbone. She has also two depths of sister keelsons, the first 16 by 10, and the second 14 by 10, cross bolted at right angles and diagonally, through the navel timbers. The ceiling on the floor is 4½ inches thick, square bolted, and on the bilge she has two keelsons, each 10 by 16 inches, which extended the whole length of the vessel. She has also a stringer of 10 by 16 inches, upon which the lower ends of the hanging knees rest, and all the other ceiling in the hold is 7 inches thick, all scarphed and square fastened. Her lower deck beams are 15 inches square, and those under the upper deck 9½ by 16 inches amidships. The hold stanchions are clasped with iron above and below, and are also kneed to the beams and to the keelson. Her ends are almost filled with long pointers and hooks, some of the pointers extending over 40 feet along the skin. Her chain lockers are in the hold abaft the foremast, and abaft the mainmast she has a large iron tank for water.

The hanging and lodging knees connected with the beams of both decks are very stout and closely fastened.

The between-decks waterways are 15 inches square, the strake inside of them 10 by 14, and that over them 10 by 16, bolted in superior style. Under the upper deck beams she has a clamp 7 inches thick; the rest of the ceiling between it and the standing strake over the waterways is 5½ inches thick. She has a long and stout hook forward, and the thick work aft is carried round the stern. The stanchions are of oak, turned, and are secured with iron rods, screws and nuts, and the deck planking is of hard pine, 3½ inches thick. Her comings and mast partners are well kneed off, and securely bolted.

The upper deck waterways are 12 by 14 inches, with two thick strakes inside of them; the deck planking is of white pine 3½ inches thick, and the covering board is 6 by 16 inches. Her bulwark stanchions are of oak, and between the main and rack rails there is a stout clamp, with extends fore and aft. The main rail is 6 by 16 inches.

Her garboards are 7 inches thick, the next strake 6, the third 5, and the rest of the planking on the bottom 4½ inches. Her wales, of which she has 18 strakes, are 5½ by 7 inches, and she is planked up flush to the planksheer. The boarding of her bulwarks is neatly tongued and grooved, and altogether, both inside and out, she is most beautifully finished. Her sides are as smooth as glass, and every moulding and line is carried out with mathematical precision. Outside she is black -- inside, pearl color.

Her frame is mostly of superior white oak, and her scantling of southern pine; she is strongly copper fastened, has many locust treenails in her, driven through and wedged in both ends, and her iron fastening is of the best kind. 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. The same is true of her aft, so far as the bolting is concerned.

She is seasoned with salt, has air ports below, brass ventilators along the line of her planksheer and in her bitts, and Emerson's patent ventilators indispensable, for every class of ships, but more particularly for packets, and those trading to warm climates.

The Flying Cloud is a full rigged ship, and her masts rake alike, viz. 1¼ inch to the foot. The following are the dimensions of her masts and yards:

MASTS.
	Dimensions, Inches.	Length, Feet.	Mast heads, Feet.
Fore	35	82	13
Top	17	46	9
Topgallant	11	25	0
Royal	10	17	0
Skysail	8½	13	pole... 5
Main	36	88	14
Top	18	51	9½
Topgallant	12	28	0
Royal	11	19	0
Skysail	9½	14½	pole...5½
Mizen	26	78	12
Top	12½	40	8
Topgallant	9	22	0
Royal	8	14	0
Skysail	7	10	pole...4
YARDS.
Fore	20	70	yard-arms...4½
Top	15	55	5
Topgallant	10	44½	3
Royal	7	32	2
Skysail	6½	22	1½
Main	23	82	4½
Top	17	64	5
Topgallant	15	50	3
Royal	10½	37	2
Skysail	7	24	1½
Crossjack	16	56	4
Mizen topsail	11½	45	4½
Topgallant	10	33	2½
Royal	7	25	1½
Skysail	6	20	1

The bowsprit is 28½ inches in diameter, and 20 feet outboard; jibboom 16½ inches in diameter, and is divided at 16 feet for the inner and 13 for the outer jib, with 5 feet end; spanker boom 55 feet, gaff 40, main spencer gaff 24 feet, and the other spars in proportion. She is rigged in nearly the same style as the Stag Hound, and looks very well aloft. Messrs. Carnes and Chessman rigged her. Aloft, as well as below, no expense was spared to render her a perfect ship.

She was built at East Boston, by Mr. Donald McKay, and her admirers are sanguine that she will outsail any vessel in the world. Messrs. Grinnell, Minturn & Co. of New York, own her, and intend her for the California and China trade. One-third of her cargo is already engaged for San Francisco, and it is expected that she will soon be filled up. Capt. Creesey, long and favorably known as the commander of the ship Oneida, is her captain, and from his established reputation it is confidently anticipated that he will make her keep way with the fleetest of the clipper fleet.

Boston Daily Atlas, April 25, 1851

Figure 14 – Record of Stevedore Service for Flying Cloud while in San Francisco

Figure 15 - Captain Josiah Perkins Cressy

It was also during this voyage while in the South Pacific, that the Chief Officer and a seaman were washed off the topgallant forecastle and lost. A full description of this event is given in the log reproduced in the Appendix. Instead of going to China, the snip returned in ballast (500 tons ^Mo) to New York. The reason for this was in part explained in a letter from Grinnell, Minturn & Co. to Griffitts dated March 5, 1853.

As the expense and loss incurred by a ship of her large tonnage going to China are considerable, we may hereafter direct her to proceed from your port to this, in ballast.

The return crew consisted of one second officer, one third officer, a cook, two stewards, a boatswain, four ordinary seamen, and 30 seamen. It was early in this trip that the rudder head was sprung and a temporary steering apparatus had to be used the remainder of the 92 day passage.

The fourth voyage started on January 21, 1854, in tow of the steamer Achilles. It was on this trip that Creesy was to break his old record run from New York to Tan Francisco, reportedly by some 13 hours. From San Francisco the Flying Cloud sailed to Hong Kong, leaving sometime after April 28 with a crew consisting of a boatswain, carpenter, 2 cooks, 2 stewards, 2 ordinary seamen, and 28 seamen. She left Whampoa July 20, 1854, for New York. A few days out, while still in the China Sea, she was carried upon a coral reef which tore her shoe from the keel and cut the keel through to the bottom planking causing her to leak 11 inches per hour. However, Creesy was determined to return to New York without entering port and did so by keeping the pumps going constantly to the delight of her underwriters, who acknowledged that this deed had saved them at least $30,000 and probably nearer $1,000,000. Creesy received a silver service for the deed and the insurance company made the following note: "Dec ‚'54 C&C; damaged cargo as per Capt. H." Her rating was also reduced from Al to Al l-2, undoubtedly because of the strain produced when she grounded.

The Seaman's Bank for Savings in New York has a sailing card (Figure 16) obviously printed sometime after this voyage, since mention is made of two record-breaking voyages. This card has been reproduced by the State Street Trust Co. in "Yankee Ship Sailing Cards, Vol. III', and it is from this that Figure 16 was copied.

Figure 16 – Sailing Card of the Flying Cloud

The fifth voyage that the Flying Cloud made to San Francisco started February 18, 1855, still under Captain Creesy arrived in San Francisco June 6th. Sailing on the second leg of the trip on June 22 she arrived in Hong Kong August 1st. Sailing from Whampoa, September 7, she arrived back in New York December l4th. Captain Creasy then reportedly returned to his home in Salem for a rest.

On her sixth, and last. Cape Horn voyage, the Flying Cloud left New York March 13, 1856, under Captain Rynard. Reynard was sent partly be cause Creesy needed a rest, but more important because he had refused to sail her again unless the ship was given a conditioning overhaul which she needed badly. Grinnell, Minturn & Co. refused to do this and although the ship had been pronounced strong and fit for sea before departing, in a few days the bowsprit was found to be badly sprung and the vessel unseaworthy in several respects. After running into heavy gales she was forced to put into Rio, arriving May 10th. Sailing again June 23rd she arrived in San Francisco September l4th. Because of the expense of operation and maintenance and her low earning power, she was laid up by her owners three months for repairs. Captain Creesy was sent overland to San Francisco to bring her east, and he sailed January L, 1857, returning to New York in 91 days. On returning, her insurance rating was further reduced to A2; in March, she was caulked and sheathed with yellow metal. Retiring a second time, except during the Civil War when he commanded ships in the United States Navy, Captain Cressy will always be associated with the accomplishments of the Flying Cloud.

The "Signal Book for Boston Harbor" of 1857 gives the designating number in the Marine Telegraph Flairs for the Flying Cloud as 2636. Figure 17 shows what flags would be flown when entering or leaving port to indicate that she was the Flying Cloud. These were all blue and white since this is the best color combination to be seen on the sea.

Figure 17 - Code Flags for Flying Cloud - 2636

With the general depression of 1857, and the heavy losses that would have been sustained if they had operated her, Grinnell, Minturn & Co. again had the Flying Cloud laid up for thirty-two months. The clipping below describes the situation.

Figure 18 - "Scientific American" article - February 13, 1858

In March, 1858, her spars were again cut down, her keel repaired, and topsides caulked, and her Al 1-2 rating returned. Most authorities claim she was sold about this time but specify no purchaser. In November, 1859, she was opened on the inside and found sound; but her insurance rating was again reduced to A2. Sailing December 9, 1859, under command of Captain Alexander Winsor, she arrived in the Downs on December 26, where she loaded for China.

Figure 19 - Captain Alexander Winsor

She left Gravesend, England, (Loading and unloading at London) February 15, 1860, arriving in Hong Kong May 22d. Sailing from Foochow August 7 and manned by four, mates, two boatswains, two carpenters, two sailmakers, three stewards, two cooks, seventy-five able seamen, and ten boys before the mast, or a total crew of one hundred men. She arrived in London on December 7. She left Deal February 28, 1861, and arrived at Melbourne, Australia, May 24 (Swan claims May 17). She left Melbourne June 28th, arriving in Hong Kong September 3, 1861. She was then offered for sale but was engaged for 6000HKD to carry 253 British troops and 10 officers, one lady, one servant, and four children. Leaving Hong Kong December 28, 1861, she put into St. Helena, February 26, 1862, and remained until March 9. She arrived at Gravesend, England, April 16, 1862, having lost eight of the troops and supposedly one of' the crew. In May, 1862, she was sold, reportedly, at a very low' price, by Grinnell, Minturn & Co. to James Baines of Liverpool who put her in his Black Ball Line running to Brisbane, Australia.

There are few records of her individual voyages for the next eight years. Under command of Captain Owen, she left Liverpool June 4, 1870, and arrived in Hervey's Bay, Queensland, August 30. About this time her owners were reported being McKay & Son. Sometime in the early 1870's she was sold to H. Smith Edwards of South Shields, England, for the lumber trade, principally between St. Johns. N.B. and London, England. It has been reported ^F3684 sometime previous, her sail area Had been reduced a third time. In June, l874, while returning to port to escape a heavy gale shortly after leading St. John, due to faulty navigation, she stranded on Beacon Island bar. According to the Seattle, Washington, Post Intelligencer of June 5 (year unknown) the pilot was Joseph Doherty. The Saint John Daily Telegraph of June 19, 1874, gives as close to an eye-witness report that is probably obtainable at this time

During the heavy blow of Wednesday (June 17) night the clipper ship, 'Flying Cloud', lying in the stream off Adam's Moorings, Carleton, dragged her anchors, and swinging around caught in the mud bank at Sand Point. In the morning, having careened over with the tide in the night, she was discovered on her beam ends, her stern in three or four feet of water, her bow in 25 feet. She Was deal laden, and while in the above position a portion of her cargo belonging to Alex Gibson Esp. floated away, at noon the remaining portion of the cargo was being discharged, and a few hours later a tug went to her assistance and she was towed off. At present the amount of damage sustained by the vessel cannot be stated. She was certainly in a dangerous position for a long time. The "Flying Cloud" was built by MacKay at Boston, 1851, and is consequently twenty-three-years old. She is a vessel of 1098 tons, and is owned by W. S. Edwards, South Shields England. (No explanation for the reduction of capacity was discovered'). Both parentheses by author.

McKay¹⁶² claims that she came off without difficulty and was put on a patent slip for repairs where she caught on fire and was so badly damaged that she was relegated to the scrap heap. Howe and Matthews¹⁹⁵ claim her cargo was lighter but her back was broken, and she was condemned and sold by the underwriters (according to the Post Intelligencer probably to a Mr. Lantalum, a St. John auctioneer) and was finally burned for her copper and metal fastenings in June 1875. Another article in the Daily Telegraph (Sept. 7, 1874) gives the following, report of the "Flying Cloud".

The portwardens, in a very detailed report, arrive at the conclusion that the cost of repairs to the ship would be greater than the value of the ship. It is likely that the following statement and recommendation will be acted upon:

We further certify that we have made a careful examination of her and her materials, and consider her, with all her tackle and furniture, to be worth (7,000) seven thousand dollars, in her damaged state. We estimate the cost of placing her on the blocks and repairing will amount to (23,000) twenty-three thousand dollars; and we further consider that her value in this place, after being repaired, will not exceed twenty thousand dollars, (20,000). We further certify that we find the ship to be in such bad condition, and that the estimated cost of repairs will so far exceed her value after being repaired, that we consider it will be for the benefit of all concerned that she should be sold as she now lies, before incurring further expense.

However, to the best knowledge available today, this report was made on a "Flying Cloud" built in 1858 at Kingston, King's County, New Brunswick, which stranded in St. John Harbor sometime during 1871. No original portwarden's report of the McKay clipper was located.

Fairburn ²¹⁰¹ gives a summary of the Flying Cloud which provides an appropriate ending to this section.

The Flying Cloud was a sharp-lined extreme clipper, with lofty spars, long yards, and a wealth of canvas, ' designed primarily, if not solely, for speed and requiring a large crew to handle her. The ship was outstandingly lucky, but aside from that, she seemed to be excellently designed for making fast runs and short passages in the California trade and, by her sailing performance, well earned the title of "Greyhound" of the California clipper fleet.

In the course of this investigation many plans, pictures, and models of the Flying Cloud were discovered. Table 1 lists all items uncovered, with explanatory remarks. There has been no attempt to make a complete list of the pictures republished in various books, but rather to record the originals wherever possible and the basic photograph where the original was not found.

Table 1 - Paintings, Pictures, Models, Plans, and logs of the Flying Cloud

Type		Location	Artisan	Date	Remarks
Models
	Frame & Plank?	Marine Museum, Mystic CT	Charles C. Davis?	-	A.H. Clark reportedly consulted, no longer on display
	Solid	Museum of Fine Arts, Boston	H.E. Boucher Co.	-	Built for Fredrick C. Fletcher
	Solid	State Street trust Co., Boston	-	-	-
Paintings
	Birds' eye view	Marine Museum?	James E. Butterworth	-	see figure 77
	-	India House, New York	Warren Sheppard	-	24" x 36"
	-	India House, New York	Warren Sheppard	-	36" x 42"
	Under Sail	Peabody Museum, Salem	C.J.A. Wilson	1926
	Under Sail	Peabody Museum, Salem	J. & F. Tudgay	-	Since neither man is known to have visited the states, this could have been painted after 1859 when the ship was in England
	Under Sail	Peabody Museum, Salem	-	1955	-
	Under Sail	American Neptune	-	1943	Shows XAN on square Rogers Private Signal Flag (see Figures 67 and 76)
	Broadside	Peabody Museum, Salem	Chinese artist	-	Photo of painting, See figure 72
	Under Sail	Peabody Museum, Salem	A. Clive Edwards	1923	Print published by Foster Bros., Boston
	Under Sail	Peabody Museum, Sale	L. A. Briggs	-	-
	Under Sail	"History of N. Y. Yards" - Morrison	-	-	Rails painted, coming together fore and aft
	Under Sail	MacPherson Collection	-	-	May be ship Golden Light (see figure 74)
	Under Sail	Supposedly in the Boston State House but not found	E. Brown Jr. Del.	-	The painting the Nathaniel Currier Lithograph was made from
Miscellaneous
	Lithograph	Marine Museum	E. Brown Jr. Lithograph - Butterworth original but present location unknown (printed by Currier & Ives)	1852	8”x12” issued printed 1852 16”x24”issued printed 1852 16”x24” rempression printed in 1915 (see Frontispiece, Figure 73)
	Loading Cargo	Gleasons Pictorial	J. Wade	1851	Watercolor? (See Figure 12)
	Launching	State Street Trust	-	1851?	Line Drawing (See Figure 12)
	Sailing Card	The Seaman’s Bank for Saving, New York	-	after 1854	Reproduced by State Street Bank (See Figure 10)
	Figurehead	Museum of Fine Arts	-	18th Century	Not actual figurehead, but presented as such by Cape Cod Improvement Association
	Freight lists, bills, etc	Harvard Business School	Griffitts	1851-4	Covers voyages 1-4 with regard to port of San Francisco
Plans
	Hull lines, sail	Popular Mechanics	Tate	Dec/1927	Model building contest
	Hull lines	Census Report	Henry Hall	1880	(See Figure 79)
	Hull lines, sail	MIT	Given by A.H. Clark	-	Supposed original tracing (See figure 78)
	Hull lines, sail	Peabody Museum	Given by 1) A.H. Clark, 2) Richard McKay	-	Blueprints of MIT tracing
	Hull lines, sail	Peabody Museum	John B. Hunley	1924	From Clark Blueprint
	Spar, deck	MIT	H.E. Boucher Co.	1912	Based on Currier Lithograph (see Figure 80)
	Hull, sail, rigging, deck	“Constitution and other historic ships”	F. Alexandar Magoun	1928	-
Abstract logs
	New York to San Francisco	National Archives	J. P. Creesy	1851	Vol. 27
	Canton to New York	National Archives	J. P. Creesy	1852	Vol. 112
	New York to San Francisco	National Archives	J. P. Creesy	1852	Vol. 114
	San Francisco to Canton	National Archives	J. P. Creesy	1852	Vol. 125
	Canton to New York	National Archives	J. P. Creesy	1852	Vol. 125
	New York to San Francisco	National Archives	J. P. Creesy	1853	Vol. 140
	New York to San Francisco	National Archives	J. P. Creesy	1854	Vol. 70
	San Francisco to Hong Kong	Boston Daily Atlas	J. P. Creesy	9/6/54	-
	New York to San Francisco	Boston Daily Atlas	J. P. Creesy	6/27/53	-
	First Voyage	Dartmouth Whaling Museum	J. P. Creesy	1851	Line cut reproduction
	First Voyage	None known	Grinnell, Minturn & Co.	1851	Reportedly printed in gold on silk

Figure 20 - Map of the World

V. Construction of the Flying Cloud

This is the portion of this study which has been little touched upon by previous authors. The constructional features of a ship which was built over 100 years ago are not easy to come by. None of the men who had firsthand knowledge of the times are left so that virtually everything must be derived from written descriptions, photographs, and contemporary paintings, and drawings.

The Boston Daily Atlas report of the Flying Cloud at the time of her launching has been considered the most reliable source in existence. This article written by Duncan McLean who enjoyed a reputation for exact marine reporting, and the details which he included in his articles tend to uphold this contention. Although he was accurate, he often did not state everything was on his mind as the following example will prove. He made this statement in describing the figurehead of the Westward Ho in the Boston Daily Atlas of September 21, 1852,

The full figure of an Indian warrior, represented as advancing rapidly in the chase, (is) placed on a pedestal of ornamental flow-ring...

In the Boston Daily Atlas of June 9, 1853, Mr. McLean made the following statement on the same subject.

How beautifully the dashing clipper Westward Ho would have looked, end on, with such a head (as the ship Bonita), instead of the poor indian, slung by the middle, which now mars her bow. We hope, for the honor of Boston, that Neptune will appropriate the said indian to himself, before the ship returns to the United States.

Although the Daily Atlas article provides a great deal of information about the Flying Cloud, many particulars were omitted. Assuming that other McKay clippers launched about the same time were fitted similarly to the Flying Cloud, the McLean descriptions of these other ships may be considered the next best source of information and they have been depended upon heavily. In addition, every description of a ship printed in the Daily Atlas from the latter part of 1850 through 1854 has been examined, and many have been drawn upon both for general knowledge and specific statements. Table 2 lists all of the Daily Atlas descriptions of ships mentioned in the text and the date of the report. There was little evidence in the Daily Atlas reports (covering over four years) which would indicate that there was a general depletion of ship construction material of any size unless it be of masts. Thus throughout this airport, it has been assumed that the Flying Cloud could be built-with the same size timbers that were used in constructing other-snips, launched both before and afterwards.

Another source of information was "Shipbuilding Industry of the U.S.” in which Henry Hall describes the Champion of the Seas and the Great Republic. His descriptions do not agree completely with McLean's and in some cases a decision had to be made on which source to consider most valid.

For those features not covered by contemporary descriptions Griffith's "Marine and Naval Architecture" written in 1851 has been helpful, although at times Mr. Griffiths presented his own ideas rather than the most common methods. It has proved necessary to compare statements made in various parts of his book, and. to evaluate every statement in light of the facts obtained from other sources. Griffiths has generally been cited only for confirmatory evidence, being used as the authority only where no other source was found.

Table 2 - Ships Described in the Boston Daily Atlas

Ship Date of report Ship Date of report

1850 Golden West November 25

Stag Hound December 21 Flying Childers December 4

1851 Phantom December 23

John Bertram January 4 1853

Witchcraft January 20 Mystery January 17

Shooting Star March 6 Golden Light January 20

Mermaid April 9 Empress of the Sea January 25

Flying Cloud April 25 Storm King February 25

Witch of the Wave May 19 Queen of Clippers April 2

Challenge June 16 Star of Empire April 14

Winfield Scott July 11 Wizard April 27

Staffordshire July 21 Wildfire May 7

S. S. Lewis July 31 West Wind May 11

R. B. Forbes September 5 Bonita June 9

Samuel Lawrence September 23 Whistler July 2

Winchester October 23 Amphitrite July 4

Flying Fish November 4 Water Witch July 11

Antelope November 29 Morning Light September 2

1852 Webster September 8

Hoogly January 2 King Fisher September 12

Dauntless January 23 Edwin Forrest October 22

Polar Star January 29 Don Quixote October 27

Ellen Forster May 19 Romance of the Sea November 8

Sovereign of the Seas June 19 Eagle Wing December 1

Winged Arrow August 2 1854

J. Montgomery August 28 Challenger January 26

Westward Ho September 21 Lightening February 8

Queen of the Seas October 6 Champion of the Seas May 20

Whirlwind October 14 Grace Darling May 29

Orient November 2 Sierra Nevada June 29

Winged Racer November 12 Barreda Brothers July 7

Bald Eagle November 17 James Paines September 2

Golden Eagle

November 23

Chatsworth Santa Claus

September 27 October 30

Because of the lack of contemporary American literature on the subject, in many instances, it was necessary to consult various English sources. Fincham's "Outline of Ship Building" has been used most extensively.

Early in this study the original colored construction plan for the sister ships Chariot of Fame and Star of Empire was found at the Peabody Museum Salem, Massachusetts. This is the only known original construction plan of a McKay ship. These ships, built in 1853, have been considered sufficiently similar to ships built earlier that the plan has been used on innumerable instances to fill in particulars. Another plan which has been used to a limited extent is that of the Great Republic, presented in the pamphlet, “Description of the Great Republic” by "A Sailor" (known to be Duncan McLean).'

The original lines of the Flying Cloud are evidently no longer available. The best lines available are in the Arthur H. Clark Collection at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. This plan is drawn in ink on tracing cloth, but the cloth bears little similarity to the cloth on which the Chariot of Fame is drawn. The cloth at MIT has every appearance of being more modern that 1851. Specifically, it has a bluish tinge compared to the pure white of the older cloth and is considerably thicker than older cloth. Two blueprints made from this tracing are in the possession of the Peabody Museum, one of them having been presented by Richard McKay and the other by Captain Clark. Considering the source of these plans, one from McKay’s son and the other from a very close friend of McKay, the general opinion of those people conversant with the situation is that, while the MIT plan is probably not authentic, it is undoubtedly the closest to the original that is possible at this time. It should be noted that the dimensions of the keel is the only comparison which can be made accurately between the plan and the Boston Daily Atlas description and the two do not agree within reasonable limits. [See note in Appendix II]

There is a very remote possibility that the original plan of some of McKay’s ships, including the Flying Cloud, could turn up in the files of the National Archives where there are many unspecified plans, but the probability is so slight that searching was not considered justified. Many plans of the Flying Cloud for modeling purposes have been published; however, the only other lines of the Flying Cloud which are worth considering are those presented by Henry Hall. In the introduction he cites Mrs. Donald McKay as having helped him in collecting various data concerning her husband’s ships. Thus it would appear that this should be an authentic plan. However, a careful examination of the lines discloses that there are self-contained, as well as comparative, inconsistencies, particularly, in the waterlines, which pretty much invalidates the plan. In an attempt to determine the origin of this plan, the directory of the Census Department in Washington was contacted and asked if Halls’s original notes were available. This department knew of none and could not suggest and other contacts in this respect. Thus, the MIT plan remains as the most nearly authentic. It should be noted that this includes the only sail plan of the ship found, although the dimensions shown do not completely agree with those reported in the Boston Daily Atlas. [See note in Appendix II]

There are a large number of paintings of the Flying Cloud, and virtually all of them were studied in an attempt to derive as much information as possible. Perhaps the best known facsimile is the Nathaniel Currier lithograph. The original painting from which this lithograph was engraved, was done, by E. Brown Jr. of Delaware. Attempts to find the original painting have failed, although some sources claim that it is in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. Collectors of Currier and Ives lithographs have long sought to trace Brown with no success. Two sizes of Currier lithographs were common, the large folio size with the picture measuring roughly 16” by 24” and the “cheap popular” size measuring about 8” by 12”. The larger sizes usually sold for $3, although prices as high as $4 and as low as $1 are known to have existed. In fact, the $1 price prevailed on the clipper sin; prints since Currier was well aware of who would desire such prints and their usual financial situation. The small prints had no set price as they were commonly sold by itinerant peddlers; however, a price of 25 cents was common. These prints were lithographed in black ink, then hand-colored on a production line basis, each man applying one color. In 1915 there appeared a later impression of a number of large lithographs, including that of the Flying Cloud. The original stones had been found and the new prints from these were frankly sold as later impressions although no additional imprint was added. All references in this study to the Currier lithograph refer to an original large size print, primarily that one owned by the Mystic Marine Museum. [See note in Appendix II]

There is a painting by James E. Buttersworth supposedly showing a bird's-eye view of the Flying Cloud during a storm. However none of the deck arrangements shown agree at all with the Boston Daily Atlas description, thus invalidating this source. There is some question whether Buttersworth, an Englishman by birth, ever actually saw the Flying Cloud, although it is known that he settled in West Hoboken, New Jersey, around 1851 ^F16 so it is possible that he did. Nevertheless, his painting has not been used in this study. Reports are that the original of this painting is in possession of the Mystic Marine Museum; however, they were unable to find it when questioned. [See note in Appendix II]

Captains of ships operating in the China trade often commissioned a Chinese artist to paint their ship while it lay in Hong Kong or another Chinese port. It was the practice of these Chinese artists to go on board and actually measure the various features of the ship, after which they would return to their canvas and meticulously lay out the ship as a sheer or broadside plan. They painted using these lines as the skeleton. Because they were for the Captain, and because actual measurements were taken, paintings of this type were considered to very accurately represent a ship. The Peabody Museum has in its files a very small (3” x 5"), stained photograph of one such painting which is labeled as the Flying Cloud. "Old Ships of New England" reproduces the same painting, but it appears to be simply a photograph of the Peabody photograph. However, there is some question of this being in fact a painting of the Flying Cloud since the steve of the bowsprit is 5½ inches versus 4 inches shown on the MIT plan and in the Currier lithograph. At tempts to locate the original painting have failed, but careful examination of the original photograph under a microscope did not disclose the name of the ship. The assumption has been made that this painting was actually of the Flying Cloud and it has been used to a considerable extent in this study. [See note in Appendix II]

The only other possible contemporary painting was discovered in the McPherson collection at MIT, but there is no information as to its date or artist. This painting was consulted in only in a few instances. As a matter of fact, there is a slight belief that the ship pictured my not be the Flying Cloud at all but the Golden Age.

That there is not a photograph (daguerreotype) of the Flying Cloud should not be surprising. It was not until 1883 that a photograph was made of the yacht America when it was 32 years old, although she had become famous as the first yacht to win the American Cup Races in 1851. [See note in Appendix II]

No contemporary models of the Flying Cloud were discovered during this study. However, an attempt was made to examine all known models at least those within a reasonable distance. This undertaking was somewhat complicated by the fact that in 1928 Popular Mechanics sponsored a contest for the best model of the Flying Cloud made from plans they published. With the large number of entries, there was put in circulation a large number of models. However, after examining the Popular Mechanic's plans, examination of these models was not considered warranted.

Magoun did a fairly detailed study of the Flying Cloud in "The Constitution and other Historic Ships" and presented plans suitable for model making purposes. Information discovered in the course of this study in some instances contradicted information presented by Magoun, and attempts to trace his sources failed. 'Where contradictions did develop, note was made of them so that the reader is given all the information possible on which to evaluate what is presented here. Photographs of many of the paintings, models, and plans mentioned above have been included in the Appendix.

No attempt was made to trace letters of passengers of the Flying Cloud. It is regretted that this was not possible, since it might shed much light on the deck and internal arrangements of the ship.

Following is a detailed description of the Flying Cloud, from laying-off the hull to making the sails. Sources are cited where possible and guesstimates on my part are noted as such.

1. LAYING OFF

American ship builders worked from a model, made up of a number of planks fastened together. After the model was shaped, the lifts were separated and measurements were taken of the individual lifts. From these the plan was laidoff. The MIT plan of the Flying Cloud was accepted as valid for the lines of the Flying Cloud. This plan ¼” = 1') was enlarged to a scale of ( ½” = 1') and faired. It was layed off on another sheet so as not to obliterate the original plan. The method used for laying off was that described by Thearl. No description is given of the method since it is similar to the method outlined in many books describing laying off ships. Table 3 presents the offsets measured - from the finished plans.

Griffiths ^77-78 comments on this phase of the operation are interesting: "We shall find it convenient to first secure the paper on the board by gluing the edges down; after having wet the wrong side of the paper, one quarter of an inch of gluing surface around the edge of the paper is sufficient; it should be partially dried with a warm iron...as the contracting power is very great...It may be well to add, that the ink used for mechanical drawings is India ink, and should be mixed by being rubbed on the finger after dipping one end in clear soft water; but a few drops only are necessary to mix at one time, and should be kept entirely free from dust.". Times have changed!

Table 3 - Table of Offsets

2. HULL CONSTRUCTION

The plan of this section is to take each major timber assembly in the ship and treat it in detail. In general (but not in some particulars) we have presented this in the same order that, the ship would have been constructed.

1 KEEL

Material The Boston Daily Atlas (hereafter referred to as BDA) reports that the keel is of rock maple.

Size The BDA states that there are three depths of keels, molding a total of 44 inches, and siding 16 inches. Neither the MIT or Hall lines of the Flying Cloud show a keel of 44 inches, showing 27 and 32 inches respectively It is possible that ships draughts were drawn without showing the shoe or false keel, since this type of keel was attached after construction of the ship was well along. Both Griffiths¹³⁶ and Peake^l2 suggest a maximum thickness of 6 inches for a false keel, although Peake¹¹⁰ does make note of a 10 inch shoe. If it is assumed that a 6 inch false Keel was attached, but not shown on the plans, there remain discrepancies of 11 inches in the MIT plan and 6 inches in the Hall plan. It can only be assumed that the draughts are probably inaccurate—a fact which has been mentioned elsewhere (see Part V).

Table 4 has been compiled from data given in the BDA reports of various McKay built ships. The data as reported (first two columns) does not exhibit any definite trend; however, if a 6 inch shoe is assumed to be the third depth on those ships which have three depths of keel, then a trend is in evidence. As partial support for this assumption, it is known that both the Stag Hound ^BDA and Champion of the Seas^H87 had 6 inch false keels, while the Great Republic had one of 4 ½ inches^S11. Based on this table, it has been assumed that the keel was composed of a 6 inch shoe and two 10 inch depths.

Table 4 - Comparison of keels of McKay ships

Total Number Average Average

depth of depths molding molding of

per depth two depths

with 6” shoe

Stag Hound 46” 3 15.33” 20”

Flying Cloud 44 3 14.67 19

Staffordshire 38 2 19.00 19

Flying Fish 38 3 12.67 16

Sovereign of the Seas - - - -

Westward Ho 30 2 15.00 15

Bald Eagle 30 2 15.00 15

Length The Chariot of Fame plan shows keel timbers 27 to 47 feet long averaging 40 feet; the piece of the keel of the Champion of the Seas^H87 averaged a little more than 47 feet, while the Great Republic plan shows 50-52 feet. It is reasonable to assume the same size timbers were available for the Flying Cloud; thus the length of keel timbers has been assumed as 45 feet.

Taper Although some authorities seem to favor the tapering of the keel at one or both extremities, there was equal justification foundG13° in the literature for assuming a constant siding. No taper is indicated on either the Hall or MIT plans, nor was a taper indicated in very many of the BDA reports. Therefore, no taper has been assumed in the Flying Cloud.

Scarfs According to Griffiths¹³⁶, a hooked scarf was the type usually preferred for keels; Peake¹⁰ states that a tabled scarf was used; while Curtis²⁹ gives four types of scarfs—plain, hooked, key locked, and key locked hook—but seems to favor the plain type. Fincham⁸ states that horizontal scarfs were usual, double the room and space in length which allowed two bolts in each (lip of the scarf) through the floors and keelson. This is the same length specified for the keelson scarfs. Wilson¹⁸⁵ states that horizontal plain scarfs, four frames in length were usual, with the nibs coming between two frames. The Chariot of Fame plan shows key locked-scarfs. The BDA in several cases made mention of the types of scarfs used for the keel: The Empress of the Seas had square keyed scarfs, the Dauntless had lock scarfs, the Winfield Scott had locked scarfs, and the Champion of the Seas had keyed scarfs. Curtis²⁹ shows a "key locked scarf" which appears to be the same as shown on the Chariot of Fame plan. Curtis gives the following proportions for this type scarf.

Figure 21 - "Key locked scarf"

The Chariot of Fame plan shows the fallowing proportions for her keel and keelson scarfs, and the keel scarfs shown on the Great Republic plan.

Figure 22 - "Key locked scarf" Chariot of Fame & Great Republic

Griffiths¹³⁵ implies that keel scarf nibs are commonly at least six inches, and, in the case of the Flying Cloud (with 7 inch garboards), 7 inches would be expected. However, he recommends a 3 inch scarf nib as being sufficient. Curtis³⁰ gives the rule that a nib should be one-eighth the molded dimension plus 1 inch, or 3 ⅜ inches for a 19 inch depth. Since there is no specific mention in the BDA reports of any other type of scarf used, it has been assumed that the "key locked scarf" was the one most used and this type has been accepted for the keel of the Flying Cloud. The proportions are shown in Figure 23.

Figure 23 - Flying Cloud keel scarfs

Table 5 gives the lengths of scarfs reported in the BDA and other reports of various ships. They are listed in order of launching date.

Table 5 - Lengths of Keel Scarfs

Ship Length of Scarf (ft)

John Bertram (1) 8

Winfield Scott (1) 9

Stag Hound (l,M) 8-10

Dauntless (1) 10

Flying Cloud M) -

Westward Ho (l,M) 12

Empress of the Sea (1,M) 10

Water Witch (1) 12

Great Republic (2,M) 12

Eagle Wing (1) 12

Lightning (1,H) 12

Champion of the Seas (l,M) 12

(1) BDA (2) Hall (M) Built by McKay

The molding and siding of the keels of these ships varies little, and any difference is not generally reflected in the length of the scarf. Thus, it is obvious that the rule outlined above was not adhered to. Although, there is evident a trend towards longer keel scarfs in later ships, because of the similarity between the Flying Cloud and Stag Hound in other respects, a scarf length of 10 feet has been assumed which would span three frames. Table 5 substantiates this conclusion to a degree since another McKay ship built after the Flying Cloud (the Empress of the Seas) had 10 foot keel scarfs; no attempt is made to explain why the Western Ho had 12 foot scarfs.

Fastening Wilson¹⁸⁵ states that keel scarfs are bolted with two copper bolts through each nib and four additional ones through each scarf, all clinched on composition plates. Fincham⁹ says scarfs are bolted with eight bolts, driven with a ring upon the head and clinched over a ring. The only two statements concerning keel fastening concerning specific ships were found in the BDA report of the Dauntless and in Hall's⁸⁷ report of the Champion of the Seas. The only statement the BDA makes concerning the Flying Cloud is that her keel and keel scarfs are fastened with copper. Hall's⁸⁷ description of the Champion of the Seas states that scarfs 12 feet long were fastened with ten 1-inch copper bolts and although scarfs 10 feet long have been assumed, they would still be fastened with ten 1-inch copper bolts, notwithstanding the fact that the BDA reports the Champion of the Seas was fastened with 1¾ inch bolts in her keelson, which does not agree with the statement made by Hall. The Dauntless^BDA had the parts of her keel bolted every 4 feet with 1⅛ inch copper bolts while 1¼ inch bolts were used in her keelson fastening; the John Bertram had both her keel and keelson fastened with 1¼ inch copper.

The Chariot of Fame plan shows the fastening arrangement used on one of its keel and this arrangement has been accepted as valid for the keel scarfs of the Flying Cloud. It has been assumed that the keels were fastened with 1⅛ inch copper bolts every 4 feet while the keel scarfs were fastened with 1 inch copper bolts, all riveted over rings.

Curtis³⁰ says the wedges (keys) of the scarf are made of hard wood, have a taper of about ½ inch to the foot, and should be driven simultaneously from each side and should be wedged at the small ends. This description of the wedges has been adopted.

Sag Several authorities remarked that the keel should be laid with a sag in the middle which would straighten when the ship hogged after being launched. Curtis³ suggests a sag of 1½ to 2 inches per 100 feet, evenly distributed over the entire length; Griffiths merely suggests "several" inches, but recommends that the forward end be raised higher than aft. Griffiths⁵⁸ would seem to have a logical argument inasmuch as the bow has less buoyancy and therefore would hog to a greater degree than the stern. His "several" inches could easily have been 3 or 4, or the amount suggested by Curtis since the keel is about 200 feet long. Although there is only the justification given above for doing so, it has been assumed that the bow of the Flying Cloud was raised 2½ inches and her stern 1½ inches above the keel at the dead-flat frame. The only time the BDA made mention of a sag in a ship's keel was in the case of the 350 ton clipper barque Wildfire which had her "keel (a little over 100 feet) raided a foot from a straight line forward”

Rabbet Fincham⁹ states that the rabbet is taken out as a equilateral triangle, all sides equal to the thickness of the garboard. The Chariot of Fame and Great Republic plans show a notched rabbet, with keel sided normally for the upper half of the rabbet; the lower half tapers at about a 60° angle from the lower edge of the garboard into the keel to a nearly horizontal line.

Figure 24 - Rabbet

2 SHOE

Material Wilson¹⁸⁷ states that the false keel or shoe is usually made of oak. However, since the BDA specifically mentions rock maple as the keel material for the Flying Cloud this material has been assumed for both the keel and shoe.

Size - Length Wilson¹⁸⁷ advises that the shoe should be from 2 to 4 inches thick, put on in lengths of 12 to 16 feet . The Stag Hound^H89 and the Champion of the Seas ^H88 had a 6 inch shoe, while the Great Republic ^H89 had one of 4½ inches, and the Orient^BDA had a 3 inch shoe. We have assumed that the Flying Cloud had a 6 inch shoe (see KEEL), put on in about 15 foot lengths.

Scarfs Wilson¹⁸⁷ tells us that shoes were square butted (no scarfs) with these butts placed so as to clear the lower nibs of the keel scarfs.

Fastening Wilson¹⁸⁷ states that before the shoe was put on, the keel was covered with two thicknesses of copper sheathing (after all keelson bolts had been driven), and the shoe was then secured with composition spikes. The BDA report of the Chatsworth confirms that the keel and shoe were coppered between. Curtis¹¹ states they were fastened with ship spikes staggered 12 inches apart, and Fincham⁶² states the shoe was fastened with metal nails every 2 feet on alternate edges. If Curtis's ¹⁴⁹ rule for the size of spikes is adopted it would give a 12 inch spike ¾ inches square. The BDA states that the S.S. Lewis had her bottom (4 inches thick) fastened with 8 inch composition spikes ½ inch square which confirms the use of this rule. These were obviously staggered but as to whether placed one or two feet apart is not certain. Two feet has been accepted since one foot appears to be rather close together. Wilson's arrangement for the sheathing has been accepted.

3 MAIN KEELSON

Material No specific mention of keelson material was made in the BDA reports. However, the BDA report states that the Flying Cloud's scantling was of southern pine. Scantling here evidently refers to all fore and aft timbers; the main keelson timbers are therefore considered to be southern pine. This assumption is partially confirmed by comparison of the plan and BDA report of the Chariot of Fame. All portions of the ship specified as hard pine are colored light brown while oak timbers are colored dark brown. The keelsons are colored light brown.

Size The BDA states there were three depths of keelsons, together molding 45 inches. The BDA also reports that the keelsons sided from 17 to 15 inches. There are two alternatives for this arrangement of the main keelson depths which meet the requirements of the sister keelsons. The first (A) is: first and second keelson sided 17, molded 15; third keelson sided 15, molded 15. The second arrangements (B) is: first keelson molded 16, sided 17; second keelson melded 14, sided 16; third keelson molded 15, sided 15. These, arrangements are presented as Figure 25.

Figure 25 - Keelson Arrangements

Although the wording of the BDA report would seem to indicate that arrangement (B) was more probable ("sided from 17 to 15" not "sided 17 and 15"), arrangement (A) has been adopted. The basis for this choice was the fact that in almost every case reported by the BDA, the midship keelsons had a single molding dimension. In fact, the BDA reports of three out of the seven McKay ships considered specified that the keelson depths were 15 inches square.

Lengths. The most prevalent (10 out of 20) length of keelson timbers shown in the Chariot of Fame plan is 40 feet. The minimum length is 18 feet; the maximum 47 feet. These extremes were necessary that the majority of timbers be given proper shift. Since it is felt the same size timbers were generally available for both ships, the same size and arrangement is considered valid for the Flying Cloud.

Taper Curtis recommends that the keelsons extend as far forward and aft as possible, tapering to nil if necessary. However, there is little taper in this case since the deadwood and stem are both sided 16 inches, only one inch less than the midship keelson.

Scarfs The Chariot of Fame's keelson depths (16 inches square) are shown in the plan to have key locked scarfs 8 feet long with a nib depth of 4 inches. Hall⁸⁸ gives the length of the Champion of the Seas keelson scarfs at 8 feet while the BDA reported her keel scarfs to be 12 feet long and her keelsons to be scarfed and keyed. The BDA also reported the Lightning had her keelsons scarfed and keyed. The Great Republic^S12 had her main and sister keelsons lock scarfed and square bolted, with the length being 7 feet, 5 feet shorter than the keel scarfs. A length of 8 feet has been assumed.

Fastening It is stated in the BDA report on the Flying Cloud that the floor timbers were fastened to the keel and keelson in the usual style with 1¼ inch copper and iron bolts. Since there is no reason to expect the arrangement to have differed from that of the Stag Hound, the BDA description of the Stag Hound has been used as a guide, especially since this seems to have been the method used in most ships of that time described by the BDA. In the case of the Stag Hound 1¼ inch copper bolts fastened every second floor to the Keel. The remaining floors were fastened with 1¼ inch copper, but these bolts went through both the lower keelson and keel. It is implied that these bolts were clinched as recommended by most authorities, since they were reported as going "through" the keel. Peake specifies that the fastenings should be clinched over a mixed metal ring let into the keel. Wilson ²⁰⁵ states that the keelsons were secured by driving through the floor timbers copper bolts, riveted on composition rings on the lower side of the main keel. It has been assumed that these bolts were riveted over composition or mixed metal rings. In fact, Curtis⁷⁴ implies that whenever a bolt is clinched, it is clinched over a ring. Curtis shows rings three times the diameter of the bolts, and the bolt heads are shown one-half the diameter of the rings. The rings on old downeasters which now rest in the mud in Wiscassett, Maine, had heads that are also one-half the diameter of the ring. A diagram of a ring taken from one of these ships is presented as Figure 26.

Figure 26 - A Clinch Ring

The reference to iron in the BDA report of the Flying Cloud is questionable since iron is permissible only where it is not driven through the keel. Thus, either iron was mistakenly included as a fastening material for the floor timbers, or our assumption that the Stag Hound was bolted in the usual style is invalid. It seems more likely that iron was mistakenly included. No fastening plan is given for keelson scarfs in the Chariot of Fame plan, but the fastening arrangement and bolt diameter accepted for the keel scarfs has been considered valid. Curtis³ states that the main keelson scarf bolts were clinched under the keel. The only other mention of this practice referred only to the first depth of the keelson, and this is the only depth thought to have been through bolted.

If the usual arrangement described in the BDA reports of the Stag Hound and other ships is followed, both the second arid third keelsons would be fastened blunt with refined iron through all the navel timbers. Although the BDA report states that both the second and third keelson was bolted through "every navel timber" it is unreasonable to assume that there were two bolts in every navel timber or four bolts in an area 15 by 12 inches. Rather, it has been assumed that what was meant was that each navel timber had one bolt driven from the second or third keelson. Figure 27 gives the arrangement adopted for the Flying Cloud. It should be noted that this arrangement is not the same as shown on the Chariot of Fame plan. The keelson fastening method used in this ship (1853) does not seem to correspond to descriptions of earlier (1851) methods.

Figure 27 - Keelson Fastening Arrangement

4 SISTER KEELSONS

Material Southern pine (see MAIN KEELSON).

Size The BDA reports the Flying Cloud had two sister keelsons, the first 16 by 10 and the second 14 by 10. This nomenclature in the great majority of cases cited by the BDA, means molded 16 and 14 sided 10. Such an arrangement fits the keelson better than would be the case if the timbers were sided 16 and 14 and molded 10. Therefore the sister keelsons are assumed to have been sided 10 inches (see Figure 24 (A)).

Length The main keelson and sister keelsons were undoubtedly made from about the same length timbers. Thus, we have assumed 40 feet to be the nominal length of these timbers (see MAIN KEELSON).

Taper Most BDA reports imply, although none of them actually so state, that sister kelsons extend as far as possible in the extremities of the ship, This naturally would necessitate their being tapered to fit the form of the ship; Wilson²⁰⁶ states that sister keelsons extend forward and aft until the outer edge becomes 6 inches in depth, the top being parallel with the top of the main keelson and from 6 to 9 inches below it. It has been assumed that the sister keelsons extend as far as possible. Although they provide no strength in the extremities, they do fill up places in which rot could start.

Scarf The BDA report of the Champion of the Seas and the Star of Empire state that the keelsons and sister keelsons were scarfed and keyed. Thus, the same specifications have been adopted as those for the main keelson. They should have proper shift of butts with respect to both themselves and the main keelson (see MAIN KEELSON).

Fastening The BDA reports that the Flying Cloud's sister keelsons were cross bolted at right angles and diagonally. By comparison with other BDA reports, it is clear that this means that fastenings went horizontally through each sister keelson and the two lower depths of midship keelsons, vertically through both sister keelsons and probably the floor timbers, and diagonally from the outer angle of the sister keelson through the navel timbers, blunt into the keel. The timbers through which the vertical bolts passed were not specified, but Wilson²⁰⁶ says these bolts (copper) rivet on rings on the outside of the garboard strake, the vertical bolts are considered to have-been clinched under the navel timbers. This conclusion was based on the fact that no contradictory reference to this method was found and on the statement that the Dauntless ^BDA had her garboards bolted through every floor timber, with no mention of the sister keelsons. Thus, these bolts could be iron. The horizontal bolts were undoubtedly iron since they were entirely within the hold as would be the scarf bolts. These bolts (horizontal) were about 5 feet apart according to Wilson²⁰⁶ driven, on alternate sides and riveted on rings. The diagonal bolts were driven blunt into the keel, which would permit them also to be iron.

5 STEM, APRON, STERN TOST, INNER POST, DEADWOOD

Material With lack of any definite evidence to the contrary, it has been assumed that these timbers were white oak. Although it might seem that the stem and stern post should be of the same material as the keel (rock maple), various BDA reports and the Chariot of Fame plan indicate that all of these timbers should be of white oak, and Hall⁸⁸ indicates that this1 was the case in the Champion of the Seas, while the keel was of white oak and rock maple.

Arrangement The stem is the foremost boundary of the ship, being a continuation of the keel to the height of the vessel at the fore extreme of her. The apron is placed next aft the stem to strengthen it, and is actually a part of the fore deadwood. Having fixed the position of the last square frame, the deadwood becomes the foundation against which the cants are butted. The stemson is a curved piece placed in the angle formed by the apron and upper piece of deadwood or keelson.

The stern-post forms the after boundary of the ship, being the after continuation of the keel. The inner post is worked inside the main post, with the stern post knee placed in the angle formed by the keel and stern post. If the inner stern post runs to the keel, the knee was placed next to this.

Size Griffiths⁵⁴ states that all stems and posts should side larger at the head than at the keel, but implies that few of the builders follow his example. The only specific reference to this arrangement was given by Hall⁸⁸ where he gives for the Champion of the Seas only one siding for the stem, but says that the stern post sided 16 inches at the keel, 20 inches at the top. Since the MIT and Hall plans show no taper, parallel siding has been assumed. Thus, both the stem arid post are sided 16 inches.

The BDA reports that the Mystery had a stem molded 27 inches at the foot and 15 inches at the head, and a stern post molded 29 inches at the heel and 18 inches at the head, while the Golden Light^BDA had a stem molded 26 at the foot and 14 at the head, and a stern post molded 27 at the heel and 18 at the head. The Chariot of Fame plan shows the stem and stern post moldings varying less than the above, and the arrangement of the Flying Cloud has been assumed similar to the Chariot of Fame.

Peake²¹ and Wilson advise that the apron and stem should be of the same siding, and Wilson says the inner post is the same size as the stern post. Griffiths¹²² recommends that the apron be sided within one or two inches of the diameter of the bowsprit, or 27 to 26 inches in the case of the Flying Cloud. However, he allows for the cases where this is not done by suggesting chocks be fastened to furnish the required thickness. Hall⁸⁸ states that the Champion of the Seas had a stem sided 16 inches but an apron sided 30 inches at the bowsprit. The bowsprit was 40 inches in diameter. No indication was found that the stem and apron of the Great Republic were of different siding. It has been assumed that the stem and apron of the Flying Cloud were of different siding, essentially following Griffiths' suggestion by making it sided 26 inches at the head, 16 inches at the foot.

Length The Westward Ho, Chariot of Fame, and Great Republic, all had stems and stern posts of single pieces. It has therefore been assumed that the Flying Cloud was similarly outfitted.

Scarfs The arrangement for the stem scarf has been taken directly from the Chariot of Fame plan. A lock scarf is shown for the stem in the Chariot of Fame plan and has been assumed valid for the Flying Cloud.

Griffiths states that the former practice of mortising the post to the keel is seldom practiced, rather it is attached similar to the stem, i.e., with a root scarfed to the keel. However, only one or two references were made in the BDA reports to a stern post with a root scarf. Wilson¹⁹⁰ states that the stern post is in one piece, having two tendons cut on the heel of it, and let into the keel and additionally secured by a composition dovetailed plate let in flush on each side and through bolted. Fincham¹² gives this same arrangement stating in addition that the tendons are ¼ the depth of the keel in length, ⅓ the breadth of the keel athwart-ships, and twice their thickness wide, and between the two tendons the wood was left of the same breadth with them about ¾ of an inch down, which forms a stop for the caulking. The dovetail (mixed metal) is let in flush and fastened with six bolts through both plates. The Chariot of Fame plan shows a semi-mortised post as does the Great Republic plan. The Chariot of Fame arrangement has been assumed valid.

Fastening Both the Champion of the Seas^H88 and the Great Republic^S11 had their stem and stern timbers and the Champion of the Seas^H88 had her deadwood, fastened with 1¼ inch bolts, the same as used for the lower keel sons. The John Betram^BDA Bald Eagle^BDA and Great Republic^S11 had their stem, cutwater, apron, stemson, stern post, false post, and stern knee cooper bolted up to the load line. The bolts of the Champion of the Seas were 18 inches apart, those of the John Betram averaged 12 inches and those of the Great Republic 6 inches, and those shown in the Chariot of Fame plan were about 10 inches. Wilson¹⁸⁹ states that the apron is secured to the stem with bolts clinched on rings on the front of the stem. The stem, apron, deadwood, and stemson are secured together with through bolts clinched on rings on the front of the stem and bottom of the keel. The sternpost knee is bolted through the stern post and keel with two copper bolts in each before the deadwood is put on. The inner post is fastened to the stern post. The fastening arrangement shown on the Chariot of Fame and Great Republic plans have been accepted for these scarfs

The bolts up to somewhat above the load displacement line were generally of copper according to the PDAJ above this they were of iron. In order to determine where this line was on the Flying Cloud, the FDA descriptions of the Westward Ho and Winged Racer amid to Hall's80 description of the Great Republic are resorted to. The Westward Ho was sheathed up to 20 feet and copper bolted up to 21 feet. The Winged Racer was sheathed up to 21 feet aft and 20 feet forward, and copper bolted up to 22 feet. The Great Republic was sheathed up to 25 feet and copper bolted up to 26 feet. Thus, it may be assumed that copper fastening generally extended one foot above her sheathing. Unfortunately, however, the BDA report of the Flying Cloud makes no mention of how high the sheathing came. Thus, the water line shown in the plan of the Great Republic must be compared with the figures mentioned above. The load water line of the Great Republic measures 21 feet forward and 24½ feet aft. Therefore, it may be assumed that the Flying Cloud was copper fastened 1 foot above the load water line shown on the MIT plan.

6 SQUARE FRAMES

Material The BDA states that the frames of the Flying Cloud were "mostly of superior white oak." "Mostly" is a puzzling word, and it leaves considerable question as to what parts of the frame were not white oak. The only clue is offered in the BDA description of the Stag Hound where her top timbers are of hackmatack; but the bulwark stanchions of the Flying Cloud^BDA were of white oak. Thus, it must be assumed that in the Flying Cloud all of the frames were of white oak.

Size The size of the floor timber on the keel is given by the BDA as averaging 12 by 17, or by bur usual convention, sided 12 molded 17. The majority of the other BDA reports give a 2 inch spread in the siding and for the Stag Hound, a 2 inch spread was given for the molding also. Considering this and statements made by Griffiths, there seems to be sufficient justification for assuming that there was a reduction in the molding of the floor timbers in the extremities of the ship.

There are two possible arguments as far as the siding dimension is concerned. The Staffordshire had a spread in the siding of 1 inch. The other reports gave a 2 inch spread to the siding, therefore a 2 inch spread has been assumed valid for the Flying Cloud. Since 12 inches is presented as an average, it would seem perfectly justified to say that the siding was 11 to 13 inches; however, since the great majority of the floor timbers were the same size, decreasing only at the ends of the ship, the size of this majority might be quoted as the average. This would make the spread 10 to 12 inches, the same as that given for the Stag Hound. Another source which should be considered in this discussion is the plan of the Chariot of Fame. The space shown between timbers in the center portion of this ship averages 3 inches (they vary and it is thus impossible to be absolute about this distance). The room and space (distance between frame centers) of the Flying Cloud is shown in both the MIT and Hall plans as being l½ feet. If the 12 inch floor timber siding is assumed, the space between the timbers on the keel would average 3 inches. On the basis of correlation with the Stag Hound and the Chariot of Fame, a siding of 10 to 12 inches has been accepted as most probable: 12 inches midships, decreasing to 10 inches at the ends.

It is obvious from the FDA reports of McKay clippers that there was a tendency towards increasing the floor timber molding. Table 6 presents the molding of the floor timbers of six of McKay's ships, listed in order of launching date

Table 6 - Floor Timber Molding

Stag Hound 14 - 16

Flying Cloud 17

Staffordshire 18

Flying Fish 18

Sovereign of the Seas 19

Westward Ho 18

Bald Eagle 19

If the 17 inches given is an average molding, then the spread would probably be 16 to 18 inches (corresponding to the Stag Hound) giving for the six ships considered a sequence of molded dimensions midships of 16, 18, 19, 19, 20, 18, 20. However, if 17 inches is taken as an absolute molding midships, the sequence would be 16, 17, 18, 18, 19, 18, 19. Because of the higher symmetry which it imparts to the sequence of molding dimensions and because the sided dimension was taken as valid midships, 17 inches has been accepted as the floor timber molding midships, decreasing at the extremities.

To arrive at the scantling throughout the entire frame toe size at both the keel and planksheer must be determined. Griffiths^l02 suggests that after setting these dimensions it was usual to graduate the molding evenly over the entire length. In the Flying Cloud, the scantling of the frame at the keel has been found to be molding 17 siding 12 inches. The size at the planksheer has been determined to be molded 8, sided 10 inches—see BULWARKS. Hall⁸⁸ gives a typical tapering of the molding for the Champion of the Seas: keel 20 inches, bilge 13, lower deck 1½, middle deck 9, planksheer 7, rail 6. Figure 28 gives a skeleton midship cross-section (straightened out) of the Champion of the Seas derived from the BDA and Hall's description of the ship. Figure 29 gives the midship cross-section taken from the Chariot of Fame plan, and Figure 30 gives the midship cross-section taken from the Great Republic plan. Figure 31 presents the assumed scantling graduation of the Flying Cloud.

The siding was not diminished gradually, but rather was reduced at one or more butts, i,e., a futtock would be sided the same throughout its length, but not necessarily the same as the adjoining futtocks. The number of reductions required depended upon the amount of difference between the siding at the keel and at the planksheer. Siding of floor timbers is taken as 12 inches, decreasing to a siding of 10 inches at the planksheer. Although Hall's⁸⁸ description of the Champion of the Seas indicates that the floor timbers and first futtocks were not of the same siding, the Chariot of Fame plan shows these timbers to be of equal siding and this arrangement is also true of the Great Republic plan, and has been assumed for the Flying Cloud primarily because it is believed this was the usual method. It has been assumed that the futtocks had the following sidings: floor timbers and first futtocks (navel timbers) 12, second futtocks 11½, third futtock 10¾, top timbers (at planksheer ) 10 inches.

Figure 28 - Molding of midship frame - Champion of the Seas

Figure 29 - Molding of midship frame - Charriot of Fame

Figure 30 - Molding of midship frame - Great Republic

Figure 31 - Molding of midship frame- Flying Cloud

However, the outsides of any frames are parallel, the reduction in siding occurring on the side of the timber toward the center of the frame,

Arrangement Griffiths advocates that the spaces between all timbers be equally divided. The Chariot of Fame plan shows the timbers of each frame being separated but not quite as much as the space between frames. An arrangement similar to that shown for the Chariot of Fame has been assumed; 2½ inch spaces between timbers and a 3½ inch space between frames at the keel.

Because only the center line of each frame is designated in the draught, it is necessary to determine how timbers were moved to obtain ff" this spacing. Griffiths¹¹¹ tells us that the first futtook (which in the Chariot of Fame plan is on the forward side of the frame in the after body and appears to be on the after side of the frame in the fore body) moves forward in the after-body and aft in the fore-body. This requires that the first futtock be placed on the after side of the frame forward of the (dead-flat) frame and on the forward side aft of the frame. Such an arrangement would require a larger space to be provided at the frame, which is evident in neither the MIT nor Hall plans. Since the Chariot of Fame plan shows this arrangement, it has been adopted for the Flying Cloud. However, the only way that a uniform spacing can be attained with this arrangement consistent with the MIT plan is to move the first futtock forward in the after-body and move the floor timber forward in the forward body.

Length The length of each futtock is somewhat dependent upon the available timber. A set of dimensions of individual futtocks was given in Webb's books of plans. It is well known that Webb did not compile these two volumes until well after the clipper ship period had passed (around 1890), but there is sufficient detail given in the futtock diagrams that they may be considered fairly representative of the lengths and forms available during the 1850's. All of the futtocks adopted for the Flying Cloud are believed to have been available at the time; each of them is slightly smaller than the futtocks shown by Webb. The lengths of the futtocks have been set midship as follows: floor timber 21’-2”, first futtock 17'-6", second futtock 13’-7", third futtock 14’-9”, top-timber 13’-4”, half-top timber 5’-3”, or bulwark stanchion 10'-3". Hall⁸⁸ gives the length of floor timbers in the Champion of the Seas as 24 feet, while giving 25 feet as the length of both the floor and first futtocks of the Great Republic. The timbers of the Flying Cloud would not have been as long as 25 feet since the ship was smaller and had a greater dead rise. The arrangement adopted for the Flying Cloud coincides very closely with a diagram in Griffiths^P1.15.

Scarfs Griffiths¹³⁹ implies that futtocks were but joined square, not scarfed with a chick as was the practice in England. The futtock diagrams shown by Webb imply that the futtocks were plan butted, and the BDA reports of the Westward Ho and Bald Eagle and Empress of the Seas speak of frames being chocked at every joint. Butt joints have been assumed for the Flying Cloud.

Chocks The BDA reports of the Westward Ho, Bald Eagle and Empress of the Seas speak of their frames being chocked at every joint. The BDA stated that the frames of the Lightning were "chocked with oak above and below every joint". Wilson²⁰³ states that chocks were placed between the frames, opposite to each butt, 6 inches thick, dove-tailed ½ inch into the timbers they abutt, the grain of the wood being fore and aft, keeping the chocks 1 inch clear of the outside of the frame to prevent water from lodging; trimed fair inside. Griffiths^P1.15 shows a number of frames with chocks fitted between timbers of each frame. Large chocks (2¾ times as long as the siding of the frame, 2½ times as long as the molding, or 3 times as long as the chock siding) are shown in the wake of each joint. Smaller chocks (½ the length of the larger chocks) are fit ted between each butt chock. No chocks are shown between frames. It has been assumed that the chocks were fitted at the joints of each frame timber, but not between frames. These chocks would be kept 1 inch clear of the frame outside and trimmed fair inside, were of oak, and of lengths following the proportions shown by Griffiths. Chocks placed between the joint chocks have been adopted on the basis of the Lightning^BDA report and Griffiths^{P1 •15}.

Fastening Hall⁸⁸ states that the frames of the Champion of the Seas had from four to seven iron bolts in each futtock, from 1 to 1⅛ inch in diameter: frames of the Great Republic^H89 were dowelled with white oak cylinders 3¼ inches in diameter, 3½ inches long and bolted through these with 1 inch iron bolts. The BDA report of the Challenge states that her frames were bolted with 1 inch iron, and the frames of the Lightning^BDA and Empress of the Seas^BDA were bolted together fore and aft. Griffiths^P1.15 shows one frame bolt driven through each futtock end and one bolt through each small chock. Wilson¹⁹⁷ states that the timbers of the frames are close together and each lap or scarf is bolted with three iron bolts. These bolts are three inches less in length than the siding size of the frame and are punched in l½ inches, taking care to keep them clear of the lodge knees and water-way bolts. The heads and heels of all the timbers are coaked together with round coaks, and there is a three inch coak between the timbers at each frame bolt, the bolt passing through the timbers and coak. The coaks are made of oak, locust, or lignum vitae.

The following arrangement has been adopted for the Flying Cloud. Frames have separating chocks between timbers, with 1 inch iron bolts 3 inches shorter than the width of the frame, driven in 1½ inches.

Griffiths¹³⁹ states that a l½ inch hole should be bored through all butts of the frame. The direction of these holes should be diagonally from corner to corner of the butt, half out of each timber, i.e., a hole starting at the molding edge in the outside should come through at the bevelling edge on the inside. Treenails were inserted thereby obtaining the strength often achieved by other methods of dowling, but this method is considered preferable to any other method. Since no other reference to this procedure was found, we have not adopted it.

Limbers Limbers are openings cut in the floors of frames to permit drainage of the bilge water to the pumps midships. Curtis⁶³ states that there were two types of limbers used, both of them being in the wake of the center of the garboard for the entire length of the ship. The first consists of a square hole cut out on the bottom of the floor timbers and first futtocks, while the other arrangement is to drill a hole a short distance up from the bottom. He states that the limbers are usually fitted with ⅜ inch diameter close link chain which when fastened is left slack so that the chain may be moved back and forth to clear the limbers should they become clogged. The square limbers and ⅜ inch chain have been adopted.

7 BULWARK STANCHIONS

Wilson²³⁷ states that bulwarks are those portions rise above the spar (upper) deck.

Material The BDA states that he Flying Cloud’s bulwark stanchions were of oak. It has been assumed that this was whiter oak, as this material was specified for the rest of the frame.

Size the size of the bulwark stanchions of the Flying Cloud is difficult to determine from the information available. Table 7 presents the dimensions of the top-timbers at the planksheer for various ships, as given in the BDA reports.

Table 7 - Size of "top timbers"

SIZE OF “TOP-TIMBERS”*

Stag Hound 8 by 1 0

Westward Ho 10 by 7

Whistler 10 by 6½

Dauntless 6½ by 1 0

Flying Childers 7 by l 0

John Bertram 10 by 7

Great Republic^H89 8 by 11-13

Champion of the Seas^H88 7 by 10

*Usual convention is molded by sided

Because of similarities in other respects between the Flying Cloud and the Stag Hound, it has been assumed that the bulwark stanchions were molded 8, sided 10 at the planksheer.

Height The height of the Flying Cloud’s main rail is given by the BDA as 5 feet from the deck. The usual convention, and one shown on the Chariot of Fame plan, was to measure, from the under side of the planksheer, to the under side of the main rail, and since 5 feet checks fairly well on the MIT plan (5’-1”) and better on the Hall plan (5’-0”) it has been assumed that the convention is valid.

Taper Hall⁸⁸ states that the Champion of the Seas had bulwark stanchions which at the planksheer were molded 7, sided 10 and at the rail were molded 6, sided 9. The same taper has been given the Flying Cloud. Thus the stanchion at the rail would be molded 7 sided 9.

Arrangement Bulwark stanchions may be either separate stanchions placed above the upper deck for the purpose of supporting the bulwarks, or they may be extensions of the top-timbers above the planksheer. The BDA descriptions of the Queen of the Seas (1300 tons) and the Queen of Clippers (2300 tons) state that their bulwark stanchions were the continuation of every other top timber, while the stanchions of the Dauntless (800 tons) were of every third top timber. Because of the similarities in size of the Flying Cloud and the first two ships it has been assumed that her bulwark stanchions were the continuation of every other top timber, or one in every other frame. This places the stanchions 5 feet apart on centers. The only difficulty with this arrangement is the question of what happens when the first futtocks are switched from the forward side of the frame to the after side in the usual method of framing a ship.

No solution is proposed.

Fastening A statement that appeared in the BDA report of the Santa Claus in regard to fastening the bulwark stanchions to the effect that they were fastened with composition in wake of the planksheer presents the question of what the remainder was fastened with.

8 CANT FRAMES

Material White Oak (see SQUARE FRAMES)

Size Griffiths states that both the scantling (in this case of meaning molding) and siding of the cant frames can be reduced from that of the square frames with advantage. Since it has already been accepted that the square frames were lighter at the extremities, it is reasonable to assume that the reduction was carried into the cant frames. The reduction in molding and siding can be obtained by estimating the amount of reduction shown on the Chariot of Fame plan. Although the lines of this ship are not available, making the results only approximate, it is estimated that in the Chariot of Fame the molding at the keel was reduced from 18 inches in the square frames to 13½ inches at the extremities. A proportionate reduction for the Flying Cloud would be from 17 to 13 inches molding.

Length Although the cant timber lengths generally follow the square frame sirmarks, it is desirable in the extremities to have one timber extend over two or three sirmarks.

Taper The Chariot of Fame plan shows the cants tapered to the same size at the planksheer as the square frames. This arrangement has been adopted for the Flying Cloud.

Fastening Wilson²⁰³ advises that the heels of the cant frames are boxed into the deadwood about l½ inches for a length of 18 to 24 inches. The heel of each timber is bolted through the deadwood with 2 copper bolts and riveted on rings on alternate sides. Hall⁸⁸ says that the cant frames of the Champion of the Seas were tendoned and bolted to the deadwood with 1⅛ inch bolts. Curtis⁶⁰ gives us a bolting arrangement which shows three through bolts to each timber arranged in a diagonal line. The cants are assumed to have been tendoned to the deadwood and bolted with two 1⅛ 1inch copper bolts riveted on rings on alternate sides.

Chocks Griffiths¹¹⁵ states that the introduction of chocks in the cant frames is recent, but it has been assumed not so recent that they were not used in constructing the Flying Cloud. Therefore chocks are assumed to have been fitted in the same manner as in the square frames, except that the chocks would be tapered to fit.

9 KNIGHT HEADS

Material The Westward Ho^BDA had her knight heads of white oak and white oak has been accepted as the material for the knight heads of the Flying Cloud (see SQUARE FRAMES).

Size Wilson²⁰¹ states that the knight heads and stem pieces are made conformably to the scantling of the frame, in and out (molding) except at the upper ends where there is an additional substance termed the boxing, equal to the thickness of the outside and inside planking, in the wake of the bowsprit, extending from about one foot above to one foot below the bowsprit. This wood is left to prevent joints in the hole for the bowsprit. Griffiths^l23 reports that the molding size of the knight heads should be the same as the adjacent cants, except that in wake of the bulwark planking, the knight heads should mold an additional amount equal to the rabbet of this planking that the stem will not be injured immediately below the bow sprit. It has been assumed that they were sided the same as adjoining cants or 10 inches.

Arrangement The BDA states that the Flying Cloud measured 235 feet "from knighthead to traffrail" implying that knight heads did in fact extend above the bulwark planking. Otherwise, they probably would have given the dimension as "over-all" as was done in a number of cases. The sides of the knight heads stand fore and aft and they heel against the forward cant frame.

Fastening Wilson²⁰² states that knight heads and stem pieces are bolted and coaked to the stem and apron. The bolts pass through one knight head and the stem or apron only. However, it would seem that in most cases where possible through bolts would be used. Curtis⁵⁹ states that knight heads are bolted through the apron and stem and each other, and this arrangement has been adopted. 1⅛ inch iron bolts have been assumed since the Westward Ho^BDA reportedly was fastened with iron and the Champion of the Seas^H88 had similar timbers in the stern fastened with 1⅛ inch bolts (see STERN FRAMING).

10 HAWSE PIECES

Material White oak (see SQUARE FRAMES)

Size The only size criteria of the hawse pieces is that they should not be cut off by the hawse hole i.e., there should be two hawse pieces such that the hawse hole may go through only a portion of each. The molding is the same as the forward cant, against which the hawse pieces heel. The hole through the hawse pieces is about 20 inches in diameter (see HAWSE HOLE).

Arrangement Wilson²⁰³ states that the hawse pieces are the cant frames to the number of 6 or 7 next aft of the knight heads; they either heel against the fore side of the foremost cant timber or run down and take the common stepping with the cants. The forward hawse piece generally sides against the knight head. However, it does not appear that this practice was followed in the Chariot of Fame plan, since there are spaces between all frames at the planksheer. Thus, we can only assume that the hawse hole was chocked around rather than put through solid timbers. The same arrangement appears to be true for the Great Republic. Therefore, in the Flying Cloud it has been assumed that the hawse holes went through chocks only.

Fastening All timbers heeling on the forward cant would probably be plain fitted to it, since any other method would considerably weaken the cant itself. In addition, each timber necessarily would be fastened thwart-ships in some manner. Wilson²⁰³ states that the hawse pieces were bolted to the apron and to each other with iron bolts, which should be kept clear of the breast hooks and hawse holes. It has been assumed that ⅛ inch iron bolts (the size used for cants) were used for these timbers.

11 STERN FRAMING

Material White oak (see SQUARE FRAMES)

Arrangement Griffiths¹²⁷ says it was common practice to cant the frames all around the stern of a round stern ship; this is the practice shown on the Chariot of Fame plan. Wilson¹⁹⁶ states that ships with elliptical sterns have the common cant frames continued round to the stern post, and up to the top-sides, thus avoiding entirely the necessity of transoms. Wilson¹⁹¹ also states that in round and elliptical sterns, timbers called side counter-timbers are worked on each side of the stern post, to form the rake and contour of the stern. These timbers butt against the last cant frame, which heels on the deadwood. Between these side-counter timbers there was a centre counter timber large enough to fill up the space between them and upon this centre timber there was sufficient wood left to cut the rabbet. The counter timbers were securely bolted to each other and the stern post, and the rudder post was cut through the centre one.

Size Hall⁸⁸ gives some dimensions of the stern timbers used in the Champion of the Seas: inner stern post molded 20 inches at the head, 16 at the foot; stern post sided 20 at the head, 16 at the keel, molded 21 at the top, 24 at the keel; stern timbers at the side of the post 10 by 10; other stern timbers 10 by 10. Since the square frames of this ship were molded 7 sided 10 at the planksheer, while the frames of the Flying Cloud are assumed to have measured 8 by 10 at the planksheer, it seems justified to assume that the stern timbers of the Flying Cloud were at least 10 by 10. In lieu of other specific dimensions, except those obtainable from the Chariot of Fame plan, all of the above stern frame dimensions have been accepted as valid for the Flying Cloud (except for the increase in siding at the top of the stern posts).

Thearle¹⁰⁶ states that stern timbers should be canted to follow a conical surface to allow windows to be properly canted. Paasch^P1.8 shows stern timbers vertical as does Curtis^68. We have assumed vertical stem timbers for the Flying Cloud.

Curtis⁶⁸ suggests that chocks be fitted in the stern frame in wake of the knuckle and rim, a practice which is not contradicted by contemporary descriptions of stern framing and has been adapted for the Flying Cloud.

Taper Hall's⁸⁸ descriptions of the Champion of the Seas indicates the stern frame timbers had no taper.

Fastening Hall⁸⁸ tells us that the Champion of the Seas had her stern post fastened to the keel with 16 bolts of l½ inch copper. This can only mean that the stern-post knee, with arms 16 and 7½ feet long and molding 46 inches at the throat, was thus fastened to the keel. The stem timbers at the side of the post were through fastened with 1⅛ inch bolts. The same size bolts have been assumed (see KNIGHT HEADS).

12 GARBOARDS

Material It has been assumed that the reference to a scantling of southern pine applies to planking as well as the fore and aft thickwork already mentioned. Griffiths¹⁴³ partially confirms this by stating that it is quite common to plank first class steamships with yellow" pine, and Hall⁸⁸ states that all the planking on the Champion of the Seas was of pitch pine.

Size The BDA states that the garboards of the Flying Cloud were 7 inches thick, but there is no indication of how wide these were. Table 8 presents the dimensions of the garboard and of those strakes next to the garboard for a large number of ships described by the BDA.

Table 8 - Dimensions of garboards

DIMENSIONS OF GARBOARDS

Golden Light 7 x 12 6 x 12

Storm King 7 x 13 6 x 13

Mystery 7 x 13

Whistler 7 x 14 5½ x 14 5½ x 14

Golden Eagle 7 x l4

Dauntless 7 x 14

Grace Darling 7 x 14

Polar Star 7 x 14

Winfield Scott 7½ x l 3

Lightning 8 x 12 7 x 12 6 x 12

Don Quixote 8 x 14 7 x 12 5 x 12

Amphitrite 8 x 14

Empress of the Sea 8 x 16

Champion of the Seas 9 x 15 8 x 14 7 x 14

It has been assumed that the garboards of the Flying Cloud were 7 x 14 inches since this seems most likely from Table 8. The BDA also states p that the next strake outside the garboards of the Flying Cloud was 6 inches, and the next was 5 inches; beyond this is 4½ inch bottom planking. An examination of Table 8 indicates that all the thick strakes near the keel tend to be of equal width. However, no strake measuring 5 x 14 is found in the table and it seems that this strake would more likely have been 5 x 12 or 5 x 13. The 5 x 12 has been chosen because a strake of these dimensions is found in the table (Don Quixote). The table also in dictates that the width of both outside strakes should probably be made equal.

Length There is little indication of the length of either the garboards or any other planking on the ship, outside or in. The minimum length which any plank may ha-we in the case of the Flying Cloud (with a room and space of 2½ feet) is 25 feet. This would allow that butts in adjoining strakes to have 3 frame spaces between them, butts in the next strake but one would have 2 spaces, and butts in the next strake but two would have 1 space, while every fourth strake would butt on the same frame. Thearle²²⁷ tells us that Lloyd's rules would not allow adjacent butts closer than 6 feet, while butts separated by one strake could be 5 feet. The above arrangement gives separations of 7½ and 5 feet respectively. Planking longer than 25 feet was undoubtedly readily available and it is probable that the above arrangement would have been expanded. If the above arrangement is expanded by two times planking 50 feet long would be required which is probably as long as anyone would want to handle. The same general arrangement would also be valid for expansion by one and one-half times or planking 37½ feet long, which is within the range of lengths suggested by Wilson²¹⁶ for the bottom plank. Fifty feet has been adopted as the length of the bottom garboards and two thick strakes" out side of it .

Taper Curtis¹⁶⁵ states that the garboards, as well as the rest of the bottom planking was run with either no lengthwise taper or an irregular taper. It has been assumed that the garboard had no lengthwise taper. Wilson¹⁸⁷ states that the thickness of the garboard strakes was greatest amidships next to the keel, but diminished gradually in both directions so as to correspond with the thickness of the plank fore-and-aft and on the bottom. Peake^l3 suggests that the hood-ends be reduced to ¾ of the thickness midships, a figure which has been accepted for lack of any better. Curtis^l75 confirms tapering in this manner, and this plan has been adopted.

The taper athwartships is difficult to fix precisely, since various contemporary articles do not agree. The BDA states that the Chariot of Fame has 8 inch garboards, with a 7 inch and a 6 inch strake outside. The Chariot of Fame plan shows the garboard about 8-9 inches thick, but the next strake is the thickness of the bottom planking - 5 inches. The Great Republic⁵ had a garboard 10 by 14 inches with two strakes of 9 and 8 inches outside. However, the Great Republic plan shows bottom planking butting on the keel. Thus, one is left with the BDA descriptions, which taken over-all, seem to leave the feeling that if the garboards were tapered there was mention made of the fact.

Fastening Although the garboard fastening of the Flying Cloud was not specified, an examination of the BDA reports provides the most probable arrangement as follows: her garboards are let into the keel, are alternately bolted through each other and the keel, and are square fastened (riveted) with bolts upwards through the timbers. The Chatsworth^BDA had her garboards cross bolted through the keel every 4 feet with ⅞ inch copper, the same size as her butt and bilge bolts. The Dauntless^BDA and the Polar Star^BDA had their garboards fastened through their floor timbers. The Dauntless was fastened with 1¼ inch copper bolts. Her keelsons were also fastened with 1¼ inch bolts. Since the Keelson fastening of the Flying Cloud was of 1¼ inch bolts, it has been assumed that the garboards were fastened likewise. It has been assumed that 1 inch bolts were used to bolt the gar boards horizontally through the keel since this is the size that has been assumed for the butt and bilge bolts.

Scarfs One authority states that the garboards and the first inside strake are scarfed, while the next strake (thick) is butted.

13 BOTTOM PLANKING

Material The BDA reports of the Flying Fish and Westward Ho state that their planking was of hard pine. It has been assumed that the planking of the Flying Cloud was southern pine (see GARBOARDS).

Size The BDA reports that the bottom planking of the Flying Cloud was 4½ inches thick. The only widths of bottom planking given in contemporary reports of clipper ships is found in Hall's⁸⁸ descriptions of the Great Republic, which had bottom planking 6 by 14 inches. Wilson states that bottom planking should not exceed 12 inches in width and considers the bottom planking to be all planking running from the wales to the garboard strake. Figure 32 has been derived from Table 8 to show graphically what size planks were used on the bottom of ships near the keel. The circled crosses represent the garboard and thick strakes assumed for the Flying Cloud. This has been presented graphically in order to derive a reasonable width for bottom planking 4½ inches thick.

Figure 32 - Dimensions of Garboards and Thick Bottom Planking

If two lines are drawn which enclose most of the points of Figure 32, then the extension of a line parallel to this band but passing through the 6 x 14 inch point (Great Republic bottom planking) to a thickness of 4½ inches gives a width of 12½ inches, which has been assumed. However, the width was undoubtedly diminished at the bilge.

There is a difference of 1 inch between the thickness given for the bottom planking and the wales, which is twice that given for the Chariot of Fame^BDA. The increase is almost imperceptible in the Chariot of Fame plan. It has been assumed that diminishing strakes were placed at the turn of the bilge, but as there was only a 1 inch difference, the increase would take place over only a few strakes.

Length Wilson states that all bottom planks and all planks in compression are 35 to 40 feet long. Thirty-seven and one-half feet has been assumed as the nominal length for all bottom planking in the Flying Cloud (see GARBOARD )

Taper Curtis begins tapering planking lengthwise immediately upon leaving the dead flat of the bottom. This practice has been adopted.

Fitting Wilson²¹⁵ states that planking terminates in the rabbet of the stem post and in the rabbet formed by a projection of the center counter timber. Above the projection of the center counter timber, the plank runs entirely around the stern. With regard to fitting the planking to the frames, Griffiths¹⁰⁶ states that the bilge strakes should be made narrower than the bottom planking because of the loss in the scantling size (molding) of the frame by making it straight for the width of the plank. This seems to be a very valid argument and is confirmed by Curtis¹⁶¹. This is probably one reason why the bilge was bolted rather than fastened with treenails since there would be less wood lost thereby. However, Wilson²¹⁷ states that in squaring off the timbers in planking the bottom, the round of the molding edge is retained, and whatever it is necessary to take away that the plank may lay solid against the timber is taken out of the plank. It has been assumed that the method described by Griffiths was used in the Flying Cloud.

Wilson²¹⁷ states that the best plan is to have 11 planks between butts on the same frame, but in no case should this be less than four. In the method described (see GARBOARDS) there are 11 planks between butts on the same frame. The BDA report of the Stag Hound states that "Below, the planking from the opposite sides meets, and the butts form a series of plain angles down to the stern post." This arrangement has been assumed valid for the Flying Cloud.

Fastening Although the fastening of the Flying Cloud's planking was not specified, the BDA descriptions of the Staffordshire, Westward Ho, and the Bald Eagle state that their planking was square fastened with treenails and butt and bilge with copper bolts. It may safely be assumed that the same was true of the Flying Cloud. Hall states that the bottom planking of the Great Republic was fastened with treenails and butt bolted with 1 inch copper. The Chatsworth^BDA with 4 inch bottom planking was butt and bilge bolted with ⅞ inch bolts. Finchan⁴¹ states that planking of a thickness between 3 and 6 inches was bolted with 1 inch copper. It has been assumed that the bottom planking of the Flying Cloud was butt and bilge bolted with ⅞ inch copper bolts.

The size of treenails is given by Curtis¹⁷⁸ as from 1¼ to 1½ inches in diameter depending upon the thickness of the plank. Hall⁸⁹ says the planking of the Great Republic was fastened with 1¼ inch locust treenails through the timbers. For the Flying Cloud 1¼ inch treenails have been assumed. Curtis¹⁷⁸ gives the following directions for fastening with treenails: they are generally made of black locust, are driven from the outside through the inside ceiling, and are wedged on both ends with oak wedged set across the grain of the plank. Treenails are commonly (when less-than 2 feet long) driven in a hole about 1/16 inch smaller than the treenail. It is believed they would be located ⅓ of the width of the plank in from the edge and likewise for the width of the timber. Wilson²¹⁹ states that all outside planking should be square fastened (two through and two short fastenings in each frame), short fastenings should be about 2⅓ times the thickness of the plank, but if let in ½ inch shall not go within 1 inch of the inside of the frame. In way of knee bolts, water-way bolts, etc. these bolts are omitted. In the frame next on each side that on which the plank butts, in lieu of one of the shortest fastenings, in the timber next the butt, there is a through bolt placed called a butt-bolt. Peake⁴⁶ suggests the butt should be ⅓ and ⅔ on the timber to ensure wood for the reception of the butt-bolt in the ⅔ section, the other butt-bolt being placed in the adjacent timber of the frame. In the hood ends forward and aft, through bolts are driven and riveted on alternate sides. When plank is reduced to a width of 6 inches, one half of the short fastenings should be omitted and the remainder placed on the alternate edges. Copper fastening extended to the iron fastening of the tops. Wilson²²⁰ states that below the copper fastening line, treenails made of seasoned locust are sometimes used; two treenails one bolt and one short fastening through each frame. Above the copper line two short fastenings and two bolts of iron are always used. No plugs are put over the heads of bolts outside the lower port sill. After the vessel is planked the projecting edges of the strakes are all trimmed off, called squaring off.

Fincham⁴¹ states that the treenails that fasten the exterior planking pass through the timbers and also form the principal fastenings of the ceiling, but as the exterior and interior cannot be planked at the same time, the exterior is brought on first. The holes for the treenails are bored through the outside planking and the timbers. The outside planking is held to the frame by temporary screw eye-bolt fastening, to secure it to the frame until the treenails can be driven through both planking and ceiling. Screw eyes or screw-bolts are in length, from a shoulder left just beyond the eye, about the thickness of the plank plus 6½ inches, and have a worn cut on from their ends about 6½ inches. The diameter of the bolts is 1 inch for plank 3 to 6 inches thick, and l½ inches for above 6 inches. When the interior planking is brought on, the holes for the treenails are bored through it and the screw-bolts are removed as it becomes necessary to drive the treenails. The treenails have both their ends caulked. The large size is caulked square, the medium triangular, and the small crosswise. Wilson²¹⁹ " states that all through (metal) fastening from outside rivet on the inside planking, waterways, knees, etc.

It has been assumed that the Flying Cloud's bottom fastened with two l¼ inch locust treenails and two 10 inch short fastenings ½ inch in diameter in each frame. The treenails were caulked crosswise (+) at each end the short fastenings punched in ½ inch, but not plugged except above the water-line, copper was used up to the load line, iron above this. In the bilge it has been assumed that 1 inch copper through bolts replaced the short fastenings. At each butt 1 inch copper bolts were used as described above.

14 WALES

Material Southern pine (see GARBOARDS).

Size The BDA report states that there were 18 wales 5½ inches by 7 inches. It seems obvious that these would be placed on the frame molded 5½ inches, which corresponds to the arrangement shown on the Chariot of Fame plan and the 5 inches thick and 7 inches wide suggested by Griffiths¹⁴³.

Length Since Wilson²¹⁶ states that wales, clamps, and spirketting are 40 to 50 feet long, it has been assumed that the wales of the Flying Cloud were 50 feet in length (see GARBOARDS).

Taper Griffiths¹⁰⁶ states that the modern procedure was to taper wales, but admits that not all builders preferred this over a constant width. The BDA description of the Stag Hound states that "The planking along the upper part of the run is carried up to the line of planksheer and there terminates, and this is done without any irregularity in the width.” This statement implies that the wales were not tapered. Thus it has been assumed that the wales of the Flying Cloud were not tapered.

Arrangement It is stated in the BDA report of the Flying Fish that the wales were carried up flush to the planksheer. The other BDA descriptions merely say "planked flush to the planksheer." Griffiths⁵⁵ recommends flush wales saying that by having no projection to the wale ("and any vessel is better without the projection than with it") a flush side is least apt to get marred, and the ship is equally as strong. The BDA report of the Westward Ho states that this ship was "planked smoothly, without a projection line up to the covering board", which indicates that the wales did not project over the bottom planking—an arrangement also shown on the Chariot of Fame plan. The position of the lower edge of the wales on the Flying Cloud would be 17½ inches below the water-line shown on the MIT plan.

Fastening Fastenings are the same as for the bottom planking—1½ inch treenails and 1 inch butt bolts (see BOTTOM PLANKING).

15 PLANKSHEER

Material It is stated in the BDA report of the Bald Eagle that her planksheer was of hard pine. It may be assumed that the planksheer of the Flying Cloud was also of hard (southern) pine (see GARBOARDS).

Size The BDA specifies that the planksheer of the Flying Cloud was 6 by 16 inches. Descriptions of other ships often specify that the plank sheer was 6 inches thick, and it can confidently be assumed that the same arrangement is applicable to the Flying Cloud.

Length The planksheer and main rail should obviously be in as long lengths as possible. Since some of the outside planking has been assumed to have been 50 feet long, it is not unreasonable to assume a length of 60 to 70 feet for the midship portions of both the planksheer and main rail.

Arrangement One timber of every other frame extends above the planksheer forming the bulwark stanchions while the other timbers are cut off so that the planksheer may rest on them. The stanchions are tapered (see BULWARK STANCHIONS) so that the planksheer may be gotton over. When in place, the planksheer, main rail, and monkey rail should all cant to the outside (see MAIN RAIL). The BDA in many cases reports that the moulding of the planksheer is carried around the stern and this is shown in all the paintings of the Flying Cloud and both the Hall and MIT plans show the line of the planksheer continuous from head to stern. However, Griffiths¹⁴¹ states that the planksheer in its whole width extended no farther than the stanchions were single which is where the forecastle and poop decks commence; the whole frames forming solid bulwarks in the extremities. A molding is continued around both outside and inside, so that externally, the appearance is the same. This arrangement is designed to allow all the top-timbers to extend in their full scantling to the forecastle and poop decks beams. The planksheer is placed so that it extends ½ inch beyond the wales or 6 inches on the outside of the bulwark stanchions.

Fastening Griffiths¹⁴² states that the planksheer (having been put over the stanchions) should be bolted edgewise once through each stanchion and at least twice between each stanchion; and inasmuch as it has no bearing in the center, it should also be well fastened to the waterway and outside strake. BDA descriptions stated that fastenings of a number of ships varied from ⅞ to l¼ inches and it has been assumed that ⅞ inch bolts were used for the above fastening. Griffiths arrangement has been adopted.

Scarfs Griffiths¹⁴² states that the siding of the stanchion sets the length of the planksheer scarf. One nib of the scarf should cut with the side of the stanchion on one side of the planksheer and the other nib on the opposite side, both of stanchion and planksheer. Thus, a scarf extends only the siding of one stanchion, i.e., 10 inches. The nib extends between the edge of the planksheer and the stanchion.

Moldings The Chariot of Fame plan shows a molding on both edges of planksheer, main rail, and monkey rail; while both the Hall and MIT plans indicate moldings of some type. The molding which has been adopted is the simple one shown on the Chariot of Fame plan shown in Figure 33.

Figure 33 - Planksheer and Rail Molding

16 BULWARK PLANKING

Material Griffiths¹⁴² states that the bulwark planking in the bow is usually of oak, however, southern pine has been accepted as being most probable (see GARBOARDS).

Size The BDA states that the bulwarks of the Westward Ho and Flying Childers were of 2½ inch material while those of the Empress of the Sea were of 2 inch and those of the Queen of the Seas were of 3 inches. These measurements were undoubtedly the thickness of the plank states that the outside planking of the bulwark was some 2 inches thick and 3 inches wide midships. The BDA reports often stated that bulwarks were “tongued, grooved, and beaded in the usual style and that results look as smooth as glass". Since there is no reason to expect that the Flying Cloud would have been outfitted differently, tongued and grooved planking 2½ thick and 4 inches wide has been chose as the most probable.

Length It has been assumed that the length of the bulwark planking was 37½ feet (see BOTTOM PLANKING).

Taper Griffiths¹⁴² suggests that two methods of planking the bulwarks were equally satisfactory. Parallel widths may be used, starting with the main rail and continuing down until they shut in aft (for there is more of an opening at the bow); then progressively shorter parallel strakes were used to shut in forward. The other method was to divide all planking regularly all around, so there were an equal number of strakes everywhere. The latter method would be neater in appearance and therefore has been chosen.

Fastening According to the BDA the bulwark boarding of the Stag Hound, Dauntless, and the John Bertram was fastened with composition. It has been assumed that these fastenings were of the same proportions as the deck fastenings—¼ inch square, 4 inches long.

Inside Planking There is question whether the Flying Cloud's bulwarks were planked inside. The BDA description of the Bald Eagle implies that planking the bulwarks on both sides was the exception rather than the rule. Davis^{DP 96} states that in merchant ships the inside of the timbers were left exposed below the pin rail and bib-piece under it (a rail similar to the pin rail but below it). The BDA report of the Sovereign of the Seas makes no mention of the inside bulwark planking and Lubbock⁴⁸ in his the Colonial Clippers shows a picture of this ship with bulwark stanchions visible. It is possible that the Currier lithograph of the Flying Cloud does show timbers forward of the forward mast. It has therefore been assumed that the main bulwarks of the Flying Cloud were not boarded.

Rack Rail The BDA states that the Flying Cloud had a rack rail, and claims that the Dauntless had a rack rail about 1 foot below the main rail . The Chatsworth had an oak pin rail 5 inches thick, while the Chariot of Fame plan shows a rack rail about 6 inches thick and 11 inches wide. How ever, this was constructed somewhat differently from the way it is believed the Flying Cloud was arranged since on this plan the rack rail is placed over 3 inch inside bulwark planking. However, the same working room and thickness as shown on the Chariot of Fame plan has been provided giving a rack rail 6 inches thick, 17 inches wide.

Clamp The BDA states that there was a stout clamp extending fore and aft between the main and rack rails. This clamp probably extended to the extremities of the ship acting as a support for the main rail. The fastening of the clamp was undoubtedly the same as that reported for the Stag Hound^BDA where it was bolted horizontally through the stanchions and vertically between both rails, indicating that the clamp completely filled the space between the two rails. Since it has been assumed that the main rail extended 4½ inches inside the bulwark stanchions (see MAIN RAIL), we have made the clamp molded 3½ inches. To provide the same amount of vertical working space as on the Chariot of Fame, the clamp would be sided at least 6 inches. However, to place the rack rail at the same height from the deck as the Chariot of Fame, the clamp would be sided 12 inches. Since the rack rail of the Dauntless^BDA was about 1 foot below the main rail, 12 inches has been accepted as the siding of the clamp in the Flying Cloud.

17 MAIN RAIL

Material Southern pine has been assumed (see GARBOARDS).

Size The BDA reports that the main rail of the Flying Cloud was 6 inches thick by 16 inches wide.

Length 60 to 70 feet (see PLANKSHEER).

Taper None (see PLANKSHEER).

Arrangement Griffiths¹⁴¹ states that the rail should have sufficient cant to turn the water outside of the ship, except on the bow, where it cants less and is set to a straight line across at the knight heads. The Chariot of Fame plan shows the cant of the planksheer, main rail, and monkey rail midships as follows:

planksheer 3½ degrees from horizontal

main rail 5½ ditto

monkey rail 6 ditto

These cants have been assumed for the Flying Cloud. The main rail is assumed to have been placed symmetrically on the stanchion extending out board 4½ inches from the stanchion.

Griffiths states that when a monkey rail is to be constructed, the main rail is put over the stanchions much the same as the planksheer, implying that the stanchions extended to the monkey rail. However, the BDA reports of many ships referred to monkey rail stanchions which were of a different material from bulwark stanchions , and the BDA of the Whistler states that the monkey rail was strongly bolted to the main rail. Thus, it has been assumed that the monkey rail stanchions were not extensions of the bulwark stanchions. The main rail is assumed to have been tendoned 1 inch over the stanchions as suggested by Griffiths¹⁴². Reference to the clamp supporting this rail is found under BULWARK PLANKING.

Scarf Griffiths¹⁴² states that rail scarfs should be edge-ways, and that he prefers the key to the hook scarf for this application, implying that he did not agree with most builders. Since the key scarf was widely used according to the BDA, this type has been assumed. Curtis's³⁰ rule has been followed giving a scarf 8 feet long with 4 inch nibs.

Fastening It has been assumed that the fastening arrangement was similar to that used for the planksheer.

18 MONKEY RAIL

Material Southern pine (see GARBOARDS).

Height The BDA states there was a monkey rail of 16 inches surmounting the main rail. By comparing the BDA report and the plan of the Chariot of Fame, it is found that this means the top of the monkey rail was 16 inches above the upper surface of the main rail. Thus, the bulwarks stood 6 feet 10 inches above the waterway, 4 inches higher than those of the Stag Hound, 12 inches higher than those of the Flying Fish, and 2 inches higher than shown on the Chariot of Fame plan. The above arrangement has been accepted. There is an even higher rail shown on the Currier lithograph and Chinese painting fitted in the bow on top of the monkey rail. It measures (Chinese painting) 54.5 feet long and the height is in the neighborhood of one foot

Size Since the planksheer and main rail of the Chariot of Fame were about the same size as specified for the Flying Cloud, it has been assumed the monkey rail was the same size as that shown on the Chariot of Fame plan, i.e., 4 inches thick by 10 inches wide.

Length The monkey rail should be made out of fairly long timbers, although it is not added for strength as are the planksheer and main rail. Fifty feet has been accepted as a reasonable length.

Scarf It has been assumed that the description of a scarf given by Griffiths¹⁴² for the main rail to be applicable to the monkey rail (see MAIN RAIL). A key scarf, 5 feet long with 2½ inch nibs has been adopted. (The monkey rail was planked inside and out according to Griffiths¹⁴¹. The Chariot of Fame plan shows the outside planking on the monkey rail to be somewhat less than the corresponding bulwark planking, while it was paneled inside. It is impossible to tell what is shown on the Currier lithograph. It has been assumed that the outside planking was 2 by 3 inches. Since most of the pictures of ships did not show stanchions, above the main tail, a paneled monkey bulwark has been assumed inside.

Clamp The BDA report of the Whistler states that the monkey rail was solid, clamped inside and outside. However, it has been assumed that no clamp was fitted inside on the Flying Cloud since none is shown on the Chariot of Fame plan.

Location The Chariot of Fame plan shows the monkey rail almost flush with the outside monkey bulwark planking. It has been assumed that on the Flying Cloud it was placed 2½ inches outboard from the stanchion, i.e., a molding of ½ inch, would be evident.

19 FLOOR CEILING

Material Southern pine (see GARBOARDS).

Size The BDA states that the ceiling on the floor of the Flying Cloud is hi inches thick. The Chariot of Fame plan shows 5 inch ceiling strakes 12 inches wide. It has been assumed that the 4½ inch ceiling strakes would be about 12 inches wide, (see BOTTOM PLANKS).

Length Ceiling planking generally follows the same rules as outside planking; thus, it has been assumed that 25 to 50 foot strakes are again applicable but 37½ feet has been assumed as the nominal length.

Taper Same as corresponding outside planking (see BOTTOM PLANKING).

Scarfs The BDA often reported that the hold ceiling was scarfed above the thick strakes over the bilge, but no direct reference to scarfing the floor ceiling was found. Since the BDA apparently excludes the floor ceiling, it .has been assumed that this was butted.

Fastening The BDA states that the bottom ceiling was square bolted. A look at the BDA report of the Stag Hound indicates that this means '"square bolted, not tacked with spikes". Curtis¹⁰⁰ states that the ceiling fastening is commonly driven in the center of the frame timbers to reserve the space from the center to the edge of the timbers for the outside planking fastening, two button-headed bolts driven from the inside to within 1 inch of the outside of the frame, and two being headed blunt bolts driven from the outside and clinched over rings on the inside. No reference to the size of this fastening was found, but it has been assumed that it would be substantially the same as the butt and bilge bolts for the planking or 1 inch. Copper bolts are assumed up to 1 foot above the load water line; iron above.

Caulking Although no specific mention of caulking is made in the BDA report of the Flying Cloud, it has been assumed that the Flying Cloud was built similar to the Stag Hound which had "Her hold ... caulked and payed from the limber boards to the (lower) deck.

20 LIMBER STRAKES

Material Southern pine (see GARBOARDS).

Size The arrangement of the limber strakes has been patterned after that shown on the Chariot of Fame plan. The lumber strakes shown here are a little over one-half the thickness of the floor ceiling and span a horizontal distance just slightly larger than the width of a strake of floor ceiling. Fincham³³ states that for 4½ inch ceiling, the limber strakes would be 3 to 3½ thick. It has been assumed that for the Flying Cloud a 3½ limber strake 16 inches wide would be suitable. Fincham³³ claims that limber boards were in about 3 feet lengths.

Fastening It is believed that in order to facilitate their removal, limber strakes were not fastened in any way; the rabbeted edges would hold them in place.

21 BILGE KEELSONS

Material Southern pine (see MAIN KEELSONS).

Size The only transverse section of a McKay ship discovered which shows bilge keelsons is that if the Great Republic. The description given by Hall⁸⁸ states there are “two bilge keelsons, each 15 inches square and in two depths". The plan shows two double bilge keelsons on each side, making four keelsons, each of two depths. If the same comparison is followed for the Flying Cloud which on the bilge "has two keelsons, each 10 by 16 inches," it is clear that there was a total of four bilge keelsons in the ship. Hall⁸⁸ says that the ceiling of the Great Republic was of 10 by 12 inch strakes. The plan shows these strakes to be sided 10, molded 12, so that it may be assumed that the bilge keelsons of the Flying Cloud were sided 10, molded 16, just opposite to the usual convention but in this case a more logical arrangement.

Length The lengths of the individual timbers have been assumed to -be the same as that of the other keelsons or 40 feet.

Taper Fincham³⁴ says that bilge thick strakes were reduced to ⅔ of their thickness, starting 8 to 10 feet from the end. However, it was often stated in BDA reports that the bilge keelson and the other thick strakes extended to the ends undiminished in size. The latter arrangement has been assumed. Wilson²¹³ states that all thick strakes rise with the heads of the timbers and butt under the berth deck lamps.

Scarfs The BDA reports of the Champion of the Seas and the Lightning, and the description of the Great Republic^S13 state that the bilge keelsons were scarfed, keyed, and fastened as were the other keelsons, which has been assumed.

Fastening The BDA report of the Lightning states that her bilge keelsons were square fastened through the timbers, the bolts being driven alternately from inside and outside and riveted. Hall's⁸⁸ and a Sailor's¹³ descriptions of the Great Republic gives the only indication of the fastening arrangements for bilge keelsons. These were square bolted with 1-¼ inch iron through each timber and edge bolted with ⅛ inch iron. Since the main keelson of the Great Republic was fastened with 1-⅜ inch bolts, 1⅛ inch bolts have been assumed for the bilge keelsons of the Flying Cloud—⅛ inch less than those in the keelson. No edge bolts were assumed (see HOLD CEILING).

Location Hall’s⁸⁹ description of the Great Republic and the BDA description of the Flying Fish, Westward Ho, and Bald Eagle all specify bilge keelsons as being located over the floor heads or over the first futtocks. The location of these keelsons in the Flying Cloud is assumed similar.

Caulking The bilge keelsons are assumed to have been caulked and payed (see FLOOR CEILING).

22. HOLD CEILING

Material Southern pine (see GARBOARDS).

Size It is stated by the BDA that the hold ceiling from the bilge keelsons to the lower deck damp is 7 inches thick. It has been assumed that a width of 10 inches for these strakes is reasonable.

Length The lengths should be 37½ feet (see FLOOR CEILING). Griffiths¹²² states that the hold ceiling and clamps may extend over the after side of the apron and butt in the center, or they may butt (without a rabbet) to the siding edge of the apron. The latter is preferred by him and has been accepted for the Flying Cloud.

Taper Same as corresponding planking (see BOTTOM PLANKING).

Scarfs The BDA specifies that this portion of the ceiling of the Flying Cloud was scarfed. Curtis¹⁰⁰ states that ceiling scarfs were 2 frame spaces long (5 feet), flat with the outboard nib feathered against the frame and the inboard nib being ⅞ of the thickness of the strake. This arrangement has been adopted.

Fastening The BDA specifies that this ceiling was square fastened, and it has been assumed that the fastening was the same as outlined under FLOOR CEILING. Although many of McKay's later ships were edge bolted between every other frame, no early references to this were found and it has been assumed that this was not done on the Flying Cloud.

Caulking The hold ceiling has been assumed caulked and payed (see FLOOR CEILING).

23 HOLD STRNGER

Material Southern pine (see GARBOARDS).

Size The BDA states that there was a 10 by 16 inch stringer upon which the lower ends of the hanging knees rested and to which they were fayed. The logical arrangement for this strake is placed flat, giving 3 inches (a 10 inch strake below a 7 inch ceiling) for the knees to rest upon, which is entirely sufficient if the arrangement given in the Chariot of Fame plan is followed. This arrangement also conforms to the usual "molded by sided" convention.

Length The stringers must extend to the extremities of the ship since there are beams and hanging knees throughout the length of the ship. Timbers 40 feet long have been assumed (see BILGE KEELSONS).

Taper None (see BILGE KEELSONS).

Scarf The FDA reports generally agree that certain thick work was scarfed. The details of the scarfs are assumed the same as the BILGE KEELSON.

Fastening The BDA reports state that the thick work of the ceiling of most McKay vessels was square bolted through the timbers. Bolts 1⅛ inches have been assumed (see BILGE KEELSONS).

Caulking It has been assumed that the thick work was caulked and payed (see FLOOR CEILING).

24 LOWER DECK BEAMS

Material The BDA reports that the Stag Hound had beams of hard pine, the Flying Fish had beams of southern pine, and the Westward Ho and Bald Eagle had deck frames of hard pine. The Flying Cloud undoubtedly had beams of southern pine.

Size The BDA states that the lower deck beams of the Flying Cloud were 15 inches square. It was common practice to reduce the molding of beams toward the sides of the ship. Wilson²²² states that beams were molded one inch less at the ends than at the center. The Chariot of Fame plan shows a reduction of 2 inches in each of her three beams which, starting with the lower deck were molded midships 15, 14, and 12 inches respectively. Halls'⁸⁹ description of the Great Republic states that "...the beams of the lower and main decks (were) 15 by 16 and (15 by) 18 inches amidships, tapering to 12 inch molding at the ends, while the upper decks beams...were 12 by 20 inches in the center, tapering to 10 inch molding at the ends..." The Lightning^BDA had lower deck beams 14 by 16 inches amidships, tapered an inch or two towards the ends. The BDA descriptions of the Staffordshire and Flying Fish specify that the dimensions given are of the beams amidships and it is reasonable that this was also the case in the case of the Flying Cloud description. A reduction of 15 to 13 inches given by the Chariot of Fame plan has been accepted as valid for the Flying Cloud.

Camber No consistent "proportions were discovered for the camber of the beams. Griffiths^P1.21 shows both lower and upper deck beams cambered ¾ inch per foot on top, with no camber on the bottom side of the beams; Curtis^ll2 suggests ¼ or 3/l6 inch per foot for the upper deck and none for the lower deck; the Chariot of Fame plan shows ⅓ inch per foot on the topside of all three decks and about ⅙ inch per foot on the bottom sides; the Great Republic plan shows ⅜ inch per foot on the topside and somewhat less than this on the bottom side. The Flying Cloud would be given a camber of 11/16 inch per foot if the MIT plan and the BDA descriptions are followed. This camber falls within the other values noted and therefore has been assumed valid. Since Griffiths and the Chariot of Fame and Great Republic plans show all decks cambered equally, it has been assumed that both decks of the Flying Cloud have 11/16 inch per foot camber. The bottom camber is determined by the molding of the beams at their extremities.

The value of 11/16 inch for the Flying Cloud was arrived at by combining the location of the planksheer shown on the MIT plan, the BDA report of the depth of hold (21’-6" from the top of the floor ceiling at the limber strake to the top of the upper deck beam), the BDA report of between deck height (7' - 8" from the upper side of the lower deck to the under side of the deck above) and the depth of the waterway (14 inches).

Length Since no scarf is shown in the Chariot of Fame beams, it has been assumed that 40 foot timbers were readily available for the Flying Cloud.

Location There is no indication what spacing was given to the beams in the Flying Cloud. Various BDA descriptions (Orient, J. Montgomery, Wizard, Witch of the Wave, Winfield Scott) indicate that beams were spaced from 4 to 7 feet apart. The Chariot of Fame plan shows beams located essentially at every third frame or every 7½ feet. This arrangement has been adopted for the Flying Cloud.

Fastening Curtis¹²³ and Wilson²²³ stated that two bolts were driven well into the clamps. Thus the beams were primarily fastened in conjunction with the waterways and adjacent strakes.

25 BETWEEN DECK WATERWAYS

Material Griffiths¹⁴¹ states that between deck waterways were commonly made of yellow pine, and the lower deck waterways of the Champion of the Seas were of yellow pine. Yellow pine has been assumed (see GARBOARDS).

Size The BDA states that the between deck waterways of the Flying Cloud were 15 inches square. Over this was a strake 10 by 16, which by the usual convention would be molded 10 sided 16. This would place the strake over the waterway flat against the frame, not projecting over it. This arrangement is reasonable since if the strake was placed the other -way it would project 1 inch over the waterway. The BDA also said that there was a strake inside the waterway measuring 10 by 14 inches—again presumably molded 10 sided 14.

Length A length of 40 feet has been assumed for these timbers (see BILGE KEELSONS).

Taper Curtis¹⁴⁶ shows- these strakes untapered, even at the extremities (see BILGE KEELSON).

Scarf Wilson²²⁸ states that in most cases waterways butt against each other. However, the description of the Great Republic^S13 states that her upper deck waterways were scarfed and Hall⁸⁸ states that the lower deck waterways (molded 15 sided 14) of the Champion of the Seas had 6 foot scarfs. Curtis¹⁴⁰ shows waterway scarfs as being vertical. The BDA report of the Mystery stated that her waterways were lock scarfed as well as all her thick work. It has been assumed that the waterways of the Flying Cloud had a 6 foot vertical scarf. The strakes over the waterway are assumed to have been scarfed vertically while the inside strake is assumed to have been scarfed horizontally. Since these strakes were both molded 10 inches, the scarf length should be ⅔ of 6 feet or 4 feet.

Fastening The BDA reports generally state that the between deck waterways were cross bolted, i.e., both vertically through the strake over the waterway and the beam, and horizontally through the strake(s) inside the waterway and the timbers. Wilson²²⁸ states that they were secured with one up and down bolt through each beam, one bolt in each beam driven at an angle into the frame and one between the beams through the knees and into the clamps. Curtis¹⁴¹ gives the following arrangement for cross bolting the waterways, etc. The waterways received two button-headed bolts driven from the outside and the inside. The inner strakes also received two such bolts similarly driven. These four bolts were arranged in a square on the stanchion (if upper deck) or on the inner edges of the frame (if between decks). In addition, two button-headed bolts were driven horizontally through all waterway strakes into a chock fitted between the stanchions in way of the waterway and resting on the top timbers. In the between decks, these button-headed bolts were driven into the frame. Two bolts were driven through each strake and the beam and were clinched over rings. The BDA states that the Ellen Foster and the J. Montgomery had their between deck waterway timbers square fastened horizontally and closely bolted vertically. The Winged Arrow had her inside strake let into the beams and was bolted through them and horizontally through all. The thick work above was square fastened and bolted vertically into the waterways .

The BDA states that there were 1325 1 and 1¼ inch bolts in the waterways and the beams and timbers between decks of the Westward Ho. This gives an average density of 3.40 bolts per boot for an estimated waterway length of 390 feet. Similar figures are given for the Bald Eagle, which had 1452 bolts through the between decks waterways, timbers, and beams. With an estimated length of 395 feet, this gives an average density of 3.67 bolts per foot. With the square fastening arrangement discussed by Curtis and assuming the beams to be spaced on 7½ foot intervals (see LOWER DECK BEAMS), the Flying Cloud would use 3.00 bolts per foot, very close to the above figures but indicating that more bolts were used, probably in the bow and stern.

The Champion of the Seas between deck waterways were fastened with 1⅛ inch iron bolts through the timbers as were the upper deck waterways. Since the fastenings of the Champion of the Seas were generally larger than the earlier McKay ships, we have assumed that the bolts were the same as in the Westward Ho, i.e., 1 and 1⅛ inch iron. It is thought that a reasonable arrangement would be to use 1 inch bolts for horizontal fastening through the waterways only and 1⅛ inch bolts for fastening through the waterway and inside strakes. It has been assumed that 1⅛ inch bolts were driven vertically through the inside strake while 1 inch bolts were driven vertically through the waterway and strake over the waterway. This arrangement tends to equalize the large and small bolts driven through any single timber or strake.

Arrangement Curtis¹³⁹ states that waterways generally were set square to the beam. Hall88 states that the between deck waterways in the Champion of the Seas "lay flat" on the ends of the beams. Wilson²²⁸ states that waterways were dovetailed down over the ends of the beams 2 inches. However, no other reference of this method was found and the Chariot of Fame plan seems to show the waterways not let over the beams.

Table 9 prepared from BDA reports gives the mortise thick strake(s) inside the between deck and upper waterways.

Table 9 - Mortise Arrangement

Between Decks Upper Deck

Stag Hound - let over

Flying Cloud - -

Staffordshire - -

Flying Fish - let over

Sovereign of the Seas - -

Westward Ho mortised over let over

Bald Eagle - mortised over

Since the Stag Hound had her strakes let over the upper deck beams we have some justification for one over the other for the Flying Cloud, but there is little justification for one over the other between decks. However, it is felt that there is a slightly better chance that they were arranged the same. Thus. It is assumed that the strake was let over the beams in both decks. Curtis¹³⁹ states that the lock strake is let into the beam 2 to 3 inches so that the top is flush with the waterway. In the present case it is impossible to make the top flush with the waterway (see Size), but it has been assumed that the strake was let over the beams 2 inches.

26 BETWEEN DECK CEILING

Material Southern pine (see GARBOARDS).

Size This section of ceiling is specified by the BDA as being 5½ inches thick. A width of 7 inches has been assumed since the Chariot of Fame and Great Republic plans show these proportions.

Length Fifty feet has been assumed (see FLOOR CEILING, WALES).

Taper Same as corresponding planking (see WALES).

Scarf The BDA makes no mention of this ceiling being scarfed, but it has been assumed that this ceiling was scarfed in the same way as the hold ceiling.

Fastening According to the BDA this ceiling was square fastened, undoubtedly, in the same manner as the floor and hold ceilings (see FLOOR CEILING).

Caulking Although the BDA made no mention of caulking this ceiling, it has been assumed that it was in fact caulked since it is reasonable to have caulked everything possible.

Arrangement Griffiths¹²² states that all ceiling and clamps above the lower deck should but against the apron in the same manner as the outside plank, except with no rabbet. This arrangement seems reasonable and has been adopted.

27 UPPER DECK CLAMPS

Material Southern pine (see GARBOARDS).

Size According to the BDA there is one clamp 7 inches thick under the upper deck beams. Its width has been set at 8 inches from comparison with the clamps shown in the Chariot of Fame plans and those of the Great Republic.

Length, Taper, Scarf, Fastening. This clamp can be considered as part of the 5½ inch ceiling for these purposes.

28 UPPER DECK BEAMS

Material Southern pine (see LOWER DECK BEAMS).

Size The BDA states that these beams were 9½ by 16 inches amidships. The convention would make these beams molded 9½ sided 16 inches, a reasonable arrangement considering that the Chariot of Fame plan shows the upper deck beams molded 12 sided 17 inches and Wilson²²² states that the siding of beams is greater than the molding.

Fastening The Chariot of Fame plan shows these beams square butted to each beam, (see LOWER DECK BEAMS).

Camber Same as lower deck (see LOWER DECK BEAMS).

Taper A beam molded 9½ inches would not have been reduced as much at its ends as the larger lower deck beams. A reduction of only 1½ inches (to 8 inches) has been assumed. This was the taper given to the upper 1 deck beams (9 x 14) of the King Fisher, while the John Bertram had a 1 inch taper on her beams (9½ by 16).

29 UPPER DECK WATERWAYS

Material Southern pine (see BETWEEN DECK WATERWAYS).

Size The size of this waterway was given by the BDA as 12 by 14 inches, or by the usual convention molded 12 sided 14. This convention is confirmed by the Chariot of Fame and the Great Republic plans. These dimensions were those of the timber from which the waterway was made; the inside edge was beveled either at about a 45 degree angle (as was the Chariot of Fame) or this bevel was fancy molded again at 45 degrees (as in the Great Republic). The plain bevel has been adopted gong from the edge of the inside thick strake to the inboard molding of the plank sheer, this was the arrangement shown on the Chariot of Fame plan.

The BDA states there were two thick strakes inside of the waterway. The Stag Hound^BDA had two such strakes which were 4½ by 6 inches, while the Flying Fish^BDA had two 4½ inch strakes. Two strakes molded 4½, sided 6 inches have been assumed for the Flying Cloud since the construction of this ship was in many ways similar to that of the Stag Hound.

Fastening It is reported by the BDA that waterways and inside strakes were cross bolted in the same manner as those between decks. Thus, a similar fastening arrangement has been adopted, the only change being that of leaving out the strakes above the waterway. Curtis¹³⁹ states that the space between the stanchions was chocked flush with the top of the waterways. These chocks rested on the top timbers and were usually fastened in place with hardwood treenails. Wilson²²⁸ states that the thick strakes inside were secured with 2 bolts in each beam, 2 spikes in each ledge, 1 bolt through every other frame driven from the outside through the frame and waterway and riveted on rings on the projecting edges above or below the decks.

Arrangement Wilson²²⁸ states that the thick strakes inside the waterway were generally 2 inches thicker than the deck plank. They extended from 20 feet before the foremast to 20 feet aft the mizzen, either jogged or dovetailed down 2 inches over the beams, the entire rabbet being cut out of the beams, but on the ledges (athwart ship running between carlings) 1 inch was taken out of each. It has been assumed that the thick strakes of the Flying Cloud were let over the beams (see BETWEEN DECK WATERWAYS). Since they were only 1 inch thicker than the deck planking they may be let over the beams only 1 inch.

Location Griffiths¹⁴¹ states that the waterway seamed to the lower side of the planksheer as far as that timber extended its whole width, beyond which, in the bow, the waterway merged into the spirketting which rises above the deck and continues the sheer. This is necessary when the sheer of the deck is less than that of the planksheer. Thus, the only time the thick strake immediately over the upper deck beams can be strictly called a waterway is when it does in fact seam to the plank sheer; when the planksheer rises above the deck line then the waterway becomes spirketting.

Scarf Fincham⁵³ states that waterways butt between the beams, carlings being let down between the beams to the width of the waterways to receive the butt fastenings. The BDA report of the Champion of the Seas stated that all her waterways were scarfed and bolted. As pointed out under BETWEEN DECK WATERWAYS it has been assumed that waterways were scarfed. This waterway would be scarfed vertically, or in the 14 inch dimension. Since this is almost 15 inches (the sided dimension of the lower deck waterways) it has been assumed that the same length scarf as between decks (6 feet) is valid.

30 DECK FRAMING

Material It seems reasonable that all deck framing would have been constructed of southern pine, as were the main deck beams. This assumption is at least partially justified by examination of the Chariot of Fame plan which shows all these timbers colored light brown.

Size The Chariot of Fame plan shows the deck framed with timber of substantially the same siding as the main beams while the BDA states that the Winfield Scott had all her carlings sided the same as their respection beams. It has been assumed that this was also done on the Flying Cloud. It has also been assumed that all fore and aft pieces were molded the same as the beams.

Arrangement Curtis shows two types of fore and aft framing. In one, the fore and aft piece is molded the same as the beam and let down from above; the other shows it molded some 30% deeper and let in from be low. Wilson²²⁶ states that the fore and aft pieces were let down between the beams with a double jog or shoulder, being cut in on top from 1⅛ to 1½ inches from the face or side of the beam. The Chariot of Fame plan appears to show the top of the fore and aft timbers let into the beams 1½ inches although it is actually impossible to determine from the Chariot of Fame plan which of these methods was used since they in plan view. Curtis^l26 pictures these timbers dapped into hatch beams with the same proportions. He states that the daps should be cut with a standing bevel from the top of the hatch beam, and should have a ½ to ¾ inch wide step worked half way down the beam. He suggests that the dap on the upper surface not exceed 2 to 2½ inches. Half beams were let into fore and aft pieces in the same way that fore and aft pieces were let into the main beams. Curtis' arrangement has been assumed with a 1½ inch dap at the top.

Fastening Lodging knees are shown on the Chariot of Fame plan, but no iron straps are shown. However, through fastenings and iron tie straps were mentioned as fastening methods for fore and aft pieces by Curtis. However, neither the Chariot of Fame nor Great Republic plans show other than through fastenings, and this arrangement has been assumed for the Flying Cloud. The fastening arrangement shown in the Chariot of Fame plan has been accepted.

Location It is difficult to determine from the Chariot of Fame plan where half beams, fore and aft pieces and knees were considered necessary. This plan indicates that beams spaced 7½ feet on centers did not need half beams and required only two sets of fore and aft pieces, but there were some half beams fitted in wake of the main hatch. It is thought that beams would not have had hanging knees, since no knees so placed are shown in the plan of the Great Republic. The Chariot of Fame plan shows lodging knees for fore and aft timbers only in the wake of a hatchway, masts, bitts, etc., with only one exception. The exception is a knee located between the main mast partner and the main hatch trimmer. It could logically be argued however, that this exception was because of the proximity of the hatch to the mast. The BDA report of the Westward Ho specifies that mast partners and hatch comings were kneed, intimating that knees were not fitted throughout. The deck framing of the Flying Cloud has been patterned after that of the Chariot of Fame.

Deck Sheer Griffiths⁶⁹ states that the practice was generally adhered to of reducing the sheer of the upper deck with respect to the planksheer, the deck following the outside sheer no farther than the forermast. Thus, it is possible to obtain forecastle room without going between decks; the hawse-holes may also be placed lower. This description corresponds exactly with the deck line shown on the Chariot of Fame plan, and it has been assumed that the Flying Cloud had such a "tapered" deck. Supporting this premise is the BDA description implying that the forecastle accommodations did not extend between decks, and the location of the hawse hole in the Currier lithograph. If the forecastle was at the level of the main rail (5 feet above the deck) as the poop deck was, then the sailor's quarters would have been rather cramped—even if the average height of men was a few inches less one hundred years ago. The deck of the Flying Cloud has been given a sheer with two criteria in mind: 1) it was made as similar as possible to the deck shown on the Chariot of Fame plan, 2) the hawse-hole shown in the Currier lithograph was assumed to be just above this deck. The lower decks shown in the Chariot of Fame plan all follow the line of the planksheer, and this practice has been adopted for the Flying Cloud.

31 HATCHES

Material Hatches were exposed to the same conditions as the deck, and since no specific reference was made in any of the BDA reports, it has been assumed that these timbers and the hatch covers were made of the same materials as the decks, i.e., lower deck - hard pine, upper deck – white pine.

Size It has been assumed that the hatches were the same size as shown on the Chariot of Fame plan: main hatch 8 feet 6 inches long by 6 feet 10 inches wide, fore hatch 4 feet 7 inches by 4 feet, aft hatch 6 feet 1 inch by 5 feet 10 inches. Griffiths¹⁴³ states that the lower deck coamings were usually low; just high enough to turn water from the hatch. Curtis¹³² says that lower deck hatch coamings were made only of sufficient height to receive a rabbet for the cover. He states the thickness of the cover was generally about 3½ inches. Curtis^l32 states that weather deck hatch coamings vary from 25 to 32 inches in height while Wilson²²⁹ recommends 26 to 30 inches measured from the top of the decking. The Great Republic plans show the lower deck hatches covers only one-half again as high as the deck planking, while the coaming of the upper deck hatches was four times as high as the deck planking, making these extend respectively 1¾ inches and 10½ inches above the deck in the Flying Cloud. Covers 3½ inches thick have been assumed.

Construction Curtis¹³⁰ claims the most commonly used type of hatch coaming was where both end and side coamings set on the beams, while Griffiths^140,143 states that hatch coamings could be molded on a high fore and aft timber. Curtis' arrangement has been adopted. Curtis also specifies that the top of the side coaming on all decks should be parallel with the deck, that the top of end coamings on weather decks should have a pitch of at least ½ inch to the foot, and that end coamings below deck generally follow the camber of the deck. All these features have been adopted.

Knees The BDA description generally states that coamings and mastpartners are kneed to the beams. Knees of the same proportion as shown in the Chariot of Fame plan have been assumed.

Fastening Curtis is the sole source of information. He states that coamings should be fastened with large button-headed bolts, counterbored and driven from the top through the coaming and beam or fore and aft timber and clinched over rings below.

32 MAST HOLES

Wilson²²⁷ states that the fore and aft partners were let into the beams with the cross partners let into these with a double jog. The corner chocks were secured to these with blunt holts. Coamings several inches above the deck plank were placed around each mast hole. Peake⁵⁷ says the mast-hole was composed of fore and aft partners, cross partners, and corner chocks. Griffiths1⁴³ states that the fore and main mast partners were often formed of 2 or 3 widths of mahogany, each 9 to 12 inches thick (the approximate molding of the beam), extending from the fore and main hatch to the respective beams aft and bolted to these beams, also connected together edgewise with bolts. Hal^l88 states that the Champion of the Seas had main and foremast partners measuring 15 by 15 and mizzen mast partners 14 inches thick by 15 inches wide. This ship had upper deck beams 16 by 10 inches (by Hall's convention this should be sided 16 molded 10) while it has already been seen that the Flying Cloud had upper deck beams sided 16 molded 9½. Therefore, it has been assumed that the same size mast partners were used in the Flying Cloud.

Peake⁵⁷ suggests the mast wedges be 3 to 6 inches thick depending upon the size of the ship and Curtis¹⁹⁴ recommends a taper of ½ inch per foot for the wedges. Fincham¹¹⁸ suggests that the mast wedges be of fir, 10 to 14 inches above the partners, 1 to 1½ inches larger at the upper end than at the partner, and all caulked.

33 SKYLIGHTS

The BDA makes no mention of the skylights on the Flying Cloud. The BDA does report that the Staffordshire “had a skylight 6½ feet long, 4½ wide and 2 feet 3 inches high, with an angular top, having a mahogany frame, and brass rods, which protect the glass on every side.” Dimensions and details of the Staffordshire's skylight have been adopted for the Flying Cloud. The BDA reports that the Stag Hound, Westward Ho, and Bald Eagle, had individual skylights over their after cabins of one, two, and one respectively. The Flying Cloud had three divisions of her after cabins. The Stag Hound had only two divisions, but the after division was arranged similarly to the after two divisions of the Flying Cloud. Be cause of the similarity, it has been assumed that there was a single large skylight over the great cabin of the Flying Cloud.

34 BITTS

Material The BDA reports that all bitts of the Stag Hound and Bald Eagle were of white oak and it is safe to assume this material was also used in the Flying Cloud. Although Magounn¹¹⁹ claims they were of iron, it is probable that in this instance he is referring to a later date than 1851. The bitts shown on the Webb plans of the Young America and Comet are all of wood.

Size The Chariot of Fame plan shows three sets of bitts, having the following dimensions: foretopsail (main topmast stay) bitts molded 15 sided (fore and aft) 18, windlass bitt molded 27 sided 16, bowsprit bitts molded 11 sided 14, all rising 5 feet above the deck. The same dimensions have been assumed valid for the Flying Cloud. It is possible that main topsail sheet bitts were fitted before the main mast, since it is implied in the BDA report of the Staffordshire and other ships that such was the case (see Construction).

Location The locations of those bitts shown on the Chariot of Fame plan relative to the other structures in the ship has been followed for the Flying Cloud.

Construction Although Griffiths¹⁴³, Wilson²³², and Fincham¹³, have a great deal to say concerning the construction of bitts, it has been assumed that the construction methods used were similar to those shown in the Chariot of Fame plan. It has learned from the BDA reports that generally bitts were kneed both "above and below", presumably meaning on both the upper and lower decks, but possibly meaning above and below the upper deck. However, only one knee is shown on the Chariot of Fame and Great Republic plans above the upper deck.

Fincham¹³ gives many particulars concerning bitts which are not shown on the Chariot of Fame plan and his remarks follow. Riding bitts (these were not fitted to the Flying Cloud) extended 4 to 5¼ feet above the deck and 4 inches below the underside of the beam of the deck below. They were of parallel breadth to the lower side of the beam of the deck, below which they were tapered on the after side, and sides so as to be at the lower end one-sixth less, and were scored and faced upon the beam about 1½ inches. These bitts were bolted to each beam with two bolts. Upon the after side of the bitts was fixed a timber called the cross-piece laying horizontally with its lower side 1 foot 8 inches above the deck. These timbers scored and faced upon the bitts from 1½ to 2¼ inches. They were confined to the bitts with a hook and eye, the hook was fastened to the bitts with a collar-headed bolt, and to the eye with a forelock; the eye passed through the crosspiece and was clinched on the after side. The cross-piece was sustained by a bracket that was fastened to the side of the bitts, and projected aft sufficiently to support it. To take the rub of the cable from the cross-piece, a face-piece of elm from 5 to 6 inches thick, was brought on the after side of it, and fastened with tree-nails about 16 inches apart on alternate edges. The face-piece was rounded off on the after side, on the upper and lower edges, to a circle, the radius being equal to its thickness. Iron castings were brought over the bitthead, and on the after side of the cross-piece. The iron casting or hood to the bitt was cylindrical, from 1 to 1½ inches thick with a flank or projection at the bottom about three inches broad for the horn of the cable to rest upon, the head of the bitt being left square. An angular piece of iron rounded on the outside, from 1 to 2 inches thick, was also fitted to the bitt below the cross-piece, and fastened with two bolts in each end. The casting to the cross-piece was from 3 to 5 feet long, aid secured to it with 3 to 5 up and down bolts. To give support to the bitts, when the ship was riding heavily, a knee called the “standard against the riding bitts” was placed against them. These were fayed upon a carling, which was about ½ inch below the upper surface of the beams, for the standard to score over it to act against the pressure forward. The standard had 2 or 3 circular coaks in it and the carling. The arm of the standard connected with the bitts extended as high as the upper part of the crosspiece. In the lower part of it a hole was cut through for a stopper. The standards were bolted with two bolts that passed through the bitts above the deck, one that stived below the deck, and one through each beam, others were driven through the carlings, about 18 inches apart, clinched below. Fixed to the fore side of the bitts, extending from the under side of the beam of the working deck to the upper side of the beam below, was a cleat for preventing the bitts from working, two-thirds the breadth of the bitts, from 7 to 9 inches thick at the upper, and tapered to two-thirds this thickness at the lower part. This cleat was bolted with five bolts, one placed h and one 8 inches from the upper end, and three at equal distances below. The bolts passed through the bitts, and the two upper bolts were clenched upon the after side.

Carrick bitts were used for fixing the windlass where they answered every purpose of riding bitts. They were brought with their after side to the center of the windlass, and extended from a sufficient height above the working deck, sometimes down to the foot ceiling, where their fore side was scored and faced upon the beam, and bolted through it with two bolts; at other times they were fixed to a carling, which was attached to the beams of the working deck. When this was the case, the carling extended two beams aft the bitts, and two or three before, and was scored over and faced on each side of the beam about ¾ inches at the upper part, and ⅜ inches at the lower, or as much as the moulding at the lower part of the beam, and of sufficient depth so as to be 1½ to 2 inches above the upper surface of the deck, and of a breadth so as to be en each side at least 3 inches wider than the bitts to support the caulking. The bitts had two tendons, each one-fourth the size of the bitts for and aft and four-fifths the size of them athwart-ships. The after tenon was brought to the after part of the bitt, and had its upper part taken off to form a dovetail the foremost tenon was placed with its fore part about one-fourth the m breadth of the bitts from the fore side. They let quite through the carling, and were both formed so as to dovetail on the after side of the tenon, and were forced upon the dovetail by a key driven up from the under side on the fore side of each. The bitts let down their whole size into the carling about 2 inches, so as to be caulked round them. On the fore side of the carrick bitt was placed a knee, or standard, to support them. If they ran down, there were carlings placed to receive them, the same as to the standards against the riding bitts, but when the bitts were fixed in carlings the standards were brought upon them. The standards were bolted up and down with one bolt through each beam and two between. The two bolts m that passed through the gudgion of the windlass answered for two of the four fore and aft bolts. To the after side of the carrick bitts was fixed a circular chock, with its lower end let into the deck about ½ inch, and confined to the bolts by a strap, and the upper end by a nut and screw; sometimes both ends were secured to the bitts with nuts and screws.

Paul Bitts were for fixing the main pauls of the windlass. These bitts ran down or were let into a deep carling like the carrick bitts.

Topsail-sheet-bitts were placed on the fore side of the fore and p main masts to which could be. brought the topsail-sheets. The fore sheet bitts were placed on the forecastle, and extended down tendoning into the mast partners on the upper deck. They were scored and faced 1 inch upon the beams, and were bolted with two bolts in each. These bitts had a cross-piece on their after sides, scored and faced 1 inch upon them, and bolted with two bolts in each bitt. The main sheet bitts were generally placed on the after side of the after beam of the main hatch with a crossp piece on the fore side. The BDA specifically mentions these bitts in the reports of the Stag Hound, Staffordshire, Westward Ho, and Bald Eagle.

Protection Wilson²³⁴ states that topsail sheet bitts had composition caps, and corner pieces and a lignum vitae cavil through the head to belay the sheet, an eye bolt for a stopper in the fore side near the |l% deck and sheaved that the sheets may lead aft.

35 DECK PLANKING

Material The BDA specifies that the between deck planking was of hard pine while that of the upper deck was white pine.

Size The BDA specifies a thickness of 3½ inches for deck planking on each deck. Curtis mentions that it was customary to make deck planking square, but Griffiths¹⁴³ gives an example of upper deck planking amidships 3½ inches thick and 5 inches wide, and suggests a maximum width of 6 inches for lower decks. Hall⁸⁸ states that the. Champion of the Seas had her lower deck planked with yellow pine 3½ inches thick and 6 inches wide, her main deck planked with material 3½ inches thick by 6 to 7 inches wide, and her upper deck was planked with 3½ by 6 inch pitch pine. The BDA states that Chatsworth had her lower deck planking 3 by 6 inches, while her upper deck was 3½ by 6 inches fastened with composition spikes in the butts. The Witch of the Wave^BDA had her upper deck 3½ by 6 inches pine planked. A width of 6 inches for the deck planking has been adopted for both decks of the Flying Cloud.

Griffiths¹⁴³ also mentions that there should be a thicker and wider deck plank placed amidships between decks to receive the heels of the between deck stanchions and to stop water from washing from one side of the deck to the other. He suggests the widths be twice the ordinary width or 12 inches in this case. A 4½ inch thick strake is shown on the Chariot of Fame plan while Hall⁸⁸ states that the Champion of the Seas had on the lower deck two strakes 14 inches wide and 6 inches thick and on the main deck, middle strakes 5 inches thick. The Ellen Foster^BDA had her lower deck of 3½ inch thick planking with a 6 inch stringer amidships. A middle strake 12 inches wide and 5 inches thick has been accepted for this Flying Cloud.

Length The lengths have been assumed the same as those available for the other planking, i.e., 37½ feet (see GARBOARDS).

Taper Griffiths¹⁴³ states that upper deck planks should taper in "order to look" proper. Since no conformation nor contradiction of this was found, tapered plank has been assumed. Each strake Griffiths¹⁴⁴ states should exhibit a taper equal to the taper of the entire ship as far fore and aft as practical. The taper may end at the fore hatch, from thence forward strakes may continue fair to the spirketting.

Curtis¹⁴⁸ states that decking should not be run to a shim end against the waterway but should be nibbed when the length across the end exceeds 1½ times the width of the plank. He states that the customary minimum nib width was 1½ inches. Griffiths recommends that the lower deck planking be laid straight, or with no taper. This has also been accepted as being valid for the Flying Cloud.

Fastening Griffiths¹⁴⁴ states that it is sufficient to put one bolt in each beam and carling through each 5 inch deck plank except at the butts. He says the bolts should be set alternately one-third of the width of the plank from the edges. Fincham⁶⁸ recommends square nailing to each beam with a single treenail in each half beam, while Wilson²³¹ states that all deck plank should be square fastened with spikes in beams and one spike in each ledge. The BDA states that the upper deck of the John Bertram was fastened with composition while the Dauntless and Chatsworth had their decks fastened with composition spikes at every butt and the Golden Eagle had her upper deck fastened with "composition aft". Griffiths¹⁴⁴ recommends 6 inch spikes for 3½ inch plank, and the holes should be plugged. Curtis¹⁴⁹ shows the deck planking square fastened to the beams and gives a rule for the size of deck spikes: ⅛ inch square and 2 inches long for each inch of plank thickness but suggests this can be reduced. For a 3½ inch plank Curtis would therefore use a 7/16 inch square spike 7 inches long. A 6 inch spike has been accepted as valid for fastening the planking of the Flying Cloud. Curtis¹⁴⁹ states that the chizle point should cut the grain of wood in the beam, a reasonable and desirable suggestion. Fincham⁶⁹ states weather decks were fastened with mixed metal, other decks with iron, which arrangement has been adopted. Griffiths¹⁴⁴ and Wilson²³¹ agree that the deck plank was plugged with similar wood dipped in white lead with the grain running in p. the same direction in wake of the spikes. Curtis¹⁴⁹ gives a rule for plugging deck planking: the diameter of the plug should be two times diameter of the spike the spike plus ⅛ inch, and the thickness should be between ⅝ and ¾ inches. Wilson²³¹suggests the thickness should be ¾ inch.

36 KNEES

Material Table 10 summarizes in order of launching date^BDA, the materials used by McKay for lodging and hanging knees.

Table 10 – Knee Materials

Hold Between Decks

Hanging Lodging Hanging Lodging

Stag Hound H H H H

Flying Cloud - - - -

Staffordshire O H H H

Flying Fish O O - -

Sovereign of the Seas O O H H

Westward Ho O O H H

Bald eagle O O H H

H-hackmatack, O-oak

Examination of this table indicates that it is safe to assume that the between deck knees were of hackmatack. Although somewhat more questionable, the hold lodging knees were probably also of hackmatack. However, the material used for the hold hanging knees is in doubt. Hackmatack has been accepted on the following basis. It is proposed that the reason McKay first used oak was because the Staffordshire had three decks, thereby requiring stronger hold hanging knees than used previously. He decided this extra strength was desirable and thereafter used oak in all ships. If this reasoning is correct, the hold hanging knees of the Flying Cloud would have been the same as those of the Stag Hound—hackmatack.

Size Table 11 gives the sizes of hanging knees and the number of bolts and spikes used according to the BDA reports.

Table 11 - Hanging Knees - Size and Fastening

(throat molding/siding/spikes/bolts)

Hold Between Decks

Stag Hound 22-24/10-11/4/16 20-22/10/4/18

Flying Cloud - -

Staffordshire 24/12/-/16-18 24/12/-/16-18

Flying Fish -/-/4/18 -/-/4/18

Sovereign of the Seas -/-/-/18-20 -/-/4/20

Westward Ho 22/12/4/20 22/12/4/20

Bald Eagle -/-/-/18-20 -/-/-/18-20

The hanging knees of the Flying Cloud are assumed to have been the same dimensions as those given for the Stag Hound, primarily because the beams of the Flying Cloud and the Stag Hound were of similar dimensions. The reason the Staffordshire has not been considered in Table 11 is the fact that it was a three deck ship requiring heavier timbers throughout.

The BDA reports that lodging knees were scarfed in every berth, as s own on the Chariot of Fame plan. The throat molding of the upper deck lodging knees in this plan measures 23 inches; the molding of the scarfed section measures 18 inches. Hall⁸⁸ states that the Champion of the Seas had hold lodging knees sided 8 molded 30 inches with eight bolts through each knee, her middle deck lodging knees were sided 8 to 9 inches, and upper deck lodging knees sided 7 inches. The BDA states that the Lightning's lodging knees were sided 8 inches; the steamer S.S. Lewis (three decks) had her lodging knees sided 7, 6½, 6 inches (hold to upper deck) and the Winged Racer, Flying Childers, and Orient had lodging knees sided 9 inches. For the Flying Cloud it has been assumed that the lower deck lodging knees were molded 23 inches sided 8, with the upper deck lodging knees molded 23 sided 7 inches.

Length There are a number of sources from which the proper lengths of the hanging knees may be determined. Curtis¹¹⁵ tells us that the proper length for the shorter of the two arms of a knee sided 10 inches is 40 to 48 inches, while a siding of 11 inches requires a short horizontal arm of' 44 to 54 inches. The hold hanging knees shown on the Chariot of Fame plan have a horizontal arm of 47 inches, and a vertical body of 59 inches; the molding in the throat being 24 inches. The application of Curtis' proportions to these dimensions would indicate a siding of between 10 and 11 inches. Unfortunately, the BDA does not give this dimension for the Flying Cloud. However, these deduced dimensions of the hold hanging knees shown in the Chariot of Fame plan correspond well with the dimensions accepted for the Flying Cloud, it is considered valid to adopt the lengths shown in the Chariot of Fame plan for the Flying Cloud.

The lengths of the between deck hanging knees can be fixed more precisely. The between decks hanging knees rested on the thick strake over the waterway, 31 inches above the top of the lower deck beam itself. The BDA states there was 7 feet 8 inches between decks; the molding of the upper deck beam at the sided of the ship has been accepted as 8 inches, and if an equal camber in both decks is accepted, then the vertical arm of the knee must be 62½ inches (7'-8” -31" +9½ -8" = 62½"). The Chariot of Fame plan shows the knees above the lower deck with a vertical body 60 inches long a horizontal arm of 50 inches, and a throat molding of 20 inches. Therefore, there is justification for assuming that the lengths of the vertical and horizontal arms of the knees in the Flying Cloud 62½ and 5l1inches molding 20 and 22 inches and sided 10 inches (see Table 11). The dimensions of the lodging knees (the knees between the held stanchions) and the hatch knees were taken directly from the plan of the Chariot of Fame.

Fastening The fastenings specified in the BDA report of the Stag Hound were 4 spikes and 16 bolts, in the hold hanging knees and 4 spikes 18 bolts in the between deck knees. Since the dimensions of the knees accepted for the Flying Cloud were about the same as those of the Stag Hound, the same fastening arrangement has also been accepted. The Chariot of Fame plan shows the placement of knee fastenings, and this arrangement has been followed in laying out the fastening plan for the Flying Cloud. Curtis¹¹⁴ shows the bolts alternating from one side of the knee to the other which is to be expected. Hall⁸⁸ states that the Champion of the Seas hold hanging knees were fastened with twenty 1⅛ inch bolts, while her upper deck hanging knees were fastened with 1 and 1⅛ inch bolts. The BDA states that the Mystery had her hanging knees fastened with 1 inch bolts while her keel was fastened with l¼ bolts. Wilson²²⁵ states that the knee bolts were riveted over rings on the knee and were all driven from the outside or the top except the throat bolts which were driven blunt from the inside. The Chatsworth^BDA had her hanging knees fastened with 1 inch bolts except the throat bolts which were 1⅛. It has been assumed that the hanging knees of the Flying Cloud were fastened with 1 inch bolts except the throat bolts which were 1⅛ inches. The arrangement of the lodging knee fastenings was taken from the Chariot of Fame plan, as were of the knees between the hold stanchions and those in the way of the hatches. Griffiths¹⁴⁰ states that for lodging knees there should be a bolt in each timber and in some cases two, which is the arrangement shown on the Chariot of Fame plan. He also specifies that iron knee bolts should be ¾ inch plus 3/16 inch for every inch of siding above 6 inches, giving 1⅛ inch bolts for the lower deck lodging knees and about 1 inch bolts for upper deck lodging knees. These sizes have been accepted as valid.

Location There was undoubtedly a hanging knee under every full beam, but there remains the question of knees under the half beams. Curtis^l26 shows, small hanging knees under each half beam. However, the plans of the Great Republic show hanging knees only under full beam, which is the arrangement assumed for the Flying Cloud.

37 HOLD STANCHIONS

Material In every BDA report where specific mention of material is made it calls for oak. Thus, white oak has been assumed.

Size No dimensions are given for the Flying Cloud hold stanchions, but they are given for several other ships. These dimensions are presented in Table 12 as obtained from the BDA reports.

Table 12 - Dimensions of Hold Stanchion

Stag Hound 10 by 10

Flying Cloud --

Staffordshire 10 by 12

Flying Fish 10 by 10

Bald Eagle 10 by 12

Although at first glance there might appear to be a toss-up between 10 by 10 and 10 by 12, it must be remembered that the Staffordshire was a three deck vessel, while the others had two decks. Thus, it has been assumed that the hold stanchions in the Flying Cloud were 10 by 10 inches.

Fastening The BDA report specifically states that the hold stanchions were "clasped with iron above and below, and are also kneed to the beams, and the keelson". The BDA reports of the Flying Fish and Bald Eagle state in addition to the above that the iron (above and below) was bolted through the beams and keelson, a practice which is shown in the Chariot of Fame plan. In fact, the only part of the Chariot of Fame plan which does not fit the above descriptions is the absence of beam knees. All other features have been assumed the same as shown on this plan. The knees not shown are assumed to have been both proportioned and fastened similarly to the knees supporting the wing stanchions. The lodging knees over the keelson in the Flying Cloud have been assumed the same size as shown in the Chariot of Fame plan.

38 BETWEEN DECK STANCHIONS

Material The BDA specifically states that these stanchions were of oak.

Size Table 13 presents the dimensions given in various BDA reports for between deck stanchions.

Table 13 - Size of Between Deck Stanchions

Ships Hold Stanchions Between Deck Stanchions

John Bertram 10” square 8” diameter

Samuel Lawrence -- 8

S. S. Lewis (steamer) 8” square 6

Witchcraft -- 9

It has been assumed that the between deck stanchions of the Flying Cloud were turned, 8 inches in diameter. The pattern shown on the Chariot of Fame plan, which is very similar to one shown by Griffiths^P1.21 and on the Great Republic plan, has been adopted for the Flying Cloud.

Fastening The BDA reports that these stanchions were secured with iron rods passing through their centers which set up below with screws and nuts (or "nut-screws"). Although there might be some question of what is meant by "screws", it is believed that the reference is only to the thread on the bottom end of the rod onto which the nut goes. However, there remains the question of why " screws and nuts " is plural. This is probably explained by the fact that "stanchions" is plural. The BDA reports of the Edwin Forrest and the Witch of the Wave stated that their between deck stanchions were of oak, turned, with 1¼ inch iron rods through their centers. The Witch of the Wave had cast iron sockets above and below but since these fittings are not evident on the Chariot of Fame plan they have not been assumed for the Flying Cloud. Griffiths¹⁴³ states that the two decks were confined by a bolt passing through the stanchion and both beams, with a nut on below the lower deck beam.

39 POINTERS AND HOOKS

Material When specified, the BDA reported that pointers and hooks were of oak. Therefore, it has been assumed that all the hooks and pointers of the Flying Cloud were of oak.

Size The BDA states the Flying Cloud had some pointers over 40 feet long. Although not mentioned in the case of the Flying Cloud, according to the BDA pointers in other ships were 12 inches square, tapering at the ends. This has been accepted for the Flying Cloud. Curtis¹⁰¹ however, states that pointers did not vary in siding.

Location Pointers were timbers which ran diagonally upward from the bow or stern to the lower deck. The Flying Cloud was reported as being almost full of pointers, but the exact number is unknown. Since the Stag Hound had two pointers in each end and the Flying Fish had four in both bow and stern it may be assumed that the Flying Cloud had between two and four pointers in each extremity. It has been assumed that there were two pointers forward and aft in the hold, and none in the between decks. Curtis¹⁰¹ states that pointers are set on top of the ceiling. The BDA states there was one long hook forward between decks of the Flying Cloud and implies there were none between decks aft. The BDA report of the Flying Fish states that all her pointers were filled with hooks. Breast hooks were undoubtedly fitted in wake of both lower and main decks, and deck hooks fayed to the top of the beams were fitted over these. Above and below the bowsprit, hooks were undoubtedly fitted as was described for the Stag Hound and Bald Eagle.

Fastening Curtis¹⁰⁵ states that pointers were square fastened to the frame timbers. The BDA report of the Flying Fish states that bolts were driven alternately from the inside and outside, while the Lightning had her pointers bolted from both sides through the cants and timbers, and the Westward Ho^BDA had them "bolted through all". If the pointers were placed over the ceiling and the ceiling was put on after the outside planking, then the fastenings of the pointers would have to pass through everything, which has been assumed. The BDA states that the Don Quixote had pointers bolted at intervals of not more than 8 inches, which seems to allow for square fastening through the frame timbers. The Bald Eagle^BDA had some of her diagonal bracing fastened with 1 inch bolts. The Winfield Scott^BDA had her bow hook bolted from the outside with l¼ inch fastening, driven through and riveted (her keel fastening was 1¼ inch). The Witch of the Wave had her breast hook fastened with 1⅛ to 1 inch bolts (keel bolts were l¼ inch), extending 15 feet on each side of the apron. It was sided 11 inches molded 4 feet in the throat, with 46 bolts in it. It has been assumed that 1⅛ to 1 inch bolts are valid for the Flying Cloud (see BETWEEN DECK WATERWAYS).

Curtis¹³⁴ says breast hooks (which fill up from the clamp to the top of the beam on the bow and on the lower deck at the-stern) were fastened similarly to knees. The Great Republic plan shows her breast hook bolts passing only through the frame timbers, and this arrangement has been assumed for the Flying Cloud. This would be possible since they could be fastened before planking was put on.

40 HULL ORNAMENTAL WORK

The BDA states that the Flying Cloud had "...neither head nor trail boards..." It appears from the other BDA reports that it was usual to have "the ends of her catheads ornamented with (gilded) carved work (and) with (gilded) carved work around the hawse-holes." These ornaments have been accepted for the Flying Cloud specifically following what is shown on the Currier lithograph. The Staffordshire was "...ornamented simply / with gilded fleurs de lis around the hawse holes...", and this was the / only description found on the specific appearance of the ornamental work. It has been assumed that "fleurs de lis" were carved about the hawse holes of the Flying Cloud.

The ornamental carving for many McKay clippers was made by Messrs. S.O, Gleason & Sons and the figurehead of the Flying Cloud was the work of "Mr. Gleason, a young artist of much promise (who) made her carved work.” The BDA states that "Her name in gilded letters is let into the curve of her bow, between the mouldings of the rails; and it also ornaments the quarters." The stern of the Flying Cloud had "Her name and port of hail (New York) ...carved and gilded upon it, surrounded by finely designed ornamental work." The picture of the Flying Cloud in the MacPherson Collection shows some of this stern ornamental work; the sail plan of the Great Republic shows the location of the names on the bow and quarter.

41 FIGUREHEAD

The BDA states that "in forming the extreme, where the line of the planksheer and the carved work on navel hoods terminated, she (the Flying Cloud) has the full figure of an angel on the wing, with a trumpet raised to her mouth. The figure is finely designed and exceedingly well executed, and is a beautiful finish to the bow. It is the work of Mr. Gleason, who made the figure-head of the Shooting Star." As mentioned before, Henry W. Longfellow wrote of the Flying Cloud in "The Building of the Ship” including these thoughts on her figurehead:

By a cunning artist carved in wood,

With robes of white, that far behind

Seemed to be fluttering in the wind.

It was not shaped in a classic mould,

Not like a Nymph or Goddess of old,

Or Naiad rising from the water,

But modeled from the Master's daughter!

On many a dreary and Misty nigh,

'Twill be seen by the rays of the signal light,

Speeding along through the rain and the dark,

Like a ghost in its snow-white sark,

The pilot of some phantom bark,

Guiding the vessel, in its flight,

By a path none other knows aright!

This confirms the fact that the garments of the figurehead were painted white, as shown on most of the paintings. Normal coloring has been assumed otherwise, with a gold trumpet.

Although a small book entitled "Ship's Figureheads of Old Cape Cod", put out by the Cape Cod Advancement Plan in 1936, pictures a figurehead and entitles it, "The Figurehead of the Flying Cloud", there is no doubt that the actual figurehead of the Flying Cloud is no longer in existence. The picture shown is of a figurehead which hangs in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts and there is entitled simply "18th Century Figurehead". How ever, it is admitted that the general attitude of the figurehead mentioned above is probably similar to that once adorning the bow of the Flying Cloud; at least it generally fits the descriptions and the paintings. The only reasonable size picture of the original figurehead is the drawing, of it on the sailing card (see Figure 16). Although this obviously is not accurate, it should be considered in attempting to determine the most accurate form of the figure. The actual size of the figurehead as determined from the Currier lithograph, is 8½ feet from the juncture with the stem to the tip of the trumpet.

42 PAINTING

By comparing all of the BDA reports of ships launched from late in 1850 through 1854, there is considerable justification for the following painting scheme. Clipper ships were generally sheathed with yellow metal up to the load-water-line and were black above this. In side the upper decks were most often buff or pearl color, relieved with white, with blue waterways, while the houses and cabins were again buff or pearl relieved with white, or else all white. Between decks, ships were usually painted white, except for blue thickwork and waterways. However, sometimes the between decks hanging knees were grained, the lower parts of the beams and the stanchions being left bright and varnished, and the standing strake over the waterway painted granite color, the waterways still blue, and the rest of the work white. The following has been assumed for the Flying Cloud: outside black^BDA upper decks pearl color^BDA and waterways blue, houses white, between decks white with blue thickwork and waterways, and the lower parts of the beams and the stanchions bright and varnished.

Although no mention was made of the color of the spars of the Flying Cloud, this has been determined by examining other BDA reports. Almost all clipper ships had their yards black, the lower masts white, studdingsail booms and other booms bright and varnished but with black ends, and the mastheads crowned with gilded balls. As near as one can tell, the Chinese painting of the Flying Cloud shows black yards, white lower masts and doublings, other masts black, bowsprit black, jib-boom and spanker boom light, and the jib-boom doubling and spanker gaff black. The MacPherson painting shows white lower masts, bowsprit black, jib-boom and spanker boom varnished, jib-boom doubling black. Clark³⁰¹ states that yards and bowsprits were usually painted black, the lower masts white to the tops and doublings above scraped bright and varnished. Since Clark apparently agrees with the other descriptions on the major points, his remarks on other spars have been accepted. For the spars not otherwise covered the color evident on the Chinese painting has been adopted, confirming this choice by examination of the MacPherson painting.

3. DECK ACCOMODATIONS

The constructional details shown by Curtis have been followed in general since they are-the closest to a contemporary source discovered. To quote from Curtis²¹², "In former times it was not unusual for ship's houses to be built with no plans except those giving a general layout of the rooms, etc... (since) experienced joiners with years of experience were at that time available." This was undoubtedly true in the case of the Flying Cloud.

Rather than try to describe the various features of this phase of construction, various cross-sections have been shown on which the arrangements may be seen. The validity of these details is extremely questionable for reasons already mentioned, and no amount of discussion of present information could verify any of the assumptions.

1 CONSTRUCTION

Wilson²³⁵ states that the beams of these decks rested on a shelfpiece rather than on clamps, with clamps below. The ends of the beams were fastened through this and had hanging and lodging knees fitted. Fincham⁴³ states that the beams for these decks were placed closer together because they were not supported by pillars which would have obstructed the cabin rooms. Wilson²³⁵ states that the after beam of the topgallant and the forward beam of the poop deck were molded and sided larger than the others. They were rabbitted out to receive the ends of the deck planks and projected above the deck the same distance as the planksheer, the projection of both being carved out to form a water course. Curtis¹⁸⁸ states that there should be a deck hook in way of these beams and a breast hook in way of the monkey rail. The only contemporary drawing discovered which gives any indication of the construction of these decks is the plan of the Great Republic. Although these plans do not show a topgallant forecastle or a poop deck, they do show a full upper deck in the same relative position as would be occupied by these decks, and it is believed they would have been constructed similarly. The deck beams were placed the same distance apart as were the other beams; however, the deck of the Great Republic received the support of wing stanchions. It has been assumed that in the Flying Cloud the beams were placed twice as close together as in the lower decks, with no wing stanchions. The size of the beams shown in the Great Republic was about molded 12 sided 20, and since the other beams of the Flying Cloud were slightly smaller, it has been assumed that these beams were molded 9 sided 15 inches in the Flying Cloud. The Great Republic plan shows these beams landed on a small clamp, molding about 4 inches, and fastened with fairly light hanging knees which fayed to the plank sheer. The rest of the ceiling was of about 2½ inch material.

2 TOPGALLANT FORECASTLE

The BDA report of the Flying Cloud states that "She has a topgallant forecastle 30 feet long amidships, fitted for the accommodation of one watch of her crew, and in its after wings are two water closets." This wording could imply that the after edge of the forecastle was not straight; however, since the pictures of other ships of the period generally show the topgallant forecastle deck square across, it has been assumed that this arrangement was valid for the Flying Cloud. The 30 feet has been assumed as the distance between the forward-most part of the deck (under the bowsprit) to the after edge of the deck. The height of the forecastle deck was usually specified in the BDA reports as being the "height of the main rail" and this arrangement has been assumed. However, since this would be only five feet above the main deck, there would be insufficient head-room unless the main deck were sunk somewhat. Since the forward upper deck of the Winfield Scott^BDA (see below) was off course . . . sunk to allow height below for the sailors. " There is justification in assuming that the upper deck of the Flying Cloud was likewise sunk. Since the after cabins of various ships were sunk around 3 feet (see AFTER CABIN) and since the bulwarks were higher forward than aft (see PLANKSHEER) it has been assumed that the deck forward was sunk 2 feet 6 inches.

The BDA description of the Flying Fish and Winfield Scott appear to be reporting on the same type of forecastle accommodations as the Flying Cloud. However, these, descriptions (which follow) give more detail.

Flying Fish—She has a topgallant forecastle the height of the main rail, and in its after wings are companions, which lead to the sailors' quarters below; and before the companions are water closets, and along the sides, lockers, etc. The accommodations for the crew occupy the angle of the bow, are lofty, well lighted, and ventilated.

Winfield Scott She has a small topgallant forecastle, the height of the main rail with a capstan on it and its after part is planked up, and on each side are water closets. The forecastle for is below this deck, and is entered by a companion-way on each side. The upper deck of course is sunk to allow height below for the sailors

According to Cutler, it would appear that a typical crew in 1851 consisted of 26-30 men, giving 13-15 per watch. McKay tells us that the crew of the Stag Hound on her first voyage consisted of 36 able seamen, 6 ordinary seamen, and 4 boys. Leaving San Francisco on her first, third and fourth voyages the Flying Cloud had a crew of able and ordinary seamen respectively of 19, 34 and 30 men. The Witch of the Wave^BDA had her topgallant forecastle “divided amidships on each side of the bowspirt, and fitted for the accommodation of all the crew. Since in the Flying Cloud only one watch was housed forward, the partition is considered unnecessary. It has been assumed that the crew accommodations of the Flying cloud consisted of 40 able and ordinary seamen.

Although the packer ship St. Denis^Dp70shows bunks about 6¼ by 2½ feet, and the Webb Institute has a plan drawn by Gustaf Hillman of Denmark which shows bunks 6 feet 4 inches long and 3 feet wide, these are reported to have been exceptionally large for the period. The size of the crew’s bunks have been assumed the same as the passengers or 5¼ by 2½ feet (see AFTER CABIN).

The only reference to the location of bunks in the topgallant fore castle of the Flying Cloud was found in the log of the first voyage, where it is indicated that bunks were located in the after corners of the fore castle accommodation.

July 12 ... wore ship to NW after running off an hour in consequence of Lawbourd hawse stopper getting adrift & filling fore castle full of water, after getting round Carpenter discovered two auger holes had been boared in the Deck close to the after sill of the fore castle & to the side, under the after birth, which has been done by some one of the sailors...

Figure 34 gives a plausible arrangement for 20 double births in the forecastle. Figure 34 also shows a cross-section of the topgallant forecastle as given by Curtis.

Figure 34 - Topgallant Forecasstle

The companions leading to these quarters have been assumed similar to those described ^BDA for the Flying Fish and Winfield Scott. Although only one watch of the crew was accommodated here, it has been assumed that there were two companions leading to their quarters. Davis^Dp70 shows companions 0.5 to 0.6 meters (1.6 to 2 feet) wide. A width of 2 feet has been assumed.

It has been assumed that the water closets were before the companions as they were in the Flying Fish. Chapelle²⁰⁶ reproduces United States Coast Guard, Bureau of Construction and Repair (files 38.45; 39.45) plans (130,131) of the U. S. Revenue Cutter Joe Lane built in the late 1840s. These plans show water closets which have been given as Figure 35 A and B. Forbes^C11 shows water closets that were 2 feet 2 inches wide and 3 feet deep. It has been assumed that the water closet shown as Figure 35C is valid for the Flying Cloud. The plans of the Joe Lane show the doors to the water closets 1 foot 3 inches wide by 3 feet 9 inches high, set up from the deck about 4 inches. The same arrangement has been assumed.

Figure 35 - Topgallant Water Closets

Two ladderways leading from the main deck to the topgallant forecastle deck have been placed as close to the water closets as possible and still allow the doors to open. The width of companions has been assumed—2 feet.

3 DECK HOUSE

The dimensions of the deck house were given by the BDA as 41 feet long, 18 wide, 6½ high. According to this report, one watch of the crew was accommodated here and the house also contained the "galley and other apartments'", It has been assumed that the watch was accommodated in the forward division of the house for three reasons. 1) This location places them as near the quarters of the other watch as possible. 2) It places them in closest proximity to the water closets in the forecastle wings which this watch presumably had to use, as well as the other watch. 3) It was the general convention in describing a ship to commence forward, and the crew's quarters were the first accommodations mentioned in the description of the house.

It has been assumed that two doors were more probable than a single entrance to these quarters. Not only may the sailors make a quicker exit in time of emergency, but the apartment is thereby made more equal to the accommodations of the other watch where two entrances have been assumed.

Three entrances would seem to be overdoing it a bit, as well as using up valuable space. These doors could go either in the forward wall or in the side walls. The side walls are favored, as near the middle of the house as possible, since by this means all entrances would be most widely separated, and therefore theoretically closer to everyone's assigned station. These accommodations are assumed to have extended the entire (18 feet) width of the house. Although the area under the forecastle was approximately 450 square feet, the area actually occupied by the crew would have measured nearer 370 square feet, after subtracting the space occupied by the bowsprit and chains. If the watch accommodated in the house were to receive the same floor area, the accommodation would have to be about 20 feet 7 inches long, or roughly one half the length of the house. In this connection it is felt that the arrangement of doors and windows shown on Boucher's model must be mentioned even though justification or the source for this arrangement was not found. The after edge of the forward door measures 18 feet 6 inches from the forward wall.

The galley is the next division reported by the BDA. The Buttersworth painting is the only one which shows a galley stack. Although this painting is generally inaccurate, it has been used for locating the galley. The stack extends above the top of this deck house a little aft the middle, which should be near one wall of the galley since it 'should be located directly over the stove. The galley of the Bald Eagle was 8 feet wide so it may be assumed that in the Flying Cloud the galley occupied only one-half the width of the deck house.

Peake⁵⁷ states that framing for the cooking range was similar to that for hatchways. A note in the description of the Staffordshire is of interest with respect to the galley fitting: "The galleys are laid with bricks, and lined with copper and tin, and their cooking arrangements are of the most approved patents." An examination of the patent records disclosed no patent which would be applicable, indicating "patent" was used as a generic rather than specific term. Wilson²⁷⁷ states that the galleybed consisted of the work connected with fitting and fixing, including the lead for the bed and tin for covering the beams and deck, and bolts to se cure the galley to the deck.

Chapelle²⁰⁶ in his drawings of the Joe Lane shows a galley range of the following proportions.

Figure 36 - Galley Range

The nature of the "other apartments" referred to in the BDA report had been determined by comparison with similar ships. The other BDA reports indicate that the divisions ranged all the way from a sail room to quarters for ten to twelve juveniles. However, in the present case there is a limitation imposed by the space remaining, there being only 380 square feet left after subtracting the crew's quarters. Table 14 gives an idea of the apartments located in the deck houses of the other ships. The packet ship Staffordshire has been excluded because we felt it would be misleading.

Table 14 - Deck House Accommodations

Name Length by Width Accommodations

Stag Hound 42 x 24 crew, galley, storerooms, etc.

Flying Cloud 41 x 18½ crew, galley, other apartments

Flying Fish 33 x 15 galley, cook’s sleeping quarters,

sail-room, store room, aft 10-12

boys, and staterooms for petty

officers

Westward Ho 25 x 16 galley, crew, other apartments

Bald Eagle 36 x 8 life boat, galley, stateroom for

forward officers (carpenter

boatswain)

Queen of the Seas 38 x 16 galley, 3 sate rooms for forward

officers, long boat

Shooting Star 22 x 10 crew, state rooms for boatswain

and carpenter, galley

Don Quixote - galley, sail room, store rooms,

quarters for petty officers,

berths for the boys

The BDA description of the deck cabin of the Flying Fish seems to have included all the accommodations (except the crew) commonly placed in this house since the size of the house was (some 260 square feet) smaller (two-thirds of the area assumed for crew accommodations) than on the Flying Cloud, it has been assumed that essentially all these should have been present in the Flying Cloud.

The forward officers evidently consisted of the boatswain, carpenter, and sailmaker. The cook may also have been considered a forward officer, but he generally had a cabin by himself. Two state rooms have been assumed for the carpenter and boatswain. The BDA seldom made mention of the sailmaker and one was seldom listed in the crew lists. A cabin fitted for ten boys has been located in the after part of the house.

Since both the Stag Hound and Flying Fish had a store room (or rooms) contained in their deck houses, it is considered justifiable to assume that the Flying Cloud had a similar accommodation. Since the storeroom was undoubtedly for food, it is reasonable to place it near the galley, either immediately abaft or opposite it.

It is believed that the cook occupied a private cabin within the deck house. The Flying Fish is stated to have had such an accommodation, and the cooks of the Staffordshire were also accommodated here. It has been assumed that the cook's quarters were immediately abaft the galley. Figure 38 gives the deck house arrangement.

4 POOP DECK AND AFTER CABIN

The BDA description of the Flying Cloud states that "Her poop deck is the height of the main rail, 68 feet long, and is surrounded by an open rail supported on turned stanchions. In the front of the poop is a small portico, which protects the entrance to the cabins..." Since this affords little basis for reconstruction, much of the following is based on the rather complete description of the Stag Hound given in the BDA. Therefore, it was necessary to reconstruct insofar as possible, the after cabin of the Stag Hound which was then used as a basis for the Flying Cloud reconstruction, (see Figure 39)

The BDA states that the half poop deck of the Stag Hound was the height of the main rail (about 5 feet 2 inches). The after cabins had a descent of 3 feet below the main deck, and were 6 feet 8 inches high. Figure 37 presents a cross section of this cabin. Forbes^N23 states "I have generally held in that the most complete and safe arrangement for ships is to have a half-poop about as high as the main rail, descending three or four steps into the cabin." Since the main rail of the Flying Cloud was only 5 feet high, a descent of 3 feet 2 inches below the main deck with four steps, 9½ inches apart, has been assumed.

Figure 37 - Cross Section of Poop Deck Cabin

Portico The portico was used to cover the stairs leading to the after cabins. There is no reason to make this portico particularly large since it served only to cover and give head room to these stairs. It has been assumed that this portico measured 8 feet wide by 8 feet long, extending 2½ feet forward from the poop deck.

Figure 38 - Deck Cabin

Figure 39 - Aft Cabins

Forward Cabin It has been assumed that the length of the 12 by 18 foot of the forward cabin of the Flying Cloud was 12 feet, since it was the usual procedure to give the length of a cabin first then its width and a cabin 18 feet long would have stuck out from under the poop deck 6 feet. It could be argued that since the poop deck was longer than that of the Stag Hound, all cabins should also be larger. However, on both ships this cabin has been assumed to have housed the same personnel (captain, three mates, a steward) and the pantry. There is therefore little reason to change the over-all size of the accommodations. It seems reason able that this cabin would also contain a water closet for the use of the officers as was described for the Witch of the Wave and several other ships. The Witch of the Wave also gives the most complete description of the accommodations of this cabin, and it was from here that the relative locations of the various state-rooms, etc. was determined. The BDA description states

She has three cabins, the first contains the captain's state-room on the starboard side, which overlooks that side of the main deck, and near it is a stateroom for the steward. Abaft these, on the same side, is the pantry. On the opposite side, are staterooms for the officers and a water closet.

The Queen of the Seas^BDA had before the cabin is a vestibule 12 feet - square, with the staircase in it, and on the starboard side of it is the pantry close abaft which is the captain's state room. On the opposite side is a mess room for the officers, and before it the stewards room.

Assuming a 2 foot passageway amidship all the Queen of the Seas apartments would be 5 feet deep. Assuming a 5 foot width for the pantry and steward's stateroom the captain's room and officer's mess would be 7 feet wide. Figure 40 presents the arrangements of the forward cabin of the Flying Cloud.

Figure 40 - Forward Cabin

The doors to the forward cabin may be either on the forward side of the portico or on the sides. Because of the size which has been chosen for the portico, and the more economical utilization of space, it has been assumed that the doors were on the forward side. These doors may either be flush with the main deck, or they may be at the bottom of the four steps. In the latter case they would have to open inward. If there were two doors, each 1¼ feet wide there would still be clearance to get out of the first two cabins. A single door hinged on either side would also give ample clearance. Doors on the main deck level would offer no difficulties. It is thought that such doors would open out since if they opened inward they would be awkward to close from outside. It has been assumed that doors were fitted on the main deck level only.

Great Cabin Although the Stag Hound has a cabin in the same general location as the great cabin in the Flying Cloud it was not entirely comparable. The forward portion of the great cabin shown in Figure 38 is equivalent to the Flying Cloud's great cabin. The after division of this cabin in the Stag Hound, is comparable to the Flying Cloud's after cabin.

Since the combined length^BDA of the two after cabins of the Stag Hound was exactly the same as the length specified for the poop deck, it may be assumed that in this case the after cabin extended to the stern. Since the poop deck of the Flying Cloud was 24 feet longer than that of the Stag Hound, it might seem correct to increase the number of passenger accommodations proportionately. However, if the same size staterooms are added to the great cabin until its length is commensurate with the length of the poop deck, there would be a total of 16 staterooms for the passengers. Table 15 gives the estimated number of passenger staterooms in the early McKay clippers. It will be noticed that none of them approached as many as 16 staterooms, and there is no reason to expect the Flying Cloud to have been an exception.

Table 15 – Stateroom Passenger Accommodations

Stag Hound 7

Flying Fish 6

Westward Ho 9

Bald Eagle 5

Thus, the great cabin of the Flying Cloud probably had the same number of staterooms as the Stag Hound.

The size of each stateroom may seem unbelievably small, but the following are descriptions which provide sufficient information for estimating the size of the staterooms.

Stag Hound: "The after cabin is 32 feet long by 13 wide. Its after division is fitted into a spacious state-room with two berths, and is admirably adopted for the accommodation of a family. Before this there is a water closet on each side, then a stateroom; before that a recess of 8 feet on each side, and then two staterooms." If the water closets are 3 feet wide; the average width of staterooms is 5¼ feet. If a passage way of 3 feet is assumed, the stateroom depth would be 5 feet.

Queen of the Seas: "'The forward cabin is 24 by 12 feet and contains 4 staterooms on each side with 4 berths in each.” With a 2 foot passageway amidships this gives staterooms 6 feet wide by 5 feet deep. "Her after cabin is 31 feet long, 12 feet wide and contains 10 spacious staterooms and other apartments (probably includes 2 water closets). A splendid sofa spans the stern, and a large mahogany table, with settees on each side extends through its center." It seems that at least a 4 foot passageway must be allowed amidships to accommodate the table and settees, leaving a cabin depth of only 4 feet. If it is assumed that the sofa and a water closet on each side took up 3 feet fore and aft the staterooms would be 5 feet 5 inches wide.

Hoogly: "Her staterooms are mostly very large, 9 by 7½ feet . . ."

James Baines: "The ladies cabin is aft, and is 30 feet long by 13 wide and 6½ high. Aft is a beautiful sofa, fitted to correspond with the curve of the stem, and over it is a neat bookcase. The forward partition is ornamented with a large plate glass mirror, which gives a reflected view of the cabin abaft it. The Captain's cabin and sleeping room are on the starboard side and communicate with the wheel house on deck, so that it will not be necessary to enter the ladies cabin. Besides these, the cabin contains eleven spacious staterooms, a bathroom, and other useful apartments." With a 3 foot passageway the length of the cabin, the staterooms would be 5 feet deep. Assuming that the captain's rooms equaled one and one-half staterooms, and there were two water closets together equal to one-half a stateroom, each stateroom would be4 feet 7 inches wide.

From the foregoing it would appear that a single stateroom (2 berths) averaged 5 feet deep by 5¼ feet wide, while a double stateroom (4 berths) averaged 5 feet deep by 6 feet wide. In the single stateroom the berths would be along the outside of the ship as noted by Forbes^C8. In the double stateroom they could be along both sides of the cabin. Bunks measuring 5¼ by 2½ feet have been assumed.

Both the Stag Hound and Flying Fish had recesses along the side (for sofas) and it has been assumed that the Flying Cloud was similarly fitted. In fact, it has been assumed that the forward two cabins of the Flying Cloud and Stag Hound were virtually identical. It has been assumed that there was a 3 foot passageway amidships in the Stag Hound, and Flying Cloud.

After Cabin The most logical arrangement to assume for the after cabin of the Flying Cloud would be one similar to the after division of the after cabin of the Stag Hound. The basic assumption has been made that in this case "apartment" is synonymous with "state-room". A number of possible arrangements for the after cabin are shown in Figure 41.

Figure 41 - State Room Arrangements

Arrangement D and E would probably not have been termed a separate cabin, but rather simply the after staterooms of the main cabin. Of the other three arrangements, C seems to offer the most economical use of space and best door arrangement.

Figure 42 presents the plan of the Flying Cloud's after cabins which has been accepted.

Figure 42 - Flying Cloud After Cabins

5 CABIN ORNAMENTAL WORK

The upper part of the deck house of the Stag Hound was "ornamental with panels", while the Staffordshire had her deck house "finely ornamented with paneling, venetian blinds, etc." It has been assumed that the deck house of the Flying Cloud was likewise ornamented with panels. The ships of this period were fitted out in all the Victorian splendor that can be imagined. The most complete description of this fancy work found was in the BDA report of the Staffordshire. Although being a packet ship it might seem to have minor bearing on the question of ornamental work aboard the Flying Cloud, it has been included to give an idea of the types of finishing then in style and considered in good taste or, as MacLean said in the description of the Westward Ho, in "the best style of art". The framework of the Staffordshire's great cabin

... is of mahogany. The panels are crowned with gothic arches, and are of pure enameled white, lined along the margins with gold, and flowered with gold in the-centers. They are raised, or rather their outlines are indented and form rosewood grooves, outside of which are the pilasters. These last are also lined with gilding, and ornamented with gilded carved work in the middle. Their capitals are richly carved and gilded, and their pedestals are enameled in imitation of dark veined marble. The forward partition amidships displays three mirrors, arched like the panels; and aft there is a splendid sofa, close to the stern. The rudder casing is finished in the same splendid style as the sides of the cabin. The beams are fringed with gilding, and the cornices are of paper mache, ornamented with roses, blooming in gold. The ceiling is white and the lofty skylights and stern-lights are at once ornamental as well as useful.

The carpets, table, settees, and other furniture, are of the richest material suitable for sea service, and are elegantly arranged. Its staterooms are spacious...and are furnished in the same style of elegance as the cabin... The cabins were designed and furnished by Mr. Manson; and her ornamental carving by Messrs. Gleason & Sons.

Nothing has been mentioned concerning the ornaments of the Flying Cloud. The Stag Hound had her forward cabin was "neatly painted and grained” and the one on the Flying Fish was “neatly painted and ornamented.” It has been assumed that he Flying Cloud was finished similar to the Stag Hound. Most forward cabins had windows of stained glass, sheltered with venetian blinds, and this arrangement has been accepted for the Flying Cloud.

The BDA gives a rather complete description of the Flying Cloud's great cabin. "The . . . great cabin, is beautifully wainscotted with satin wood, mahogany and rose wood, set off with enameled pilasters, cornices gilt work, etc. The panels are of satin wood, gothic in their form, and are set in mahogany frames edged with rose wood." The arrangement for fancy work on the Flying Cloud has been determined by comparing the descriptions given for the Staffordshire (above) and for the Stag Hound "The sides of the (after) cabin are splendidly finished with mahogany Gothic panels, enameled pilasters and cornices, and gilded moldings, (see Figure 43).

Figure 43 - Stag Hound After Cabin

Although the cabins of the Staffordshire were designed and furnished by Mr. Thomas Manson, McLean tells us in the description of the James Baines that Messrs. Jas. H. Beal and Brother furnished '"nearly all of the splendid ships which have been built by Mr. McKay." Cabin furnishings consisted of the carpets, tables, settees, sofas, mirrors, etc. The BDA description of the Shooting Star gives an idea of the furnishings of the period:

The transom is fitted as a sofa covered with crimson damask, and near it is a circular divan, with a central pyramid, on the front of which is a circular mirror set in a gilded frame. The divan is also covered with crimson damask. A mahogany table and seats occupy the center of the cabin. The after part of the cabin, when required can be converted into a separate apartment by curtains.

The Witch of the Wave had her "transom...fitted as a semi-circular sofa, covered with rich velvet." Mahogany was probably used throughout. It is stated in the BDA description of the Staffordshire that her staterooms were "furnished in the same style of elegance as the cabin." It has been assumed that the cabin and staterooms of the Flying Cloud were furnished similar to the descriptions above.

The Great Republic^S10 had her tables furnished with "plate, Ec by Mr. Samuel T. Crosby, the most eminent in his line of business in Boston." It is not unlikely that Mr. Crosby also furnished plate for the Flying Cloud.

4. FITTINGS, ETC.

An attempt has been made here to cover only the most important and obvious of the numerous fittings aboard any ship.

1 RUDDER

Material The Chariot of Fame plan shows the rudder colored the same as the keel, frame, etc; therefore, white oak has been assumed as the material of construction.

Size The MIT and Wall lines do not show a rudder, but the sail plan on the MIT plan shows the portion of the rudder above the load water line. Using this as a basis the rest of the rudder has been proportioned to con form to that shown on the Chariot of Fame plan. It has been assumed that the rudder was as thick as the sternpost of 16 inches. Griffiths shows a diagram in which the rudder is 13 inches thick with a 16 inch post, but others (Curtis²¹, Peake^P1.9, and Thearl^P.LXXXIII show the rudder and post sidings equal. A 16 inch rudder head is shown on the Chariot of Fame plan. The Chatsworth had a-rudder stock 17 inches in diameter with a stern post sided 17 inches. Since the rudder has been assumed 16 inches thick, the rudder head of the Flying Cloud has also been set at 16 inches.

Construction The construction details of the rudder shown on the Chariot of Fame plan have been adopted for the Flying Cloud, (see Figure 44).

Figure 44 - Rudder

Thearl²⁴⁹ states that the rudder was dowelled and bolted together, but since dowelling was more an English practice, seldom mentioned in American literature, it has been assumed that bolts were used as fastenings. Copper bolts, 1½ inch in diameter, passing through all timbers have been assumed since these timbers were of the same siding as the keel and keelson timbers.

Gulleting These were small pieces of wood running between the pintles. They are assumed to have been fastened by boat spikes similar to the false keel since they were not structural members.

Hoops Griffiths implies that rudder heads were sometimes banded with iron when he states that a bar of iron should be three times its thickness longer than the circumference of the spar or rudder to be banded. How ever, neither the Chariot of Fame nor the Great Republic plans show a banded rudder head and none has been assumed for the Flying Cloud.

Pintles & Gudgeons Brady²⁵⁵ mentions iron pintles while Fmcham¹² says pintles were made of mixed metal; but these are blue on the Chariot of Fame plan, the same as the other iron work shown. Iron has been as sumed for the Flying Cloud. Pintles and gudgeons have been arranged ac cording to the Chariot of Fame plan as to location and size. The scraps shown are 3 inches wide and extend to within three or four inches of the after part of the rudder. Fastenings have arbitrarily been assumed as 1 inch iron, driven through and clinched. Wilson²⁵⁰ states that braces and pintles were cast with straps, which were let into the sides and through bolted. Butts⁶⁰ claims that pintles should be two times the rudder diameter in eighths or 4 inches in diameter which has been assumed.

It is generally agreed that the rudder should be able to move 42° to -45° from a fore and aft line. Wilson²⁵⁰ states that the rudder was bearded to 38° while the stern post was bearded so that the rudder would swing to 42°.

Woodlock It is generally agreed (Peake¹⁴³, Thearl²⁵⁰, and Wilson²⁵⁰) that a woodlock, a small piece of wood which prevents the rudder from being unhung, was nailed to the rudder under the upper pintle. Wilson²⁵⁰ states that it was made of oak, coppered before being put on, and secured in place by a copper bolt driven through cornerwise into the stock of the rudder so that it can be readily drifted out when the rudder is required to be unshipped.

Cleat Luce⁹² states sometimes a strong cleat was placed under the second gudgeon on which the pintle partly rested. Wilson²⁵⁰ states that a metal step called a saucer was secured to the stern post below the center brace to keep the straps of the pintles and braces apart.

Rudder Chains Rudder chains were used to prevent the*loss of the rudder and to provide means of control if the wheel became inoperable. Peske¹⁴³ states that there was usually a bolt driven in the back of the rudder just above the water to which short chains were shackled which in turn were connected to the stern and thence to the quarters by rope pendants. Thearle^P1.LXXXIT shows a strap fitted for this purpose. Although the Chariot of Fame and Great Republic plans show no indication of such fittings, it has been assumed that the Flying Cloud was fitted with chains in the manner described by Peake. No chains were observable in the Currier lithograph or in the Chinese painting. Magoun¹¹⁸ claims that the Flying Cloud had only one rudder chain, but gives no source for this apparently unusual arrangement.

2 BOATS

No mention is made in the BDA report of the Flying Cloud concerning boats. The Flying Fish was reported to carry five boats, as was the Challenge. The only description of boats given by the BDA during 1851 was for the Challenge as follows:

She has five boats, the first a launch 26 feet long, 9 wide and 3½ deep, double planked and modeled for sailing or rowing, having a jib and "mainsail, and rowlocks for 12 oars.. The next are two cutters, carber built, 27 feet long, 7 wide, and 2 feet 9 inches deep, also fitted for sailing and rowing; each having the same number of oars as the launch. The third cutter is 25 feet long, 5 feet 5 inches wide, and 2 feet 4 inches deep, to be rowed by five oars. The captain's gig is 30 feet long, 5 wide, 3 feet 3 inches deep, is clincher built, to be rowed with six oars. These boats are all built of white oak and cedar, are copper fastened, have brass rowlocks, and are furnished with sails, awnings, water breakers, etc.

There is little uniformity exhibited among the ships which had boats mentioned in the BDA, either as to their number, location, type, or size. According to the BDA, the Antelope had two boats, the Polar Star had three, The Golden Eagle, Golden Light, Golden West, J. Montgomery, Whirlwind, Winchester, and the Santa Claus had four, and the Ellen Fester, Flying Childers, Queen of the Seas, Challenge, and Flying Fish all carried five boats. The Currier lithograph of the Flying Cloud shows two boats on iron quarter davits, and at least one boat on the deck house. The Chinese painting shows a starboard quarter boat on iron davits and may also show one on the port side. The woodcut of the Flying Cloud loading at New York shows one quarter boat on the starboard side (but aft of the mizzen rigging) while the top of the deck house is not shown. Other paintings show a various number of boats on the deck house and on the quarters. It has been assumed that the Flying Cloud carried four boats, two at the davits and two on the deck house placed bottom up. The length of the quarter boats shown on the Currier lithograph is 27.5 feet while the one boat visible on top of the deck house is 34.6 feet long; the Chinese painting shows a 28.5 foot boat on the starboard quarter davits. There is a close similarity between the measured length of quarter boats of the Flying Cloud and the length of the two cutters of the Challenge described. There is also similarity between the dimensions of the 27 foot cutter of the Challenge and the 26 and 28 foot cutters presented in the Navy specifications and plans bock of 1900 (see Figure 45). It has been assumed that the shape of the 28 foot Navy cutter (which is the same as the 26 foot cutter) is valid for the two quarter boats of the Flying Cloud. Figures 46 and 47 show the lines and sail plan of this boat.

The BDA cites many instances when the ship's long boat was stowed on the deck house, and it has been assumed that this is the boat shown in the Currier lithograph. Although the Challenge had a 26 foot launch and a 30 foot captain's gig, it has been assumed that the Flying Cloud had only a 30 foot long boat. Since the launch of the Challenge and the launches shown in the Navy specifications have similar dimensions, the lines of the 30 foot Navy launch have been adopted for the long boat of the Flying Cloud, It has been assumed that the other boat on the deck house was a slightly smaller cutter than those hanging on the davits; a 26 foot boat has been assumed. Although the dimensions of the smaller cutter of the Challenge did not correspond well with the Navy specifications (see Figure 45). The Navy lines and sail plan have been assumed (see Figures 48 and 49). It has been assumed that these boats were fitted as were the corresponding boats on the Challenge.

Figure 45 - Principal Dimensions of Launches & Cutters

Figure 46 - Lines of a 28 foot Cutter

Figure 47 - Sail Plan of 28 Foot Cutter

Figure 48 - Sail Plan of 30 Foot Launch

Figure 49 - Lines of 30 Foot Launch

Davits The location of the davits has been determined from the Chinese painting as being 17 inches from the bow and 29 inches from the stern of the boats, an average of 23 inches. The davits are shown 5 feet h inches above the monkey rail with the keel of the boat being even with this rail. The after davit is shown only a few inches before the forward mizzen mast shroud.

Anchors The weights of anchors specified by Brady³²⁸ for launches and cutters used on war ships have been used as the basis for determining the size of anchors in each of the boats for the Flying Cloud. The comparison has been made on the basis of the product of the three major dimensions of the boats. One anchor weighing 100 pounds, two weighing 60 pounds, and one weighing 50 pounds have been assumed.

Figure 50 - Size of Anchors for Launches and Cutters

Butts⁶⁰ gives the length of double oars as a proportion of the boat's breadth as follows:

Launch 1.25 2d Cutter l.40

1st Cutter 1.30 3d Cutter 1.45

3 GROUND TACKLE

The BDA makes no mention of the ground tackle of the Flying Cloud. An anchor approximately 8½ feet long, exclusive of an 18 inch ring, with the arm passing through 6½ feet above the crown is shown on the Chinese painting of the Flying Cloud. Only two descriptions of ground tackle of any specific ship have been found; the BDA description of the Challenge, and the description of the Great Republic.^S20 Since the Great Republic had Porter's patent anchors, the weights given for these are no help. [Ed. Porter patent U.S. 2,497] The total weight of the three anchors of the Challenge was reportedly of 13,378 pounds, besides a stream anchor and chain. According to Brady²⁹⁰ and Fincham⁴ a ship that had a total of three anchors and a stream anchor would have had two bowers and one sheet anchor, all of the same weight.

By using one formula given by Luce²⁶⁸, which states that the anchor weight (exclusive of stock but inclusive of bending shackle) equals three times the square of the extreme breadth of the ship, a weight of 5,043 pounds is obtained. Using a second formula supplied by Luce²⁶⁸ which states that the anchor weight equals two thirds the drought plus the beam, the whole times 100, one gets 4,433 pounds. For three equal size anchors, the above formulas give a maximum total weight of 15,129 and a minimum of 13,299 pounds, which bracket the 13,378 given in the BDA. Since the second rule gives such a close approximation (-0.6%) to the BDA value, this rule has been used in calculating the size of the anchors for the Flying Cloud, giving 4,144 pounds as the weight of the bowers and sheet anchors. It should be pointed out that this weight is some 10% below that necessary to "equal or exceed the requirements of Lloyds in weight and length" as given by Butts⁸⁴ (see Table 16). However, since the ground tackle of the Challenge^BDA and the details connected therewith have been made to surpass the strictest requirements of Lloyds", it has been assumed that the weights derived above are applicable.

Table 16 - Lloyds Regulation for Ground Tackle

Ship Chain Length Wood Number

Stocket of Anchors

Anchors

(Tons) (Inches) (Fathoms) (cwt) Bowers Stream Kedge

1200 2 to 1 ⅞ 300 40 3 1 3

1500 2 300 45 3 1 3

2000 2 ⅛ to 2 ¼ 300 50 3 1 3

According to Brady³²⁸ with bowers of 4,144 pounds, the stream anchor should weigh 1,056 pounds or nominally 1,000 pounds. Luce²⁷⁰ also states the stream anchor weighed about one-fourth of the weight of the bower. Figure 51 presents this relationship graphically as given by Brady³²⁸.

Figure 51 - Weight of Anchors

Chains The BDA states that the Challenge had two chains 120 fathoms in length, one 1 ⅞ inches and the other 2 inches, to go with the three bowers weighing 4,460 pounds and the stream anchor weighing 1,116 pounds. The BDA reported the Phantom (1,300 tons) had four chains of 1 ⅞, 1 ⅝, 1 ⅜, and 1 inch; and five anchors weighing 4200, 3700, 3200, 1200, and 500 pounds. Figure 52 plots the size of these chains against the weight of the anchors. It also gives the chain sizes acceptable to Lloyds as given by Butts⁸⁴ and the size of chain recommended by Luce²⁸¹ and Brady³²⁸.

Figure 52 - Chain Size vs Anchor Weight

Two ⅛ inch chains for the bower and sheet anchors and one 1 inch chain for the stream anchor, each 120 fathoms long have been assumed for the Flying Cloud. It was often stated in the BDA reports that the ground tackle chains exceeded the requirements of Lloyds in length. Although Table 16 indicates that 300 fathoms was required by Lloyds, it has been assumed that since the Challenge had only two 120 fathom chains, the same length would be acceptable in the Flying Cloud. Luce²⁸¹ states that chain cables were shackled every 15 fathoms, with the rounded part of the shackle forward, and at certain intervals in the chain were placed swivels.

Size Davis, in "The Built-up Ship Model" suggests a method of estimating the size of an anchor from its weight. He assumes that the metal coming off the flukes will make the palms and the iron taken from the top of the shank will be made up by metal added at the crown. Using his method the shank length comes out 6.7 feet, not particularly close to the 8 foot anchor shown on the Chinese painting. This anchor would require a 10 inch square shank. Porter presented a diagram showing the length of the arm of common anchors of different weights. An anchor of 40 cwt had an arm 4 feet 2½ inches long and an anchor of 45 cwt had a 4 foot 4½ inch arm.

Stock No description of the exact shape of anchors has been found. Fincham⁴ states that the length of the wooden stock was equal to the length of the shank plus one-half the diameter of the ring. The middle dimension of the stock was one-twelfth its length, while the end dimension was one-half of this. Stocks were made from two pieces, separated at the middle by ½ to 1¼ inches, a 3 inch wide chock (wedge) placed between them, and fastened with 4 bolts placed at half the largest size on each side of the middle, and a quarter from the edge; three or four treenails were placed at equal distances, and two hoops evenly distributed on each side, if the anchor was under 4,000 pounds, three to all anchors above 4,000 pounds. According to Luce²⁷⁰ an oak stock weighed about one-fourth as much as the anchor and it was kept coated with coal-tar, not paint. If it is assumed the shank was only as long as the length of two arms combined and the cross section is calculated for a total length of 17 feet (4 x 4 feet 3 inches), 8⅞ inch square material would be required and the shank length would be 8½ feet. The stock was made straight on the part towards the ring, but the other way it was tapered equally on both sides and double on the bottom. Davis^Dp118 adds that the stock is parallel for nearly one-half its length.

Shank and Arms Davis and Luce²⁷⁰ state that the length of the arms or flukes from the throat to the bill was equal to the length of the large part of the shank from the crown to the top of the stock, and the palm was equal to one-half the length of the arm or fluke from the nib-end to the stock, while it was as wide as it was long; its width was rounded to a point at the nib. The shank tapered from the crown to the stock, being one-third smaller, just below the stock where the chamfered edges of the shank end in a square (this is called the small round of the stock). Luce²⁷² states that the average proportion in use were: shank 100; ear arm from crown to bell 40; stock 100; radius outside 35; angle of face of palm with shank 51°; when on ground angle of shank 24°; blade 75°. Porter⁵¹ gives a drawing of the fluke of a common anchor which is reproduced as Figure 53.

Figure 53 - Fluke of Common Anchor

Figure 54 gives the proportions of an anchor shown by Davis^Dp and of Cotsell's admiralty anchor.

Figure 54 - Anchors

Location Davis^Dp118 states that the bowers were stowed on the bows, one on each side. Captain Winsor's account of a typhoon (August 8, 1860 — China Sea) indicates that, at least at this time, an anchor was carried on the bow lashed to a ring bolt, "The starboard anchor washed off of the bow. Tore out all the ringbolt and everything it was lashed to." Leslie²⁷⁰ claims the bowers were stowed just abaft the cathead, in the bows of the ship, while the sheet-anchor, which was used only if both bowers were lost, was stowed abaft the foremast, near where the fore sheet passed into the ship. Davis says the sheet anchors were stowed just abaft the fore channels, while Luce²⁷⁴ states this anchor was stowed in the main hatch. Davis^Dp claims the stream anchor was a spare one kept stowed on end in the main hatch lashed to the stanchions. Fincham³ states that the stream anchor is used only to ride in rivers or to bring up for a short time.

4 CAPSTANS

Number The BDA reports that the following ships were fitted with two capstans; the Stag Hound, Flying Fish, Westward Ho, Bald Eagle, and many other clippers. Although the BDA makes no mention of capstans on the Flying Cloud and reports that the packet ship Staffordshire had three capstans, there is considerable justification for assuming that the Flying Cloud had only two capstans. However, this is not the conclusion reached by Magoun and Boucher who both show four capstans. It is not known what justification was found for these additional capstans, but until something is found which contradicts only two capstans, this number must be accepted.

Materials The capstans were very probably made of mahogany and locust, since out of the one ship launched in 1850 and the seven ships launched in 1851 which had capstans described in BDA reports, five were of mahogany and locust and two were of mahogany alone (see Table 17). The use of brass and composition in capstans is somewhat questionable. Two of the above capstans were described as being inlaid with brass; one was inlaid with compositions; four were "brass mounted"; and one had "composition circles and pawls'". It seems likely that all actually were brass or composition mounted and that some of the earlier ones were inlaid. Since the launching date of the Flying Cloud falls at the very end of the "inlaid" series, it has been assumed that the capstans were inlaid with brass. It is also likely that brass drum heads were common to all, although this is not evident from the descriptions. Table 17 lists, in the order of launching, the ships which had capstans described in the BDA in 1850 and 1851.

Table 17 - Capstan Material

Ships Where BDA Wood Remarks

Built Date Used*

1850

Stag Hound Boston Dec. m & l inlaid with brass

1851

John Bertram Boston Jan. m& l composition circles

and pails & brass heads

Shooting Star Boston March m & l inlaid with brass

Mermaid Boston April l & m inlaid with composition

Witch of the Wave Boston May brass heads

Challenge New York June brass heads

Staffordshire Boston July m brass mounted

R B Forbes Boston Sept. m & l brass mounted

Samuel Lawrence Boston Sept. l & m brass mounted

Antelope Boston Nov. m brass mounted

* m- mahogany l - locust

Construction It has been assumed that the type of capstan used aboard the Flying Cloud was the double capstan shown in the plans of the Great Republic. Wilson²⁴⁸ states that there was a wrought iron spindle which had the framing of two decks to steady it. It turned in a bush or collar in the upper of these decks, and had the pivot at its lower end supported by a step fixed to the lower deck. The greatest diameter of the spindle was about the middle, and ranged from 5-8 inches. The diameter at the ends was two thirds that of the middle. The drum head of the capstan ranged from 3 to 5 feet in diameter with bar holes 3 to 5 inches square and 10 to 12 inches tapering inwards. Capstan bars were 8 to 14 feet long, connected together through their outer ends connected together by a rope called a swifter. Capstan bar holes were spaced about one foot apart.

Location One of the capstans was unquestionably on the forecastle, probably amidships, but the fore and aft position can only be surmised from a study of various paintings, particularly the Currier lithograph. It has been assumed that the capstan was located 15 feet from the bow. When specified in the BDA reports, the second capstan was located on the quarter deck. The location of this capstan on the Challenge was given as: mainmast-hatchway-capstan-hatchway-mizzenmast, and the R. B. Forbes had her capstan abaft the mainmast before the hatchway. It has been assumed that the capstan on the Flying Cloud was between the after hatchway and the poop deck.

5 STEERING APPARATUS

Type By the time of the clippers, the use of Reed's patent steering apparatus seems to have gained complete acceptance on McKay's ships. All BDA descriptions of McKay ships which mention the steering apparatus by name refer to Reed's type, and although not so stated, it may be confidently assumed that the Flying Cloud used this type of apparatus. The best sources of detailed information are the original patents issued to Reed which give all details (U. S. Patent Nos. 5,242 and 6,507). The BDA report of the Don Quixote (October 27, 1853) stated that she had Reed's steering apparatus with an iron yoke brace on the after part of the rudder head to keep the rudder pintles on their centers. This seems to be discussed as something new or out-of-the-ordinary and it has been assumed that none was fitted on the Flying Cloud. However, it has been assumed that all improvements patented up to 1851 were employed; therefore Patent 6,507 has been assumed valid.

Construction The location of the steering wheel is relatively fixed since there was a direct vertical connection with the rudder head. Wilson²⁵⁵ states that steering wheels range from 3 to 6 feet in diameter. The barrel, rim, and standards of the wheel were made of mahogany and the spokes of locust; the shaft was of copper or composition. The wheel was arranged so that the lower rim of the wheel moved opposite to the movement of the rudder. It is thought that the Flying Cloud would have had a fairly large wheel; a 6 feet diameter has been assumed. The other specifications given by Wilson²⁵⁵ have also been assumed, with the added feature of an embossed emblem (usually a star) fixed to the upper-most spoke with the rudder amidships placed as an night time aid to the helmsman.

Size The Chinese painting shows a wheelhouse 8 feet 10 inches long, the height of the underside of the monkey rail aft and 1 foot 4½ inches higher than this forward; the wheel is not actually visible, but it is probable that this is what causes the forward part of the house to look sloped. In this case the wheel would have a diameter of approximately 6 feet 6 inches to 6 feet 10 inches. Since the same type of house is fitted on the MIT model of the Invincible the above dimensions have been assumed valid. A width of 7 feet 5 inches has been assumed since this is approximately in the same proportion as shown on the Invincible.

6 PUMPS

Type No mention is made of the pumps of the Flying Cloud. However, the BDA states that the Stag Hound had "patent copper pumps, which work with fly wheel and winches". The BDA description of the John Bertram indicates that these were probably of "New York patent." The Flying Fish and Westward Ho had Litchfield's patent pumps according to the BDA, while the description of the Stag Hound's pumps indicate that they were also of Litchfield's patent. Although no U. S. patent was found under Litchfield's name, it is known that C. L. Litchfield was from New York. According to the BDA of July 5, 1852, Litchfield's pumps were sold by Whiton, Train & Co., ship chandlers located at 1 City Wharf. Since it is reasonable to assume that the Flying Cloud was fitted with pumps in a manner similar to the above ships, it has been assumed that the Flying Cloud had Litchfield's patent pumps. Figure 55 shows the fly-wheel pumps which Magoun¹²⁸ believes were aboard the Flying Cloud.

Figure 55 - Fly Wheel Pump

Number Various BDA reports indicate that in many ships there were "two hold pumps and two bilge pumps". These were specified for the Polar Star, Samuel Lawrence, Orient, J. Montgomery, and the West Wind. It appears that the hold pumps were of Litchfield's patent, and may also have been used for the bilge pumps.

Location The location of the hold pumps in many ships was abaft the main mast, inside the fife rail, a location which Forbes^N25 acknowledges by saying "as to the position of pumps, the one generally chosen is the worst, or nearly so that can be selected; they are, in ninety-nine cases in the hundred, placed very near the mainmast; and it is certainly a convenience to put the pumps into the same 'thick-work' around the mainmast, it makes a good finish, looks well, accommodates the capstan..." This location for the pumps has been assumed for the Flying Cloud.

Other Pumps A Flander's patent force pump was often mentioned by the BDA. This pump was fitted aft and was designed for wetting sails, washing decks, and extinguishing fires "should such a calamity befall her". It is probable that the Flying Cloud carried such a pump, but the location is not known. No record of a U. S. Patent was found. [Ed. U.S. patent 8,239]

7 WINDLASS

Type It seems justified on the basis of the BDA reports to assume that the Flying Cloud had a patent windlass since the Stag Hound and Flying Fish were stated to have had one. The only clue as to the type is given in the description of the Stag Hound, where it was stated that her patent windlass had mends which ungear". The patented windlasses in existence at that time were examined (U.S. Patent Nos. 2449, 3291, 5477). However, none of these patents seem to fall under the above description, at least none seems to make a point of "ends which ungear". The Chariot of Fame plan shows a windlass, and the proportions shown there have been assumed valid for the Flying Cloud. Handles similar to those shown in Patent 2449 and a ratchet similar to that shown in Patent 3291 have been assumed. Figure 56 gives the shape of the windlass shown by Magoun:

Figure 56 - Windless

Location The usual location for the windlass was under or lust abaft the break of the topgallant forecastle. It has been assumed that in the Flying Cloud it was located just aft the break. The accompanying bitts have been placed in the proper location to support the windlass.

8 BINNACLE

Fincham defines the binnacle as a case to contain the compass, lights. etc., but the shape and exact form of this fitting is open to question. The BDA description of the Queen of the Seas stated that her --

binnacle is in the after part of an octagonal skylight, over the cabin, and therefore at night its light will not be liable to be blown out by squalls; but though this is excellent, the officer of the deck will have to obtain a light for his pipe elsewhere (sailors prefer pipe smoking to cigars) therefore, against this high handed outrage upon salt water rights, we enter our solemn protest.

Thus it may be assumed that this was not the usual arrangement for a binnacle. The only other BDA description for the binnacle was that of the Staffordshire which had “mahogany binnacles inlaid with brass”. Since no patented binnacle was found until 1865, this is not a possible source of drawings. The only source is contemporary models. MIT has on exhibit a contemporary model of Webb's clipper Invincible (1851) which shows a round binnacle. A round binnacle as been assumed valid for the Flying cloud. Wilson²³² sates that all fastenings within an 8 foot radius of the binnacle were of copper or composition.

9 WATER CASKS

Water casks were generally round, made of wood, and stowed along side of the deck house. The two exceptions to this arrangement noted during p the course of this study were the Sierra Nevada^BDA which “on deck, along the sides of the house, she has square iron water tanks hold more water and stow snugger" and the Webester^BDA which had “water casks which stow on deck are not round but nearly square and are fitted to stow along side of the house.'" Four round water casks were shown on the Boucher model and on Magoun's plan of the Flying Cloud, two on each side of the forward part of the deck house. This arrangement has been assumed for a lack of better information.

10 LIGHTS

Clark⁴² stated that all packet ships carried a white light at the bowsprit cap from sunset to sunrise. These ships also carried a flare-up which was kept in the companion, ready for immediate use. Longfellow’s poem “The Building of the Ship” confirms the location of a light around the bowsprit by saying,

Twill be seen (the figurehead) by the rays of the signal light

No evidence of side lights was found on any of the contemporary paintings, therefore, it has been assumed that none were fitted on the Flying Cloud. Magoun¹¹⁸ confirms that such lights were not in use in 1851. The government regulations were not checked in this respect; however they would have little actual value in determining when a custom originated since laws would be enacted only after a custom had proved valid.

11 VENTILATORS

Hold Emerson's patents (U.S. Patent Nos. 5182, 5183) give a very complete outline of the construction of hold ventilators described in the BDA report of the Flying Cloud. Emerson's patent No. 5842 showed the placement of ventilators in a ship, but specified only that they be placed at the extremities of the ship. The BDA states that the Witchcraft (two decks) had two of Emerson's ventilators forward and one upon the quarter deck, the last of polished brass. One of those drew a column of air up from the bottom of the hold, through a flue of 10 inches in diameter, and the other an equal column from the between decks, while that upon the quarter deck blew a column down into the between decks. The Morning Light (three decks) had three Emerson ventilators forward and two-aft which communicated with all the decks and the hold. Although the BDA report of the Flying Cloud states only that she had person's ventilators "for the purification of the hold", BDA reports of other ships indicate that the arrangement of the Witchcraft was typical.

The BDA of July 5, 1852, states that Lewis Jones & Son at 36 Union St. had the exclusive patent rights of these ventilators in Boston at this time.

Other The BDA reported that the Flying Cloud had "brass ventilators along the line of her planksheer and in her bitts". Forbes^C3 (1866) stated that "Small brass screw ventilators have long been in use, but as they are seldom opened when they ought to be, and (are) generally uneffective by reason of the covering-board or plankshire resting on the top of the timbers, they do not amount to much." This type of ventilator, which were always open and had tubes over them which fit into the lower part of the rack rail so that water could not enter was evidently what is meant in the BDA description of the Flying Cloud. No other description of either of these types of ventilators was found.

12 AIR PORTS

The BDA report of the Flying Cloud states that "she...has air ports below ..." Wilson states that air ports were circular apertures out in the side of a vessel to admit light and air to the berth deck, staterooms, etc. They were closed by the old-fashioned air port plunger, or fitted to close with a light of glass, set in a composition-frame and turning on a hinge, secured when closed by a heavy thumb-screw. Enoch Hidden's U. S. Patent No. 5879 gives the second type of air port. The Hoogly^BDA had circular plate glass ports instead of windows; the Shooting Star^BDA had circular plate glass air ports as substitutes for stern windows; and the Anglo Saxon^M44(1846) had in each side four circular air ports with plate glass lights in them each 8½ inches in diameter set in composition frames and secured with screws, so as to be air-tight when in. Air ports are visible in only one painting of the Flying Cloud—the one in the MacPherson Collection. Although there is some question as to the validity of this painting, it was from this that the location of these ports was determined.

Griffiths⁵⁹ states that if a ship is intended for passengers, with lights in the side, the chock separating the timbers of the frames should be smaller in order that the light may come between the frames.

13 SCUPPERS

Size and Shape Wilson²³⁹ states that scuppers were holes lined with lead, cut through the waterway and outside planking, and having a composition valve fitted on the outside. Fincham⁸⁸ states that scuppers were covered with leather flaps. The size and shape of the scuppers has been taken from the plans of the packet ship Isaac Webb given in Webb's book of plans, and this shape (See Figure 57) corresponds well with that shown in some contemporary paintings.

Figure 57 - Scuppers

Location The locations of the scuppers have also been taken from the plan of the Isaac Webb, built in 1851. Three scuppers were places with almost equal space between them, one midships, and the others fore and aft.

14 HAWSE HOLES

Location The Currier lithograph locates the center of the hawse hole (only one on the starboard side) slightly less than its own diameter down from the planksheer and one and one-half the diameter forward of a vertical line drawn from the load-water-line. The incident which occurred during the first voyage of the Flying Cloud (see TOPGALLANT FORECASTLE) indicates that the hawse holes led directly into the crew's quarters forward.

Size Flncham⁷⁴ gives a table of hawse hole diameter versus chain size so that, having once decided upon the size of the largest anchor chain, the size and dimensions of the hawse pipe-may be determined. It has been assumed that the largest chains were 1⅞ inches (see GROUND TACKLE), which would require a pipe 17½ inches in diameter with a l¼ inch thickness of iron in the body of the pipe and the flange.

Construction Fincham⁷⁵ states that the hawse hole was lined with ¼ inch lead. The pipe itself (cast iron) was let in from outside and fastened with four bolts through all. Wilson²³⁸ states that hawse pipes were cast in two pieces butting in the center of their length, and secured by bolts driven from the outside and inside flanges. He states that hawse holes were stoppered with bucklers which worked on hinges, a score being taken out to admit the link of the cable. Fincham³¹ states that bucklers were of elm, either in one or two parts, and were fixed by two bare for each hole with wedges driven firmly.

15 CHAIN STOPPERS

Application Of the first six McKay clipper ships built, only the Flying Fish was reported by the BDA as being fitted with Crane's patent self-acting chain stoppers. The BDA of March 5, 1854 had a list of about 110 vessels which were at that time fitted with Crane's chain stoppers. Of the six McKay clippers referred to above, the list included only the Flying Fish, Stag Hound, and Westward Ho. It would be expected that the Flying Cloud were fitted with Crane's stoppers; if not at the time of her launching, then certainly before her career ended. However, in view of the reputation of the Flying Cloud, it seems likely that, had she been so fitted at the time of the 1854 ad, her name certainly would have been included. An ad in the BDA of July 5, 1852, also makes no mention of the Flying Cloud when it states that "They have been tried in the following, among many other New York ships - Tornado, Governor Morton, and E. 0. Scranton; and "... the ships Flying Fish, Hoogly, Northern Light, and Crusader, of this port (Boston) and many smaller vessels also have them."

Construction Although the original patent was not found, the contemporary descriptions give an idea of the arrangement. What follows is a composite description taken from the BDA report of the Flying Fish and the ads appearing in the BDA of July 5, 1852, and January 16, 1854. [Ed. U.S. patent 9,645] Craned patent self-acting chain stoppers, invented by J. E. Crane of Lowell, Massachusetts, were simple in design, economical in cost, and of the highest utility in leaving every link of chain as it was hove in. They were secured to a breast-hook close inside of the hawse hole. The chain passed over an angular iron ridge on the deck, and as it was hove in every link was nipped by a self-acting paul, located above the ridge, which fell upon the chain. Consequently, fleeting or surging of the chain ' upon the windlass would not lose a single link. When the chain was required to be paid out, the paul was triced up out of the way leaving fair scope for running. It superseded entirely the use of the devil's claw.

16 LIGHTNING CONDUCTORS

Although for over 20 years the British Navy had been using lightning conductors invented by Sir William S. Harris, these fittings were very seldom, found on US merchant ships in the early 1850’s. In the BDA description of the Water Witch (July 1855) the following statement is found, "...like all our other fine ships, she has no lightning conductors.". This omission was blamed on the fact that no reduction in insurance premium was given for installing such devices. An article in the BDA of April 27, 1855, announcing publication of "Shipwreck by Lightning - Papers Relative to Lightning Conductors" by Capt. Forbes states as follows, "Several years since, Capt. Forbes published a similar work; but north of New York, so far as we know, the suggestions were not acted upon..." With this evidence it must be assumed that the Flying Cloud was not fitted with lightning conductors, at least during the first years.

17 CATHEADS

Location The location of the catheads has been determined from the location of the anchor shown on the Chinese painting as being 45 feet 10 inches forward of the fore side of the fore mast, or nearly three- fourths of the distance between the fore mast and the bow. The cathead was generally placed perpendicular to the planksheer.

Construction Butts⁶⁰ states that catheads were the same size as the beams. Wilson²⁵⁵ states that the cathead was made of white or live oak knees, with up ward slope enough to allow the anchor to lay level when stowed, and long enough to insure they hung clear. The projecting part of the cathead was supported by a knee. A wide wrought-iron band was usually let in flush on the top of the in board portion and ran a short distance on the outboard portion to add to the strength of the cathead. The bolts which secured this band to the side of the vessel were driven from the outside and clinched in countersinks in this band. The outer end of the cathead was hooped to prevent its splitting. Fincham⁴⁷ states that catheads had two or three sheaves in their outer end while the inner end lapped under a forecastle deck beam. Wilson²⁵⁵ says the inner end of the cathead generally ran down inside the ship's side through which it was bolted. The contemporary model of the Invincible at MIT shows three sheaves, and this number has been assumed for the Flying Cloud. An eyebolt was placed in the outer end of the cathead to take the standing end of the cat-fall. Another eyebolt was fitted on the after side for the fish davit. There was also a tripper for the cat stopper on the forward side of the top and an iron belaying cleat on the top gallant forecastle deck.

Bill Boards When the anchor was stowed, the inner fluke rested on an iron covered board, termed the bill board, which projected from the side of the ship - with a slight outward slope. Bill boards were fitted with trippers and iron belaying cleats for the shank painters. Ring bolts were also placed where required to lash the anchors when stowed for sea.

18 CHANNELS

Channels were flat ledges of white oak designed to spread the lower shrouds. According to Wilson²⁴⁰ the average length of channels equaled about one-half the length of the lower mast from spar deck to cap. One-half the length of the mast from hounds to spar deck was the part usually occupied by the spread of the rigging, the channel extending about one-fourth the length of the mast head on each side of the rigging. It was reported^BDA that the Romance of the Sea had a distance of 24 feet between the foremost swifter and the after chain plate along both the fore and main channels and 18 feet along the mizen channel, both of which were unusually long according to the report. The Bald Eagle^BDA had 22 feet between the chain plate of the forward swifter of the main rigging and the chain plate of the royal backstay. Her lower rigging and backstays had more spread than usual, having like a ship of war, sufficient space for a port between the chain plates of the third and fourth shroud.

According to the rule for the length of a channel given above the Romance of the Sea should have had channels 25 and 24½ feet long compared to the actual length of 24 feet, and 22 feet compared to 18 feet; the Bald Eagle should have had 27½ feet compared with an actual length of 22 feet. Thus it is obvious that the rule should not be used and for the Flying Cloud it was decided that measurement of the Chinese painting would be the best method for determining these dimensions. According to this painting the fore, main, and mizen shrouds extended 25.55, 24.85, and 12.58 feet respectively (see Table 33). An extension on each side of one-fourth the length of the masthead has been accepted.

With regard to the other dimensions of channels, Davis^Dp108 states that a ship of 500 tons had channels at her main mast that were 24 feet long, 2 feet wide, and 5 inches thick; at the fore mast 19 feet long, 4½ inches thick; and at the mizen mast the only dimension given is a thickness of 5 inches. Wilson²⁴⁰ states that the thickness of channels was about one and one-half that of the skin of the ship’s side on which they were fastened, supposing the material to be the same, made one-third to one-forth thinner then this at the outer edge. Butts⁶⁰ claimed that channels should be ½ inch thicker than the bottom planking .

Construction Channels were bolted to the ship's side edgewise, at interval of about 5 feet, the bolts being driven through and riveted on rings on the inside. The channels were supported from below by wrought iron channel knees. Finchan⁵⁰ states that channels were bolted every 5 to 4 feet and were supported by two knees between each port, these knee plates had their upper ends let through the channel, with an arm under the channel extending sufficiently within the arm that was connected with the side of the ship to receive two or three up-and-down bolts, and extending outward to receive one up-and-down bolt. Wilson states that there were usually four knees for the fore and main channels and three for the mizen. Ring bolts were placed only in the lower ends of these knees instead of in every second chain plate as was frequently seen. Channel planks were tonged and groved at their edges.

Chain plate and prevention plate bolts passed through the ship and were riveted or keyed. A small iron chaffing plate was fitted over the edge of the "channel under the chain plate to prevent it from cutting into the channel. After the chain plates were fastened, a channel rail was placed over the edge of the channel. Fincham⁵⁰ states that the channel rail was as deep as the channel was thick at the outer part, and was ½ inch less than this in breadth. The rail was fastened with saucer-headed bolts, two times the breadth of the rail in length, driven into the channel between the dead eyes.

In general the foregoing arrangements have been accepted. White oak has been assumed, 6, 6, and 5 inches thick going from the fore to the mizen mast. The thickness has been a compromise between Butts' suggestion (5 inches) and Wilson's recommendations (about 7 inches)

19 LADDERS

Fincham⁸⁰ states that ladders had steps 7-9 inches apart which is reasonable and has been assumed.

20 GANGWAY

The Chinese painting shows a 2 foot 6 inch gangway on the starboard side. The after side was located 1 foot 5 inches forward of the forward main shroud.

21 FIRE BUCKETS

Boucher's model of the Flying Cloud shown nine fire buckets arranged along the after part of the poop deck house; Magoun shows seven buckets in the same location. The larger number has been considered more reasonable.

22 COMPANIONS

Webb's plan of the Young America shows three companions, all facing aft, with a sliding roof and sloping top. This is a logical arrangement and has been considered valid for the Flying Cloud.

25 CABIN WINDOWS

The BDA reports often stated that the windows in front of the after cabin were of stained glass and sometimes these were sheltered with Venetian blinds. Mention is made of no other openings and it is assumed the remaining windows had plain or perhaps frosted glass. Each stateroom was generally, if not always, fitted with "a deck and side lights."

24 SALTING

Griffiths¹⁴² presented a most complete description of salting, a method of wood preservation used extensively in the 1850's in ship construction. He states that the planksheers were not put over the stanchions and fastened until the ship was fully salted, sills for the reception of which were put between the timbers near the light-water line, and extended the entire length of the ship. In order that the salt might run down, part of the chock was removed. This chock was probably one in wake of the lower deck beams. The heads of all the timbers were often sawed off below the lower aide of the planksheer, in order that the salt might cover them.

25 CHAINS LOCKERS

The actual size of the chain lockers (in all cases the BDA used the plural) is difficult to determine. Brady's book shows a first rate war ship with two chain lockers, each about 6 feet 7 inches long by 4 feet 6 inches wide, located symmetrically beside the fore mast. Since the Flying Cloud carried considerably less ground tackle than a ship of war there is justification for reducing these dimensions to 5 feet long by 4 feet wide. The BDA report of the Flying Cloud states that the chain lockers were "in the hold abaft the foremast." Since other BDA reports indicate that the chain lockers were generally adjacent to the foremast, it seems valid to place the forward side of the chain lockers in the Flying Cloud in line with the foremast. The lockers probably extended to the hold beams as shown by Leslie for a war ship.

26 WATER TANK

Material The BDA states that the water tank was made of iron.

Size It is evident from the BDA reports of the first seven McKay clipper ships that there was a trend toward increasing the capacity of the water tank. Table 18 presents the ships considered and their water tank capacity.

Table 18 - Number of Water Tanks and their Capacity

Ship Number Capacity

Stag Hound 1 4500 gal.

Flying Cloud - -

Staffordshire 2 6000

Flying Fish 1 5000

Sovereign of the Seas - -

Westward Ho 1 6000

Bald Eagle 1 6000

In determining the probable capacity of the Flying Cloud's water tank the only justified comparison among the ships given in Table 18 is with the Stag Hound and Flying Fish. The Staffordshire was a packet ship designed primarily to carry people, not cargo, therefore requiring more water than a clipper ship; the Westward Ho and Bald Eagle were launched considerably after the Flying Cloud. The Stag Hound had a 4500 gallon water tank, the Flying Fish one 5000 gallons. The Flying Cloud very probably had one size or the other. In deciding between the two capacities, primary consideration has been given to the fact that there was a large difference in the capacity of the tank in the Stag Hound (4500 gal) and those in the Staffordshire (6000 gal). Although admittedly slight, there is some justification for expecting that a tank intermediate in size was installed in some ship. The Flying Cloud is the only ship in which this could have been placed. On this meager evidence it has been assumed that the Flying Cloud has a 5000 gallon water tank.

That the water tank was circular is evident from the many BDA reports of other ships which generally specified cylindrical water tanks. In determining the diameter of this tank, it has been assumed that the depth of the tank was the distance from the top of the upper deck beam amidships to the top of the keelson platform, or 15 feet 8 inches. The diameter for a 5000 gallon tank is then 7 feet 5 inches. The actual size of this tank is difficult to determine since the BDA figures can be proved generally inaccurate. For instance, the BDA states that the Star of Empire had "two tanks each of about 5000 gallons capacity" while actual measurement of the plan in the Peabody Museum shows tanks of 5060 and 6740 gallons.

Installation It has been assumed that the water tank was constructed as the one described in the Stag Hound. This extended from the upper deck to the top of the keelson, where it rested upon a bed constructed over and along side the keelson. It has been assumed that "over the keelson" referred to only a thin planking which lent itself to fastening and caulking more easily than the keelsons themselves. A 4 inch planking has been considered sufficient. The auxiliary sister keelsons (sometimes termed cousin keelsons) which were evidently required are thought to have been only large enough to support the tank.

Since the combined main and sister keelsons were 37 inches across, at least 25 inches of cousin keelsons must be added to each side to give the tank sufficient support. A width of 30 inches would provide a 5 inch shelf which is considered ample for any fastenings. This 30 inches can be attained most conveniently by the use of two sets of cousin keelsons, each composed of three 15 inch square timbers. The length of the first set would necessarily be only 7 feet but has been assumed 8 feet in length, and the second set have been assumed 6 feet long. This provides an ample shelf around the entire tank. Figure 58 gives a cross section view of the arrangement of the cousin keelsons.

Figure 58 - Water Tank Foundation

Location The BDA specifies only that the water tank was abaft the main mast, there remains the question of exactly where. The description of the Bald Eagle^BDA states that her water tank was "close before the after hatchway," while the Chariot of Fame and the Great Republic plans show one of the tanks as forming the forward side of the after hatchway. It is obvious that the water tank should be located close to the center of gravity of the ship so that the trim of the ship would not be altered during the voyage, since a 5000 gallon tank would hold about 20 tons of water. A location adjacent to the after hatch way has been assumed

Construction The tank is assumed to have been riveted as shown on the Great Republic plan. Fingham¹¹⁴ states that water tanks had "a circular lid in one corner, fitted so as to be screwed in firmly to prevent any filth from injuring the water." The firm which constructed the tanks for the early McKay clippers is unknown, but the water tanks for the Great Republic^S10 were made by Messrs Leonard, Holden & Co. of East Boston.

27 SHEATHING

Although the BDA makes no mention of the Flying Cloud being sheathed, she undoubtedly was so protected, only the exact timing being in question. The woodcut of the launching of the Flying Cloud (Figure 10) showed no sheathing, but then the description of the Great Republic^S7 mentions that this ship was sheathed with yellow metal, while a Gleason's Pictorial woodcut of the launching indicates no sheathing. Since most of McKay's ships were sheathed before the BDA reports were printed, it has been assumed that the Flying Cloud was sheathed by this time. The BDA reports were generally published some days after the launching and since Wilson²⁴⁵ states that it was usual to launch a vessel before sheathing her, per forming the sheathing operation afterwards in the dock, it is probable that this was the case with the Flying Cloud.

Arrangement The method of sheathing a ship is not widely covered in the literature. The BDA reporting of the Grace Darling states that she was “… caulked on the stocks, and when hove out to be sheathed, every seam was again horsed and payed, and two tiers of felt were placed under the yellow metal; consequently she was as tight as a bottle." Davis^Da205 states that ¼ inch of felt was used. The only sheathing material commonly used by the 1850's as indicated by the BDA descriptions was yellow metal. Copper sheets were still sometimes used, but yellow metal sheathing (Muntz metal) was generally used in the merchant service by this time. Wilson²⁴⁵ states that metal sheets 4 feet long and 14 inches wide were used for sheathing. The lower edges of the upper sheets were lapped over the upper edges of those below and the after end of each sheet was lapped over the fore end of the next sheet aft. A length of 5 feet 11 inches was allowed for each sheet, 15 inches-was al lowed for each course, giving a 1 inch over lap all around. Copper of the following weights was used (ounces per square foot ): 18, 22, 24, 26, 28, 32; but often only 24, 26, 28, and 32 ounce sheet was used. Wilson states that in the latter case 32 ounce sheathing covered the bows diagonally from the foremast at the load line of the fore foot and was also used for the one course placed above the load-water-line; 26 and 28 ounce covered the rest of the bottom. The keel was covered with a double thickness of 24 ounce and 28 or 52 ounce was placed on the rudder. Butts⁷⁷ gave a more complete description of the sheathing arrangement. Sheathing weighing 28 ounces was used from the foremast at the load-water-line diagonally to the keel at the fore foot, 26 ounce was placed parallel to the first, starting at the mainmast, 24 ounce was placed parallel to this from the mizenmast, 22 ounce covered the rest of the stern, 26 ounce covered the rudder and keel, and 28 ounce the berardings.

An idea of the actual weights of yellow metal used is obtained from advertisements placed in the BDA by Fullerton & Raymond, 147 Milk Street, sole agents in the United States for the G.F. Muntz's Patent Metal Company of Birmingham, England. In the April 2, 1851, issue the following quantities of yellow metal sheathing were advertised as being on sale:

20 cases 18 oz.

35 20

35 22

35 24

70 26

80 28

40 30

45 32

360

plus 50 cases of Muntz's

Yellow Metal Nails

There were several other firms also manufacturing yellow metal sheathing at the time. An ad in the BDA of January 6, 1851, stated that Enoch Train & Company handled yellow metal sheathing manufactured by Messrs Vivian & Sons of Liverpool, and the Taunton Copper Manufacturing Company of Taunton, Massachusetts, was manufacturing yellow metal sheathing under the direction of their plant superintendent William H. Muntz, son of G. F. Muntz the inventor^M55.

Figure 59 - Probable Nail Arrangement in Yellow Metal Sheathing

The number of sheets of sheathing required for the Flying Cloud can be determined roughly from a table presented by Butts⁸¹. This table was prepared 3 by Captain Bardow, Superintendent of the East Boston Dry Dock, and lists various ships and their sheathing requirements. The pertinent sections of/this table have been presented as Table 19.

Table 19 - Sheathing Requirements

Ship Size Load-Water-Line Dead rise Length # of Sheets

tons Forward Aft inches of keel of Sheathing

feet

Flying Fish 1505 18 19 20 190 2556

Morning Star 1800 20 20½ 21 205 2795

Star of Empire 2050 15 15½ 13 180 2310

Winged Racer 1767 19 20 26 193 2693

Comparing the dimensions of the Flying Cloud with those of the ships given in the table it appears that the Flying Cloud required in the neighborhood of 2700 sheets of sheathing.

Nails Table 20 presents the data given by Butts⁸² for the number of composition sheathing nails contained in one pound for lengths of ⅞ to 1½ inches in ⅛ inch increments. This data is for nails sold by H.N. Hooper & Company, 58 Commercial Street, Boston, Mass. However, in the BDA of March 5, 1851, Fullerton & Raymond advertised only ⅞ to l¼ inch nails, which are presumably the sizes commonly used. These different size nails were undoubtedly used to fasten different weight sheathing. It is probable that four weights of sheet were used (22, 24, 26, 28 oz), corresponding to the four nail sizes (⅞, 1, 1⅛, l¼ inch).

Table 20- Number of Sheathing Nails per Pound

Length of Nail Nails per Pound

⅞ 230

1 190

1⅛ 186

1½ 169

Davis^Ds105 states that a composition sheathing nail was chisel-pointed with a large flat head, the head being beveled on the underside. Butts gives composition nails as the fastenings for yellow metal sheathing, while copper nails were used to fasten copper sheathing.

Lindley states that in sheathing a ship the copper was annealed (heated to p, dull redness and quenched) and then beaten to shape with a mallet of a shape shown in Figure 60 (A); holes for the nails were made with a punch (B).

Figure 60 - Sheathing Mallet and Punch

5. DEFINITIONS

This section covers several terms included in the text which are ambiguous or today are generally unknown.

Apartment

1) A suite or set of rooms; sometimes a single room—Dictionary

2) "The after part of the cabin, when required, can be converted into a separate apartment, by curtains.” Shooting Star^BDA

Between Decks

1) The height from the upper side of one deck to the under side of the deck above.— Fincham⁹

Bolts

1) Common headed bolt had a small swell at the end.

2) Tee-headed bolt--a segment of the head is taken off on each side L so as to make it one way one-half the size it is the other. They were used for securing chain plates that the chain plates might be m -t the bolts being driven out. In this case they were called chain bolts.

3) Clinched bolts were riveted.

4) Forelocked bolts had a tendon and wedge in the end.

5) Ring bolts had a ring in the eye of an eye bolt.

6) Drift bolts were used for starting out other bolts.

7) Eye bolts had an eye in one end (all the above descriptions from Fincham)

8) The diameter of an eyebolt should be two and one-half times the diameter of the iron it was made of. If a ring was put in this eye; its inside diameter was five times the diameter of the iron.—Davis^Dp106

Cabin

1) Nautical – A private room on a ship for officers or passengers.

2) Navy – The quarters of the captain, etc. Dictionary

3) “the forward cabin (was) separated from the other (aft) by a partition” -- Dauntless^BDA

Cabin Class

A class of accommodations in a passenger vessel, superior to tourist class, inferior to first class. Cabin class was formerly used for first class. – Dictionary

Companion

The hood or covering over the ladderway to the (captain's) cabin. Also the framing, formed with glass at the upper parts or sides, over the captain's cabin, ward, or mess room, or other officer's apartments for giving light – Fincham⁵⁴

Composition—See Metal, Composition

Cress Fastening

One through bolt and two short fastenings in each frame.

Cross Fastening, Double

Square fastening.

Dead Rise

1) Perpendicular length included between the outer extremity of the half floor at the dead flat and a horizontal line drawn from the base line.—Luce²²⁵

2) The height of the end of the floor timbers above the base line; about two-thirds the breadth of the vessel. – Butts⁷⁶

First Class

The highest class of accommodations in a passenger vessel, especially one having three classes.—Dictionary

Gangway

“…the deck of the forecastle and quarter decks are stopped short at the waste amidships, which is thus left open; the passage to and from forecastle to quarter being preserved by the deck at the sides of the ship going through and forming what are called the gangways."—Peake"8

Hatchway

Passageway which goes between decks to the hold – Fincham⁷³

Depth of Hold

1) "The depth of hold is taken from the top of the beam in the main hatch to the top of the ceiling alongside of the keelson.. ."—Griffiths⁷⁷, Curtis²⁷

2) Upper side of lower deck beams to upper part of limber strake,—Fincham⁵⁹

Ladderway

Passageway that does not communicate with the hold.—Fincham⁷⁵

Metal, Composition

According to Smith^A533 this is another name for brass. However, the Metals Handbook⁹³⁷ states that a bronze alloy containing 85% copper, 5% zinc, 5% tin, and 5% lead is termed composition. This reddish bronze colored metal is used for general castings requiring fair strength, soundness, and good machining properties.

Composition to be of copper, zinc, and tin in such proportions as to give a tensile strength of not less than 35,000 psi.—Hichborn⁵

Metal, Mixed

Composed of copper and zink with a certain proportion of grain tin to give it sufficient rigidity. – Fincham^12,25

The Metals Handbook gives only two copper-zinc-tin alloys:

Alloy Copper Zinc Tin

Admiralty metal 71.00 28.00 1.00

Naval Brass 60.00 29.25 0.75

Metal, Muntz

See Metal, Yellow

Metal, Yellow

Nominally 60% copper, 40% zinc

Molding

The convention used by McLean in his descriptions for the Boston Daily Atlas was that in the nomenclature "15 by 20 inches", the first figure given was the molded dimension while the second was the sided dimension.

Navel Timbers

"The navel timbers, where they butt on the keel..."—Orient^DBA

Quarter Deck

As the cabin (trunk cabin built into a half poop deck) is small, "she has a spacious quarter deck."—Mystery^BDA

Siding

See Molding.

Stateroom

A cabin on shipboard.—Dictionary

Spirketting

"...that (inside planking) placed-over the waterways is distinguished - by the. technical term of spirketting."—Peake⁵²

Wood

The three principal kinds of ship timber were live-oak, yellow pine, and white oak.—Griffiths¹⁷⁵

Hard Pine - generally considered the same as yellow pine.

Georgia Pine - see Long-leaf Pine.

Long-leaf Pine - according to Hall²⁴⁶ this is the same species as the Southern Pitch Pine, the Pitch Pine, and the Yellow Pine. The tree grows from Virginia southward, 60-80 feet high, with a diameter at the trunk of 2-4 feet. The wood is course grained and weighs 40-50 lb/cu ft when seasoned.

Pitch Pine - see long-leaf pine.

Southern Pine – Fincham¹⁹ claims this to be the species pinus australis or pinus palustris (see Long-leaf Pine).

Southern Pitch Pine - see Long-leaf Pine.

Yellow Pine – Fincham¹⁹ claims this to be the species pinus mitus (see Long-leaf Pine).

6. SPARS

A complete analysis of the size of masts as exhibited in Table 21 would be complicated and probably unmeaningtful. However, the trend of McKay's thinking can be surmised by a cursory examination of this table. The following points will be noted concerning sparring the first seven clipper ships built by McKay.

1) The lengths of the main masts remained fairly constant.

2) The mast diameters first increased then decreased.

3) The lengths of the topmasts decreased slightly.

4) The topmast diameters increased.

5) The lengths of the topgallant masts decreased slightly.

6) The diameters of topgallant masts increased substantially; however, the mizzentopgallant decreased in the later ships

8) Diameters of royals increased then decreased.

9) Skysail mast length decreased.

10) Diameters of skysail masts remained essentially constant.

It is obvious that McKay was experimenting with sparring, the over-all trend being toward reducing the length of the upper masts and increasing their diameters; then in later ships reducing the diameters slightly. It is suggested that the reasoning which brought these changes about was this: in order to reduce the loss of spars, the lengths of the upper masts were reduced and the diameters of all masts increased. Subsequently, however, the diameters were decreased because of the stiffness of these large diameter masts.

Of course, the masts cannot be considered apart from what they were designed to support, i.e., the yards. An analysis of the trend in yard dimensions is more difficult than for masts. Although not as obvious as for masts, in general, it may be said that both the lengths and diameters of yards at first increased then decreased. Upper yards had their diameter increased percentage-wise more than did the lower yards. It could well be argued that the trends noted for masts were the result of the changes in yard dimensions rather than any desire to make more substantial masts for their own sake.

The important fact brought out by this analysis is that McKay, and this is true of the other American builders of the day, had no set sparring rules as did most of the foreign Guilders. They experimented, and were not satisfied with what was produced, always feeling there must be a better arrangement. The other point to make is that the early ships were oversparred, as evidenced by the reduction in sparring of later ships.

An attempt was made to equate the spar dimensions of the Flying Cloud to fractions commonly used by the European builders. There was no evidence of simple fractions and the three digit fractions which would be accurate are unreasonable. This is a strong indication that proportions were made on- an individual spar basis. Therefore, the dimensions not given in the BDA and the taper of all spars has been derived from sources necessarily inconsistent with the BDA dimensions.

It has been suggested that the differences in size of spars among these ships could have been due to the availability of timber rather than any conscious effort to change. There are two facts which contradict this: first , the evident trend already discussed; and second, the fact that it is known that at least four of the seven vessels considered had "made" masts and there is strong evidence that the others were of this type also.

Table 21 Dimensions of Masts and Yards

Steeds "Elements and Practice of Rigging and Seamanship'' (1794) is the primary contemporary source of information concerning spars and rigging of ships. After comparing the information presented by Harold A# Underhill in "Masting & Rigging" (1946) with that given by Steele it would appear that many of the particulars concerning spars and rigging had not altered during the period between 1794 and the clipper ship era of the 1850s. Very little of the information presented by Underhill has been included here; only those facets which were different or where there might be a choice are covered in this study. Since the spars of clipper ships evidently did not follow the published proportions for spars, wherever possible spar dimensions of the Flying Cloud have been determined by comparison with other clipper ships of the same period rather than by any rule. In some instances, however, it was necessary to use rules given by Underhill or other authorities. Spar hardware as given by Underhill has been assumed valid unless noted under RIGGING.

1 MASTS

Material Hard pine masts were the only type mentioned in the BDA reports of 1851 through 1854. It has therefore been assumed that all spars of the Flying Cloud were of hard pine.

Size It has been found necessary to derive the taper of the masts from a number of sources. Table 22 presents the diameters of masts given by these various sources together with the diameters accepted as valid for the Flying Cloud.

Hoops The BDA of January 6, 1851, advertised English hoop iron sold by Edward Winslow of 5 Broad Street, Boston. The following were itemized:

401 bundles of ⅝ inch iron

205 “ “ ¾ “ “

165 “ “ ⅞ “ “

166 “ “ 1 “ “

81 “ “ 1¼ “ “

Luce^Sea87 states that hoops were 4¼ to 5 inches wide and ½ to ⅝ inch thick. They were placed every 5 to 5½ feet along the mast (1¼ times the diameter). Wilson suggests the dimensions 4¾ by 9/16 inches. It has been assumed that the hoops on the fore and main masts of the Flying Cloud were 5 by ⅝ inches I and those on the mizen 4¾ by 9/16 inches.

Rake The BDA reported that all masts of the Flying Cloud raked l¼ inches to the foot.

Construction Although not specified for the Flying Cloud, the fore and main masts of the Stag Hound, Staffordshire, Flying Fish, and Westward Ho were made masts, dowelled together, fished on every square, and closely hooped with iron all over from the head to two feet below the lower deck partners. The mizen masts of these ships were single spars. The same arrangement has been assumed for the Flying Cloud. Wilson states that made spars were put together with lignum vitae coaks, one coak under each hoop on the first two strakes put together, and the next two strakes had coaks half way between the first. The strakes were bolted with 5/4 inch iron bolts spaced 9 feet apart on each strake. The coaks in scarfs were about 2 feet apart, placed so as not to be in line with the bolts passing through the coaks in each strake. Coaks for masts 28 Inches in diameter or under were 3 inches in diameter, for larger masts 3½ - inch coaks were used. Outside nibs of scarfs were one-tenth of the given diameter of the mast; the inside nib was one-seventeenth of the given diameter. Scarfs were spaced equally throughout the length of the mast. Chaffing battens, one-fourth the given diameter wide and half as thick, were placed on the forward side of the masts to protect sails from the hoops.

Table 22 Taper of Masts

In making masts, the procedure was to set off on the mast the length of the head and the depth of hold. The part between the partners and the stop of the hounds was divided into eight equal parts; between the partners and heel was divided into four equal parts. The diameters specified in Table 22 were then laid off at the appropriate locations. A mark for a hoop was made 50 inches above the partners and another 2 inches below the stop of the hounds. The space between was divided into equal parts so that hoops would be 5 feet 6 inches apart (for a ship-of-the-line). The portion below deck was similarly divided, being careful to clean the wedges. The length of scarfs was regulated by the distance between hoops; the masts of a ship-of-the-line had five hoops on each scarf. The futtock band should be placed around the mast seven fifteenths of the breadth of the tops from the top of the hound to the center of the band.

Tops The BDA reports of the Challenge and the Empress of the Seas were the ones which mentioned the size of tops. The Challenge tops in wake of the after shrouds of the topmast rigging (i.e. at the widest part) measured 16½ , 17 and 13½ - feet, fore, main, and mizen respectively; the Empress of the Seas tops measured 17, 17, and 15 feet. Since the literature gives rules for the tops specify the main top be the largest, it has been assumed that dimensions equal to those given for the Challenge were valid for the Flying Cloud. These dimensions are considered more accurate than any which might be obtained by measuring any contemporary painting, and are considered more probable for the Flying Cloud than the "one-half of the molded breadth of beam" rule given by Luce and Brady. However, the relative breadth of the main (10), fore (9), and mizen (8) tops as given by Brady are reasonably close to those given by the BDA report of the Challenge.

It has also been assumed that, like the Stag Hound, Staffordshire, and Challenge, the Flying Cloud undoubtedly had tops like a ship of war boarded close to the eyes of the rigging. Lever²³ says "The tops in Men of War, and East Indiamen, are decked over...and have a square hole in the middle, called Lubbers Hole...In the Merchant service the Tops are seldom decked. Sometimes they are made what is called Grating fashioned. ..Sometimes they are made with light Battens..." Thus it is seen that "boarded like a ship of war" means completely boarded, with no holes save the lubber's hole. The BDA reports that the Romance of the Sea had tops "built of solid oak," which construction has been assumed valid.

It has been assumed that the shape of the tops was that shown by Underhill, i.e. the old style square top with the fore side given considerable sweep. This is not the exaggerated form of triangle which became necessary after the introduction of the double topsail (about I855). Luce^Sea90 says that the length of the tops was two-thirds their breadth. The dimensions given by Brady³²⁵ in his table entitled "Proportions for Tops, Trestletrees, Cross-trees, and Caps" have been considered valid for the Flying Cloud. Underhill claims that topmast trestle-trees had no cheeks or decking and all tops were fitted parallel to the waterline.

Top Stanchions and Rails Wilson states that there should be four or five holes in each stanchion, and an iron cleat should be riveted on between the first and second hole from the top of the forward side. The iron rail should have a nut on each end, on the inside and outside of the outboard stanchion to keep the rail steady. Table 23 gives the dimensions of top stanchions.

Table 23 - Size of Top Stanchions for a Ship of the Line

Fore & Main Mizen

Length 42” 39”

Diameter at bottom 1¾” 1⅜”

Diameter at top 1¼” 1”

Diameter of rail 1½” 1⅛”

Bibbs Luce^T88 states that bibbs were made of oak, put on with two reverse diagonal shoulders and with three to four coaks, the upper shoulder ⅛ inch thick for every 5 inches of the given diameter of the mast; the lower shoulder ⅛ inch for every 4 inches of the given diameter. Wilson states that the length of bibbs for the lower masts should be four-elevenths of the mast head length; the length of the bibb arms was equal to the width of the trestle trees, while the thickness here was one-fourth its thickness.

Mast Step According to Wilson, fore and main masts were placed in cast iron mast steps which were made to fit down over the main keelson with a broad flange extending to the sister keelsons to which they were secured. Mizen masts were stepped in a live oak timber which was scored down over the berth orlop deck beams and secured. Examination of the Great Republic plan indicated that all steps were of wood, and it has been assumed those of the Flying Cloud were also of wood.

Fids The US Navy specifications of August 9, 1870, recommended that locust fids for topgallant masts be of a length equal to the breadth of the respective trestle trees, three-fifths of the given diameter of the topgallant mast in depth, and five-ninths the depth in thickness. Topmast fids were of iron.

Fife Rails Webb's plan of the Young America shows fife rails around the fore and main masts while that of the Comet shows rails only around the fore mast. These all have a high bitt-type members forward and are level aft. In both cases, the fore mast rail also has a horizontal member between these bitts as shown in Figure 61.

Figure 61 - Fife Rail

Mast Coat Luce^Sea139 states that mast coats were fitted 18 inches above the deck and were 5 inches larger in radius than the mast hole. The coat was sewed with 1 inch seams and had a 6 inch double collar on the upper part. Wilson states that the mast coat was nailed to the mast and mast combing.

2 YARDS

Material Hard Pine has been assumed for all yards (see MASTS).

Size The BDA report of the Flying Cloud gives the overall length, yard arm length, and sling diameter of each yard. Butts¹⁷ gives various rules for determining the size of sails, and in all cases the length of the yard arms is subtracted from the length of the yard, implying that the yard length included the length of the two arms. Steele’s proportions are generally quoted for the taper of yards and although Griffiths¹⁴⁷ gives his own proportions, they are not substantially different. Steele's proportions are given in Table 24 and these have been assumed valid for the Flying Cloud. Luce^L89 implies that the diameter of the entire yard arm was three-sevenths the diameter at the slings, while Clarke⁵² states that yards were one-half the diameter of the slings with in the squares at the yard arm.

Table 24 - Diameter of Yards

Slings 1

First quarter 30/31

Second Quarter 7/8

Third Quarter 7/10

End (arm) 3/7

Construction Since the Sovereign of the Seas^BDA A somewhat larger ship launched after the Flying Cloud, had all her yards made of single timbers, it has been assumed that the yards of the Flying Cloud were also single spars, not scarfed in the slings as was sometimes reported for other ships.

Chaffing Battens Wilson states that lower and topsail yards had chaffing battens extending one-half the length of the yard, with a center width slightly leas than the eight square and three-quarters of this at the ends. On topgallant and royal yards he suggests a length of two times the arms, and the eight square in width.

3 BOWSPRIT

Material It has been assumed that the bowsprit was of hard pine (see MASTS).

Size The BDA gives only two bowsprit dimensions: a diameter of 28 inches and an outboard length of 20 feet. Table 25 gives diameters of this spar; Steele's ratios have been accepted.

Table 25 - Bowsprit Diameters

Kipping Steele

Underhill

Diameter at bed 1 1

First quarter 60/61 60/61

Second quarter 11/12 11/12

Third quarter 4/5 4/5

Outer end 2/3 5/9

Heel 6/7 6/7

Steve The BDA reports that the bowsprit of the Stag Hound had a steve of 4½ inches per foot and that of the Bald Eagle had a 4 inch steve. Griffiths¹⁹⁰ recommends 4½ inches. The MIT plan and Currier lithograph of the Flying Cloud both show 4 inches while the Chinese painting shows 5¼ inches. Since the MIT plan is generally considered accurate and with the substantiating the Currier lithograph, a steve of 4 inches has been assumed.

Bee Blocks These are pieces of wood (generally oak) bolted to the sides of the bowsprit at the outer end through which the fore topmast stays are passed. Wilson claims they should be long enough to reach 3 feet inside the head rail and should be one-quarter the given diameter of the bowsprit square.

Bed Wilson states that the bed of the bowsprit was lined with lead to prevent water from getting below as a result of any shrinkage or shakes in the bed timbers.

4 JIB BOOM

The BDA reports that the jib-boom of the Flying Cloud was 16½ inches in diameter, divided at 16 feet for the inner jib and at 15 feet for the outer jib, with a 5 foot end. These lengths are exactly those shown on the MIT sail plan. Table 26 gives Steele’s diameters for this spar. These are minimum diameters at these locations. Where the jib-boom was divided, the stops would be over and above the dimensions given above.

Table 26 - Jib-Boom Diameters

Given diameter 1

First quarter 40/41

Second quarter 11/12

Third quarter 5/6

End ⅔

Heel 1

5 FLYING JIB BOOM

Although the Stag Hound^BDA had a flying jib-boom, no indication was found that one was fitted to the Flying Cloud. However, it should be noted that in the log of the San Francisco to Hong Kong leg of the fourth voyage of the Flying Cloud, mention was made of a “fore royal staysail boom." It is believed this must have been referring to the jib-boom.

6 DOLPHIN STRIKER

Luce⁹⁰ states that the length of the dolphin striker (martingale) was one half the outboard length of the jib-boom; the diameter being 1 inch for each 2 feet of length. Wilson suggests a diameter of 1⅛ inches to 2 feet of length. The Chinese painting of the Flying Cloud shows a dolphin striker 12 feet long while that shown on the Currier lithograph measured 15 feet. This differs considerably from Luce's suggestion which would require it to be 17 feet in length.

A length of 15 feet has been assumed.

Wilson suggests the following taper for this spar and since other sources do not provide this information these ratios have been accepted.

Table 27 - Dolphin Striker Diameters

Given diameter 1

Inner end 5/4

Outer end at stop 8/9

Grommet 5/7

End of pole 15/28

Wilson suggests that the pole, which is included in the above lengths, be one-sixth of the total length. The Currier lithograph shows one-sixth and this length has been accepted.

Although no indication of the use of whisker booms on the Flying Cloud was found, dimensions of these spars have been included in Table 28 for completeness.

Table 28 - Whisker Boom Diameters

Given diameter 1

Inner end 4/5

Outer end at stop 1

Grommet ⅝

7 SPANKER (DRIVER) BOOM

The only dimension of the spanker boom given by the BDA is a length of 55 feet. Both the diameter and length of this spar are given for the Stag Hound and Bald Eagle, and by interpolation it was found that a diameter of 10½ inches and an end of 2 feet would be suitable for the spanker boom of the Flying Cloud. Griffiths¹⁹⁵ states that booms had their maximum diameter at the sheet block close to the after end; Steele⁴⁷ states that a driver boom was largest in the middle; and Underhill²⁵⁸ suggests one-third of the distance from the mast. It has been assumed that the greatest diameter was at the middle, tapering equally in both directions to two-thirds at each end in the following way (Steele).

Table 29 - Spanker Boom Diameters

Given diameter 1

First quarter 40/41

Second quarter 11/12

Third quarter 5/6

End ⅔

8 SPANKER GAFF

The BDA gives only the length of the Flying Cloud's gaff — 40 feet. The Bald Eagle had the same length gaff, with a diameter of 9 inches. On the basis of this the same diameter has been adopted as valid for the Flying Cloud. A 5 foot end has been assumed since the Stag Hound, Sovereign of the Seas, and Flying Fish had 44, 45, and 40 foot gaffs, but each of these gaffs had a 5 foot end. Griffiths ¹⁹⁵ states that gaffs were largest on-third to two-fifths of the length (or 13 to 16 feet) from the mast, while Underhill^26l places it 4-6 feet from the mast, and Steele⁴⁷ locates it 4 feet from the mast in which length the jaws were scarfed. Steele's plan has been followed, as have his diameters.

Table 30 - Gaff Diameters

Given diameter 1

First quarter 40/41

Second quarter 11/12

Third quarter 4/5

End 5/9

Measurement of the Chinese painting indicates that the halliard or halliard blocks were placed at two places along the gaff: one 9.88 feet from the peak, the other 8.64 feet toward the mast from the first point.

9 MAIN SPENCER GAFF

The BDA states that the Flying Cloud had a main spencer gaff 24 feet long. The Stag Hound had a 25 foot spencer gaff with a 2 foot end, the Sovereign of the Seas had one 24 feet long with a 2 foot end, while the Flying Childers had a 26 foot spanker gaff which was 7 inches in diameter. Using the proportions recommended by Underhill a given diameter for a 24 foot gaff would be 6¼ inches with the same taper as the spanker gaff. A 2 foot end has been assumed. Although the Stag Hound had both a fore and main spencer gaff, only the main spencer gaff was shown in any of the pictures of the Flying Cloud.

10 STUDDING SAIL BOOMS & YARDS

Booms The BDA report of the Bald Eagle states that her studding-sail booms were one-half the diameter of the yards and of the usual lengths. Underhilll¹⁹¹ states that booms were commonly one-half the which they were fixed. Although Underbill²⁶² suggests a slightly smaller diameter (1 inch per 5 feet of length) compared to the yard diameter (l inch per 4 feet of length) one-half the diameter of the yard has been assumed valid for the Flying Cloud. Steele⁴⁰ and Luce⁸⁹ state that the lower boom was five ninths of the main yard length, and all authorities suggested a diameter of 1 inch for every 5 feet of length in this case. These booms were of constant diameter for the length which doubled on the yard (one-third); the outer end was tapered to two-thirds of the given diameter (Steele and Underhill). The Currier lithograph confirms the one-half length and one-third overlap.

Yards Steele⁴⁰ states that studding-sail yards were four-sevenths the length of the corresponding booms, and 1 inch in diameter for every 5 feet of length. The same taper as given for regular yards is implied since no mention, of this was made. Wilson³³⁰ states that topmast and topgallant studding-sail yards were two-fifths as long as their respective yards while the lower studdingsail yard was the same length as the topmast studding-sail yard; all with diameters of 1 inch to 4 feet of length. Butts²⁷ states that the lower studdingsail yards were usually one-third the lower yard or a little less in length. Butts' proportions for the lower studding-sail yard has been assumed. Table 31 summarizes the important spar dimensions of the Flying Cloud.

Table 31 - Important Spar Dimensions of the Flying Cloud

7. RIGGING

The best reference on rigging in the clipper ship era is “Masting & Rigging" by Harold Underhill, and in general it has been assumed that the rigging of the Flying Cloud followed the particulars outlined there. Since this book is readily available, no attempt has been made in this study to cover any but the most important rigging. Reference is made here only where Underhill’s book has been departed from.

The contemporary pictures that are considered valid are the Currier lithograph and the Chinese painting. The BDA report states that the Flying Cloud was rigged similarly to the Stag Hound; therefore the specifications given for the Stag Hound have been considered valid unless they were found to contradict the above mentioned pictures. The dimensions of the standing rigging of the Stag Hound have been taken as the basis for the size of other rigging.

Table 32 gives the dimensions of rigging suggested by various authors as well as those dimensions reported in the BDA reports of various ships. The sizes accepted for the Flying Cloud were derived from these.

The only manufacturer of rigging cited in the BDA reports was that for the Eagle Wing which had her rigging made by the New Bedford Cordage Co. However, there were many other rope-yards which could have supplied the rigging of the Flying Cloud.

1 STANDING RIGGING

Stays There are three sources which must be compared to determine the stay arrangement of the Flying Cloud. Although the length of the masts shown on the sail plan included on the MIT plan correspond closely with the BDA description, there are notable variations in yard lengths indicating that whatever else is shown should be questioned. The stays shown on this plan have a reasonable arrangement, but they do not correspond particularly well with the arrangement shown on the Currier lithograph and the Chinese painting (Figure 62). In addition, since the Flying Cloud was rigged similarly to the Stag Hound, it would be expected that her main topmast stay would be set up before the fore mast as specified for the Stag Hound and as shown in the Currier lithograph and Chinese painting, not in the fore top as shown in the MIT plan. Because of the agreement between the two contemporary paintings and the inconsistencies of the MIT plan as noted above, the MIT stay arrangement has been eliminated from further consideration. However, in justification of this plan, it may be noted that all the changes noted could easily have ' taken place between the time the lines were laid out and the time of her first voyage, and has already been noted (see YARDS) both the painting and lithograph were probably done after her first voyage. Thus it is not justifiable to discredit the entire MIT plan because of the sail plan alone.

The Chinese painting is observable only through the medium of a very old and well stained photograph. The stays that are evident correspond, except in one case, to the arrangement in the Currier lithograph. It has been assumed that the stay arrangement shown in the Currier lithograph is valid, but certain measurements of the stays have been taken from the Chinese painting.

Table 32 Size of Standing Rigging

Figure 62 - Stay Arrangement

The sizes of the stays are covered in Table 32. In some cases the estimated size of rigging for the Flying Cloud has been based on the corresponding rigging of the Stag Hound in spite of the fact that to do so apparently contradicts the sizes given for other ships. The standing rigging of the Flying Cloud was of patent four stranded Russian hemp while the running rigging was of manila hemp.

The following quotations are the basis for determining how the forward stays were set up.

Stag Hound Main topmast stays lead on deck and set up to bitts before the mast.

Flying Fish Her fore stays set up to the knight heads, and all her other head stays lead through the bows and set up inboard. The main stays set up to the bitts before the foremast, and the main topmast stays in the fore top.

Staffordshire Her fore stays set up inboard clear of the bowsprit, and her main topmast stays in the fore top.

Challenge The head stays lead through the bow, and set up inboard; the bowsprit shrouds and bobstay are there fore the only standing rigging secured to the bow, and these all set up to the bowsprit.

Measurement of the Chinese painting indicates that the fore stay was 55.9 feet forward of the fore side of the fore mast in line with the top of the bulwark above the monkey rail. The main stay crosses the forward side of the fore mast 1.20 feet below the top of the monkey rail. The main top mast stay crosses the forward side of the fore mast 3.12 feet above the monkey rail. The mizen stay crosses the after side of the main mast 5.01 feet above the monkey rail. The Currier lithograph shows the fore stay lined up with the head of the figurehead, the main stay (double) somewhat below the monkey rail at the fore mast, the main topmast stay at the fore mast somewhat above the monkey rail, and the mizen stay considerably above the monkey rail. The only discrepancy between this and the Chinese painting is with the fore stay, end if it is assumed that this set up to the knightheads, then the arrangement shown on the lithograph must be accepted.

Shrouds The number of shrouds was determined by examination of the Chinese painting and Currier lithograph. Table 32 presents adequate information of the size of these ropes and Table 33 gives the locations.

Table 33 - Location of Shrouds

Distance from Next

Shrouds Number Forward Shroud (feet)

Fore 6 2.88 2.88 2.88 2.88 2.88

Topmast backstay 3 2.65 1.30 1.60 2.90

Topgallant 1 1.10

Royal 1 1.40

Total 16 15.35

Main 6 3.04 3.04 3.04 3.04 3.04

Topmast backstay 3 2.55 1.05 1.30 2.35

Topgallant 1 1.10

Royal 1 1.30

Total 12 24.85

Mizen 4 2.21 2.21 2.21

Topmast backstay 2 2.05

Topallant 1 2.65

Royal 1 1.25

Total 8 12.58

The BDA reports that generally the lower rigging (shrouds) was wormed and served over the ends up to the leading trucks, and sometimes was covered over the serving-in the eyes and down below the futtock rigging with canvas, while the topmast rigging (shrouds) was set up on the ends, Clarke states that the eye of the first shroud of the main topmast rigging was 18 inches from the middle to the siezing.

Ratlines Kipping suggests that the ratlines be 15 inches apart, which has been accepted. He suggests that the fore and main mast ratlines be 1½ inch rope, 1¼ inch for the mizen, and 1 inch for topmast ratlines.

Deadeyes The Currier lithograph shows the lower shroud deadeyes set up on the line of the main rail, outside of the monkey rail — as was described by the BDA for the Flying Fish. The upper deadeyes were shown centered 28½ - inches above the monkey rail. The topmast shrouds according to the BDA reports, were in all cases set up on the ends.

Luce⁹⁰ suggests that lanyards were generally one-half the size of their shrouds.

Steel⁵⁸ states that deadeyes were of elm, 4 to 30 inches in diameter, in thickness equal to one-half the diameter plus 1 inch, scored around one-half the size of the shroud. There were three holes, one-fourth the diameter within the circumference. Fincham agrees that deadeyes were of elm. Although specified only once in the BDA reports (Challenge), it has been assumed that the deadeyes were made of lignum vitae.

Figure 65 was derived from data given by Kipping (copied by Underhill). With this figure the proper size deadeye for a given size shroud or backstay may be determined. The lanyard size can be determined from the diameter of the deadeye also. Underhill gives a table of deadeye thicknesses for each diameter.

Figure 63 - Shroud Diameter vs Deadeye Diameter

Hearts had one-third the diameter left near the strain and had four or more grooves (Steel).

Clarke⁸⁷ states that the lower deadeyes of the main stay are 3½ feet apart, with the mousing raised twice the length of the masthead from its end. The-main topmast stay has a collar 14 feet in circumference. The end of the main topmast stay is 2½ - feet from the lower part around the deadeye. No deadeyes are visible on the Currier lithograph stays.

Bowsprit Rigging Table 32 gives full information on the bowsprit rigging. Since the Flying Cloud was rigged similar to the Stag Hound, it has been assumed she had the same chain-work about her bow. Butts⁹⁰ indicates that rigging chain was short round-linked, without studs. The location of the various stays and shrouds has been determined from the Currier lithograph since this portion of the Chinese painting is faint. Figure 64 shows the arrangement of the bow rigging as given in the Chinese lithograph.

Figure 64 - Bowsprit Rigging

Iron-Work The BDA report of the Empress of the Seas states that Mr. Mendum "does the iron on all Mr. McKay's ships," and since he was the black smith for the Flying Fish, he probably also worked on the Flying Cloud.

Chainplates:- According to the BDA report, the Stag Hound (and therefore probably the Flying Cloud) had fore and main chainplates of 1⅞ inch iron. It is not known definitely which dimension this refers to, but it seems reasonable to assume it to be thickness. The mizen chainplates would probably be somewhat reduced in size, l½ inches has been assumed, being in the same proportion as the shrouds themselves. Finchom⁴⁹ states that chain plates were 3-4 inches wide and ¾ to 1½ inches thick. It has been assumed that the mizen chainplates were 4 inches wide and the fore and main plates proportionately larger or 5 inches.

Caps:- Although the Champion of the Seas, James Baines, and Lightning all had "caps of wrought iron" about 1 inch thick and 10 inches wide (Lightning ) it is believed that this was a more or less unique arrangement in the early 1850's and that the Flying Cloud had simply "iron bound caps" as did the Shooting Star. Wilson states that caps were in width one and five-eights the diameter of the respective top- and topgallant masts, with a depth of one-half the width. The wood on the ends of the cap was five-twelfths the diameter of the respective top- or topgallant masts.

Trusses:- The BDA very often states that clipper ships had "patent trusses" (Stag Hound, Flying Fish, and others) and it may safely be assumed that the Flying Cloud was so fitted. The only ship trusses which could be found among the early patents was one issued in January, 1852, to J. T. Quimby (no number) and one issued September 24, 1824 (U.S. Patent No. 2449) to (Captain) Preserved Fish of New York, Luce shows in the plate opposite page 90 a patent truss which has been reproduced as Figure 65, Wilson states that the truss band was one-half the length of the mast head from the top of the hound to the center of the band. The distance between the lower yards and the masts was one-fourth the length of the respective mastheads.

Figure 65 - Patent Truss

Futtock Rigging:- Wherever specified by the BDA the futtock rigging on clipper ships was of iron. The arrangement given by Underhill has been assumed.

Boom Irons:- Wilson states that all yards, from the center of the yard to the lower side of the boom, were six-thirteenths of the diameter of the yard at the slings. The size of iron should be the same as the neck of their respective pacific irons. The rollers were in length one half the diameter of the booms (no roller in the topsail yard iron). The width of the irons should be one-third the end of the yard.

Quarter Irons:- Wilson states that these, in the neck between the yard and boom, should be one-half the diameter of the boom and should be placed one-sixth of the length of the yard from the end of it.

Burton Bands:- These were placed on the lower topsail yards one seventh on the fore and main masts and one-sixth on the mizen mast the length of the yard from the end of it with an eye and shackle on the top side of the yard (Wilson).

Iron Fids:- These were five-sixteenths of the diameter of their respective topmasts and topgallant masts in depth and two-thirds of the depth wide. If of wood, they were one-half the mast diameter in depth and two-thirds of the depth wide (Wilson).

Iron Jacks:- On the head of the topgallant mast these should be in length one-third of the length of the royal mast. The diameter in the center was ⅞ inch to every 4 feet of length, the diameter on the end was three fifths of the center diameter (Wilson).

Pacific Irons:- For the lower yards these were in length three and one-half times (four for topsails) the diameter of the end of the yard. The inner end of the straps was five-sixths the width of the outer end. The length of the neck was one-half (three-fifths for the topsail) the diameter of the end of the yard, which was added to the length of the pacific irons. The size of the neck was one-half (seven-fifteenths for top sail) the length of the neck; the size of the square part was two-fifths (one-third for the topsail) of the length of the neck added (Wilson).

2 RUNNING RIGGING

Brady comes closest to the sizes of the standing rigging given in the BDA reports; therefore the sizes of the running rigging given by Brady for a first class frigate have been accepted as valid for the Flying Cloud. Although Underhill must be consulted for most of the rigging arrangement, a few particulars will be covered here, mostly of a miscellaneous nature and with no attempt at completeness.

The topsail sheets and ties were generally of chain if the BDA accounts may be taken as an indication. Both the Stag Hound and Flying Fish were so fitted, as were the Winfield Scott and the Witch of the Wave. It has been assumed, the Flying Cloud was similarly fitted. By considering all of the BDA descriptions concerning this rigging the most probable arrangement may be determined.

Witch of the Wave Double chain topsail ties, that is, she has blocks on her topsail yards, and the standing parts of the ties are fast to the mastheads, instead of single ties and runners abaft the masts.

Winfield Scott Runners of her topsail ties are of chain and their standing parts are fast in the channels on opposite sides to the halliards.

Flying Fish Instead of cheeks to her topsail yards she has regular iron parels; similar in design to those of the topsail yards; and she has double topsail ties and halliards.

Sovereign of the Seas Instead of holes in topmast heads, she has double gins for the topsail ties, with gins on the yards and double halliards. The main topgallant mast has also a gin at the mast head, and a double tie to the yard, the standing part fast abaft.

Westward Ho She has double topsail ties and halyards, with iron gins at the mast heads, instead of sheave-holes, and an iron gin on each yard.

Bald Eagle Her topmasts and jibboom have no sheave holes in their, heads, but double gins instead, for double ties which have double halliards that lead on deck, on opposite sides. Double chain topsail ties seem to have been used extensively and have been assumed valid for the Flying Cloud.

Kipping states that the topsail sheets fasten to clews which, passing through iron cheek blocks; were brought on the after side of the yard and thence through the quarter blocks shackled oh each side of the middle or slings of the yards, and were led down by the mast. The topsail yards were hoisted up by chain-tyes and rope halliards. The upper end of the tye was first rove through the bullock-block from aft, then through the tye block hooked into the eye of the hoop in the middle of the yard and then the end taken to the mast head, where it was shackled to the chain pendant on the side opposite the bullock block, the lower end of the tye came down abaft the mast, to which a block was shackled, for any required purchase to be added to hoist up the sail as far as the spider hoop.

Butts states that the main and fore sail had a rope or chain, and a large single block made fast to each clew. The ropes or chains, called tacks, led forward to the chess-trees and bumkins, and the block received a thick rope from aft which was termed the sheet. The clews of the topsails were drawn out to the extremities of the sheave-hole on the lower yards by two chains called topsail sheets; and the clews of the topgallant sails were in a like manner extended upon the topsail yards to the sheave holes 6y chains called topgallant sheets. On the basis of the proceeding quotations, chain topsail sheets have been assumed, but not chain topgallant sheets.

Luce⁹⁰ states that the top pendants, topsail tyes, and sheets were equal in size to the topmast shrouds; the braces and lifts were equal to the size of the corresponding lanyards, and the topsail halyards were one-half the size of their tyes.

Table 34 gives a list of the chains for a ship of 1000 tons as presented in American Neptune, 1945, page 288. It is thought the list was made sometime after 1854.

Table 34 - Size of Chain for a Ship of 1000 Tones

Butts¹² lists the following ropes used to work the square sails: halliards, tacks, sheets, bowlines, buntlines, clew-garnets, leech lines, reef tackle, slab lines, spilling lines, and braces. Some of these are defined below.

Bowline These lines are attached by bridles to bowline cringles to keep the weather leech tight when on a wind.

Down-haul These ropes pass along a stay through the hanks of a staysail or jib and make fast to the upper corner of the sail to pull it down.

Garnet Tackle fixed to clews of sails to haul the clew up to the yard.

Gasket A plaited cord long enough to wrap around the yard six or seven times at equal distances. Used to keep a sail neatly furled.

Hanks Wooden rings in the form of a circular wreath, with the two ends fastened by means of notches.

Reef tackle A tackle upon the deck fastened to its pendant, which passes through a block at the topmast head, through a hole in the topsail yard arm, and is then attached to a cringle usually placed 5 feet below the lowest reef. It is used to pull the topsail close up to the extremities of the topsail yard to lighten the labor of reefing.

Slab lines Small ropes passing up behind a ship's mainsail or foresail, and reeved through blocks attached to the lower part of the yard, thence transmitted each in two branches to the foot of the sail where they were fastened. They were used to truss up the sail, but more particularly for the convenience of the steersman that he may look forward beneath it.

Vang Traces leading from the gaff to the rail at the aftermost part of the ship's quarters to steady the mizen gaff.

Chess tree A timber with a sheave in ti, secured to the sides of the ship to extend the tack of the main course to windward. The sheet is then hauled aft to leeward.

Peake⁶⁸ states that on the forecastle there were holes through the bows of the ship called fair leaders, for the sheets to lead through. Bolts were placed round the mast to receive blocks for ropes to lead through from the respective yards and sails on the fore mast; and to the Bide of the ship immediately in the wake of the shrouds to the lower masts, pin racks, or pieces of wood with sheaves or pulleys in them to receive ropes and pins to which to belay those ropes, were bolted.

Bulwark fairlead Figure 66 shows the size of the bulwark fairleads shown on the Webb plan of the packet ship Isaac Webb (1851).

Figure 66 - Bulwark Fairlead

The Chinese painting shows the main yard brace crossing the top of the monkey rail 5.6 feet from the stern; the fore yard brace is at the same height when it crosses the main mast. The Currier lithograph shows the tacks of the main and fore sails entering inboard just above the planksheer.

3 BELAYING PINS

Steel^l59 states that belaying pins were made of ash, were 16 inches long, 1⅝ inches in diameter at the upper end which was turned as a handle which extended three-sevenths the length, then was shouldered to 1⅛ inches. The general pin arrangement shown by Underhill has been adopted. Magoun^l25 Bhows a complete belaying pin plan for the main fife rail and pin rack, but no source for this was noted and it is believed it is probably a standard one which was included.

4 BLOCKS

The blocks given by Brady for a first class frigate have been assumed valid for the Flying Cloud. Steel¹⁵⁴ states that the specified size of blocks refers to their length and gives the following proportions for different types of blocks. The length is equal to eight times the breadth of the sheve hole which is 1/16 more than the thickness of the sheave, which is one-tenth more than the diameter of the rope. The diameter of the sheave is five times its thickness. The breadth of the block is six times the thickness of the sheave; the thickness is one-half the length. In multiple blocks, the thickness of each partition is one-sixth less than the breadth of the sheave hole. Luce⁹⁰ states that the length of the brace blocks is the diameter of the yard in the respective yard in the slings and that the fore and main tack and sheet blocks should be slightly over two times their respective tacks and sheets. He claims that straps for blocks are one-half the length of the bock in circumference. A block is three times as long as the circumference of the rope it reeves.

It would appear that the blocks of probably all of McKay's early clippers were made by Mr. Thomas J. Shelton, if the majority of the BDA reports are indicative of the usual practice.

5 FLAGS

The ensign is shown flying from the spanker gaff in almost every picture of the Flying Cloud. Measurement of the size of this flag shown in the Currier lithograph and Chinese painting gives flags 11.5 by 18.5 feat and 18.8 by 20.5 feet respectively. The smaller flag shown in the Currier lithograph is the more reasonable appearing one. The size of modern flags (with the proportion of 1:1.9 prescribed by Executive Order in 1912) which most nearly approaches the measured size is 10 by 19 feet and this size has been accepted. In 1851 the American flag had 13 stripes and 30 stars, arranged in five rows of six stars each.

The house flag flown from the main truck varies considerably in the pictures of the Flying Cloud which were found. The most common flag shown was that of Grinnell, Minturn & Co. which was a three color swallow tail. However, there is considerable argument as to the actual colors, and even more on the sequence of these colors. McKay⁵⁴ shows red, blue, yellow (pole to fly); the Currier lithograph shows blue, red, white; the Chinese painting appears to be red, blue, white; the Boucher model shows red, white, blue; Clark³⁰³ claims blue, white, red; Grinnell Martin (grandson of one of the owners of Grinnell, Minturn & Co.) claims Blue, red, white according to Magoun; while Capt. Alexander Winsor evidently^Ma128 also claimed blue, red, white. A painting of the Flying Cloud as the frontispiece of Clark's "Clipper Ship Era" shows a tapered swallow tail flag of dark, white, dark coloring. A poster located at the Peabody Museum entitled "Private Signals of Merchants of New York and San Francisco" shows Grinnell, Minturn's flag as blue, red, white which seems to be the most probable coloring and sequence in light of the above notes. [See note in Appendix II]

Another painting of the Flying Cloud shows a red swallow tail house flag with a white circle in the middle — that of the Black Ball Line. A painting shown in "American Neptune', 1945, page 211, shows a rectangular "Rogers Private Signal Flag", white with dark letters "XAN" on it. The Buttersworth painting, purported to be of the Flying Cloud, shows a dark rectangular house flag. Magoun¹²⁸ claims the Flying Cloud's private signal — a red pennant - was flown from the mizen. However, no good picture of this flag was found. The flags shown in Figure 67 have been drawn from the poster in the Peabody Museum and various paintings.

Figure 67 - Flags of the Flying Cloud

H SAILS

The sail details have been taken primarily from I. R. Butts’ “The art of Sail making - Supplement to the Merchants and Mechanics Assistant " (Boston I858). Although several English authors covered the subject of sails more completely, Butts seems to have given the first account of making flat sails. The sails on American clippers were made to set flat while the British continued to follow the theory of bellied sails. To fill in the gaps left by Butts, later works of American authors were consulted such as Luce, Wilson, and Clarke. To fill in the still remaining gaps it has also been necessary to refer to English works, primarily Kipping' s "Sails and Sailmaking" (London I898) and Steele's "Elements of Masting and Rigging" (London 1794) which is the basic source of a great deal of Kipping's notes. Since the actual sewing of a suit of sails was, and still is, very much of an art only a few of the more basic facts and dimensions can be presented in this study.

It would appear from the BDA reports that the sails of many of McKay's ships were made by a Mr. Porter, probably of Porter, Mayhew & Co., Summer Street, East Boston. The sails of the Stag Hound, Flying Fish, and Bald Eagle were made by him, and these were the only reports in which the sailmaker was mentioned. However, it should be noted that Captain Brewster rigged these three ships, suggesting that there may have been a connection between the two. Since the Flying Cloud was not rigged by Capt. Brewster but by Messrs. Carnes and Cheesman, it cannot be said with complete confidence that Mr. Porter made her sails, but it seems likely that he did.

Since the BDA reported that the Flying Cloud was rigged similarly to the Stag Hound, there might be justification in assuming the sails of the Flying Cloud were of "cotton duck 22 inches wide in the cloths" as were the sails of the Stag Hound. However, in measuring the width of the cloths shown in the Currier lithograph it was found that the royals, skysails, topgallant, royal studding sails and the main royal staysail show approximately 17 inch cloths, while the other sails show cloths about 21 inches wide. Since there seems to have been a definite attempt made by the artist to show cloths of different widths, and since these correspond so closely to the commonly used widths of 16 and 22 inches, it has been assumed that the small sails of the Flying Cloud were made of 16 inch cloths (all the sails of the Challenge^BDA were made from 16 inch wide cloths), with the other sails being made of 22 inch cloths.

There were a number of unusual sails sometimes carried aboard American clipper ships. There were light sails, designed to spread the maximum amount of canvas in slight winds. Classed among these light sails were sky scrapers (triangular in form fitting above the skysail yard on both sides of the mast); moonrakers or moon sails ( triangular masthead sails, the upper angle of which was lashed below the masthead cap with the outer clue lashed to the yard arms below); water sails (triangular studding sails fitted below the lower studding sails); save-alls (a square sail fitted below the courses); a ringtail (a fore and aft studding sail fitted to the after leech of the spanker); a gafftopsail (a triangular sail hooped to the mast using the spanker gaff as a boom); and a Jamie Green (similar to the old time sprits’l but sheeted to one side only). Of course all of these sails would never be spread at the same time, but some ships undoubtedly did carry all of the above sails setting them at one time of another. The BDA states that the Stag Hound did not spread a "jib-topsail, water-sails, middle, royal, and mizzentopmast staysails, gafftopsail or moon sails;" however, the Flying Fish was fitted with "royal studding sails, stay sails, water sails, a ringtail , etc. " The sails fitted on a clipper were undoubtedly often specified, at least in part, by the owners. Since neither of the ships mentioned above was owned by Grinnell, Minturn & Co. it has been assumed that the Currier lithograph and Chinese painting indicate the sails usually carried. However, the log of the San Francisco to Hong Kong leg of the fourth voyage of the Flying Cloud mentions the "main moonsail yard" seeming to indicate that moonsails were being carried at that time.

The fore and main yards shown in both the Chinese painting and Currier lithograph appear to be very close to the same length, indicating that three paintings were probably done after the Flying Cloud returned from her first voyage, since at that time the yards on the fore mast were altered to be the same size as those on the main yard (see PART IV). This timing also logically follows since it was not until this record-making voyage that she became famous.

Although the original BDA spar dimensions have been used for calculations of the size of the square sails, the dimensions of the jibs and staysails were taken from the Currier lithograph since this source seemed most reliable and is probably more accurate than the sketchy rules for determining dimensions which might be used. Therefore although it cannot be claimed that a faithful reproduction of the ship as originally sailed has been produced, it is probably reasonable an arrangement as can be attained at the present time.

1 SQUARE SAILS

Table 36 presents the basic dimensions of the fifteen square sails carried on the Flying Cloud. These dimensions are based primarily on the BDA spar dimensions and rules set down by Butts. Most of the other particulars were taken from Kipping and Steele.

Reef point locations on topsails were determined by comparing the Currier lithograph and the Chinese painting with Butts' recommendations. These measurements are given in Table 35.

Table 35 - Position of Reef Points

Table 36 - Sail Dimensions

Sail Weight of Cloth Dimension

Sails Linings A B C D E F G

I¹

Fore Course² 1 5 43.00 1.00 55.17 55.17

Topsail 2 5 32.40 1.62 40.42 57.50

T’Gallant 4 6 23.75 1.25 34.46 12.10

Royal 6 8 16.15 0.85 25.09 36.16

Skysail 7 8 12.35 0.65 17.00 26.32

Main Course² 2 5 48.00 1.25 66.17

Topsail 2 5 38.70 1.75 48.68 68.90

T’Gallant 4 6 26.60 1.40 39.46 50.63

Royal 6 8 18.05 0.95 29.64 41.37

Skysail 7 8 13.11 0.73 18.82 31.05

Cross Jack 3 5 40.00 4.00 43.34 51.34

Mizen Topsail 3 5 29.00 2.40 32.25 45.20

T’Gallant 5 6 19.80 2.20 25.00 33.63

Royal 6 8 12.60 1.40 19.73 26.76

Skysail 7 8 9.00 1.00 16.18 20.68

II A¹

Fore Topmast Staysail 1 5 53.70 24.70 68.70

Inner Jib 4 6 72.20 38.40 101.00

Outer Jib 4 6 63.90 38.80 97.00

Main Topmast Staysail 3 5 69.40 37.95 90.60

II B¹

Main T’Gallant Staysail 5 7 89.70 60.10 126.80

Royal Staysail 7 8 56.90 36.10 65.20

III¹

Main Spencer 3 5 105.00 21.09 29.00 93.00 54.00 9.33 0.11

Spanker 2 5 128.40 33.54 49.02 120.80 48.00 16.00 1.11

IV1

Fore Lower Stud’sail 4 6 48.00 0 46.70 46.70 2.00

Topmast Stud’sail 4 6 33.27 11.54 17.58 28.05 1.50

T’Gallant Stud’sail 6 8 24.25 6.32 12.54 23.50 1.25

Royal Stud’sail 7 8 16.25 7.54 8.91 18.12 1.00

Main Topmast Stud’sail 4 6 39.70 13.11 18.32 32.35 1.50

T’Gallant Stud’sail 6 8 27.25 8.07 13.04 26.74 1.25

Royal Stud’sail 7 8 18.25 7.87 9.36 19.97 1.00

Dimensions given in feet

¹ See accompanying figures

² Fore and main courses had one-third to three-fifths of the length of the foot square

Figure 68 presents these data graphically. The best line was drawn through these points and zero. The line was drawn curved so that the vertical distance between reef points would increase slightly from the first to the fourth, as recommended by Butts.

Figure 68 - Position of Reef Points

The shape of the mainsail was determined after considering both the dimensions suggested by Butts and the dimensions of the mainsail of the Challenge given in the BDA. The mainsail of the Challenge had a drop of 47 feet; 3 inches in the bunt, a 49 foot 6 inch leech, it was 100 feet on the foot and contained 1273 yards of canvas 16 inches wide. Her main yard was 90 feet long with 5 foot yard arms. The main mast was 97 feet long, had a 17 foot head, and was housed about 21 feet. The size of this sail indicates that there was a clearance or approximately 4 feet to the deck. Measurement of the Currier lithograph of the Flying Cloud indicates roughly the same clearance.

2 FORE AND AFT SAILS

Table 36 presents the basic dimensions of these sails. The general shape and size of the three jibs (fore topmast staysail included) was determined from the Currier lithograph, while the roaches were patterned after a diagram given by Butts (Figure 69). The jibs on the Chinese painting are indistinct and in an awkward position for accurate measurement. The MIT plan shows only one jib (the inner jib), which is very similar in shape and size to that shown in the Currier lithograph.

The size-of staysails was also determined largely by measurement of the Currier lithograph. The main royal and main topgallant staysails are shown on the Currier lithograph as being quadrilateral, while the maintopmast staysail is triangular. Although Underhill¹²⁶ says the nooked (or quadrilateral) staysail was used largely between the fore and main masts of brigantines and barquetines, implying they were not used on ships, it is felt the lithograph should be followed. No mizen staysails are shown on the Currier lithograph or on any of the paintings of the Flying Cloud, but they were included on the Boucher model. However, this is not considered justification for inclusion in this study.

Figure 69 - Construction of Jibs

The shape of the spanker shown on the MIT plan has been adopted using the spar dimensions given in the BDA and the rules given by Butts. The spanker on both the Chinese painting find Currier lithograph is shown in perspective, which, when brought into true shape, correspond fairly well with the shape shown on the MIT plan.

The size and shape of the main spencer was determined from-the length of the gaff as given by the BDA together with measurement of a small portion of this sail which is visible in the Currier lithograph. The length on the foot was made to give a reasonable appearance to the sail. The roach on the foot was made following Butts' rules, but this appears to be very slight compared with the contemporary pictures which show it as being more than that given to the spanker. However, this discrepancy could be due to the fact that the sail bellied out with no boom to hold it. The Chinese painting does not show a spencer gaff.

The location of the spanker reefs shown in both the Currier lithograph and the Chinese painting have been measured. However, they do not agree as well as they did in the case of the square sails. As a matter of fact there is considerable disagreement as Table 37 shows.

Table 37 - Location of Spanker Reefs (Ft)

Kipping indicates that the reef points ought to become closer together in proceeding up this sail; therefore, the measurements of the Chinese painting have been assumed valid.

According to Underhill²¹ there were two types of spankers: those which hoist up and down the mast, and those with a fixed gaff. The presence of reef points on the paintings of the Flying Cloud indicates that the sail was of the former.

3 STUDDING-SAILS

Table 36 presents the important dimensions of studding sails for the Flying Cloud. The basic shape and dimensions were derived from rules given by Butts; however, the length on the foot has been made to correspond with the length assumed for the studding sail booms (see STUDDING SAIL BOOMS AND YARDS). Although Kipping states that cloths were arranged parallel to the inner leech of studding sails, the Currier lithograph shows them sewn perpendicular to the head and foot. The latter arrangement has been accepted.

4 CONSTRUCTION

Very little of the actual constructional details of sails can be covered in this study. What has been noted is sketchy at best, but it does give some of the more important points; and some not-so-important ones.

Butts³¹ says that it was customary to sew all square sails from the head. After sewing one side of a seam, a portion of the second side was left unsewed for the width of the tabling at each end. These portions were called wearings and were usually cut out to make the tabling lay flat. When sewing leech cloths, the wearings were left on the front side-since the head and foot tablings were turned on the after side and the leeches on the forward side. Most linings, mast cloths, and corner pieces were seamed on the after side of the sails. The toplining was put on slack, ½ inch to each cloth. The reef bands were tabled on the forward side as were the leech linings, buntline pieces, belly band, and reef table pieces. The middle band was a lining of one-half to one whole breadth, placed across courses and topsails half-way between the lowest reef and the foot. When there was not a middle band on the topsail, the reef tackle pieces were seamed on the after side and extended to the top of the toplining. The buntline cloth was a lining sewed up the sail in wake of the buntline, to prevent that line from chaffing the sail.

Luce¹⁹³ states that all sails should be sewn with 108-116 stitches per yard with a double flat seam. Seams of courses, topsails, lower staysails, trysails, and the spanker were 1½ inches wide and were stuck (tripple seamed). Spankers had broader seams at the foot than at the head were 1 inch wide. Tablings were sewed on with 68-72 stitches per yard.

Butts states that roping may be taut, plain, or flat (actually referring to the tautness of the canvas, not the rope). The foot of a topsail was roped taut at the clews and splices, graduating to plain at the buntlines. Leech ropes of square sails were roped plain, with the head rather taut. The luff and leech of the spanker were roped flat, but the leech rope was turned in so that it was more elastic; the mast rope was put on in a more natural position; head and foot were roped a little slack. The foot, leech, and stay ropes of jibs were roped plain. The bolt rope and grommets were put on the after side of a square sail or on the' larboard side of a fore-and-aft sail.

Reef and head holes were put 15 inches apart or two per cloth but the Currier lithograph shows one reef point per cloth. Two buntline holes were put in a topsail, but very large ships had four. Two holes per cloth were placed at the heads and reefs of all square sails, with one hole per yard in the luff of jibs and staysails, except at the peak where they were two feet apart.

Reef points were white cordage, in length equal to two times the circumference of the yard. With each successive reef, the points were shortened by 6 inches; the after legs extending 1 foot longer except the close reefed points which were halved.

Table 38 presents some of the constructional particulars of the sails of the Flying Cloud.

Table 38 - Sail Construction Details

VI Model of the Flying Cloud

An original intention of this study was to provide enough information to build an accurate model of the, It was also desired to construct a model large enough so that it would actually sail and could be operated by remote control; thus the scale of ½ inch equals 1 foot, which for the other sections of this study was unduly large. In this section are described some details of the model.

VII Bibliography

Listed below are all books, magazines, etc., which are refereaced in

the body of this paper. The BDA reports used were given in Table 2. Code

designations such as H⁸⁸ refers to Hall's Census Report, page 88.

Bradlee, Francis B. C. The Ship Great Republic and Donald McKay Her Builder

Brady, William Kedge Anchor

Butts, I. R. Merchants & Merchants Assistants

Butts, I. R. The Art of Sailmaking

Cape Cod Advancement Plan, Hyannis, Mass., Ship's Figureheads Of Old Cape Cod

Chapelle, Howard I. The History Of American Sailing Ships

Clark, Arthur H. The Clipper Ship Era

Clarke, Francis G. American Ship-Masters Guide

Curtis, T.-7. H. The Elements of Wood Ship Construction

Cutler, Carl C. Greyhounds of the Sea - The Story of the American Clipper Ship

Davis, Charles G. The Buit-Up Ship Model (abbrevation Db)

Davis, Charles G. Ships of the Past (Dp)

Davis, Charles G. Ship Model Builder’s Assistant (Ds)

Fairburn, W.A. Merchant Sail (F)

Fincham, John An Introductory Outline to the Practice Of Shipbuilding

Forbes, R. B. Construction of Ships for the Merchant Service (C)

Forbes, R. B. New Rig for Ships and Other Vessels (N)

Griffiths, J. W. Marine & Naval Architecture

Hall, Henry Ship-Building Industry of the United States –Census of 1880 (H)

Hichbom, Philip Standard Boats of the U. S. Navy

Howe, Octavius T. & Matthews, Frederick C. American Clipper Ships 1833-1858

India House Catalogue of Marine Collection at India House, New York City

Kipping, Robert Masting & Rigging

Kipping, Robert Sails and Sailmaking

Leslie, R. C. Old Sea Wings, Ways, and Words

Lever, Darcy Sheet Anchor

Lindley-Jones A. H. Boat Building Materials and Methods

Lubbock, Basil The Colonial Clippers

Luce Text-Book of Seamanship (L)

Luce, S. B. Seamanship (Sea)

Maury, Matthew, F. Maury's Salling Directions

Committee for McKay Memorial Report on Memorial to Donald McKay 1810-1880

McKay, Richard C. Donald McKay and the Ships he Built (B)

Mckay, Richard C. Some Famous Sailig Ships and their Builder Donald McKay (M)

Magoun, F. A. The Frigate Constitution and Other Historic Ships (Ma)

Montagu, Lord Robert Naval Architecture - Ship Building and the Rig of Clippers

Morgan, S. Griffitts Papers-Supercargo, San Francisco, Grinnell, Minturn & Co. (No)

New York Public Library Currier and Ives Exhibit

Paasch, H. Illustrated Marine Encyclopedia

Porter & Co. Porter's Patent-Anchor

Robinson-Dow, John Sailing Ships of New England

A Sailor (McLean, Duncan) Description of the Great Republic (S)

Smith, J . Textbook of Advanced Machine Work (A)

Smith, J. T. Signal Book for Boston Harbor Signal Flags (Magnetic Telegraph)

Currier & Ives - Simkin, Col in (Ed. ) Currier & Ives America (Si)

State Street Trust Co. , Yankee Ship Sailing Cards (Vol . I l l )

Steel, David Elements and Practice of Rigging and Seamanship

Swan, Bradford F. Captain Alexander Winsor

Thompson - others Yacht “America" (T)

Webb, William H. Plans of Wooden Vessels

Webster, C. B. & Co. Old Ships of New England

Wilson, Theodore, D. An Outline of Shipbuilding, Theoretical & Practical

PERIODICALS

American Neptune, Vo l . 1, 1941

Boston Almanac, 1851 (B)

Boston Almanac, 1856

Boston Daily Atlas, April 25, 1851 (BDA)

Boston SemiWeekly Atlas, April 16

Gleason's Pictorial, 1859-60

New York Commercial-Advertiser, May 9, 1851

Popular Mechanics, December, 1927

Seattle Washington Post Intelligencer, June 5

Appendix I – Paintings and Plans

Included in this section are photographs of most of the paintings and plans included in this study

Figures 72-83 are not included in this web version due to copyright concerns.

Appendix II – Revisions and Additions

REVISIONS AND ADDITIONS TO THE STUDY OF THE FLYING CLOUD (this is an appendix to the oroginal typed manuscript)

Page 18 (these page and paragraph numbers referred to the page and paragraph numbers in the original typed manuscript)

The signal code number 2636 shown in Figure 17 was valid for the Flying Cloud but not as probable as another one. The flags shown were according to John R. Parke’s Code, which originated in 1823 as J. M. Elford's Code. It is more probable that the Flying Cloud used Marryet's Code flag's (later known as the Universal Code) because of their popularity at the time. Figure 17A shows the flags she would fly if following this code; the number is 3P 3471 (3P = third distinguishing pendant).

The Roger's Private Signal Flag shown in Figure 67 is not comparable to the two house flags shown there but rather to the code flags shown here.

Page 27, Paragraph 2

It is now known from Herbert Skinner, Jr. that his father, Herbert Skinner of Fall River, himself a naval architect, had access to the original half-model of the Flying Cloud from which he drew the tracing around 1915 for Captain Arthur Clark which is now at MIT. This is not necessarily true of the other tracings there, however. The origin of the sail plan is presently unknown.

Page 27, Paragraph 3

The drawings in the Henry Hall report were done by Hall's brother, who was not what would be termed an accomplished draughtsman. Thus, although it is known that Hall himself was given free access to anything and everything, he desired all over the country, the drawings are not necessarily exact reproductions of that material . However, it is generally agreed that since the original plans and/or half-model of the Flying Cloud were used in drawing the Hall plans, they are reasonably accurate. Self-inconsistencies could perhaps be corrected with study. The original Hall notebook on every geographical locality except New England is in the Peabody Museum.

Page 27, Paragraph 4

It has often been said that the original painting from which the Currier lithograph was made was the oil now found in the MacPherson collection in England. However, careful examination of the two leaves little doubt that this is not true and that in fact the painting may have been copied from the lithograph. Lithographers generally followed the original painting much more closely than is obviously true here.

Page 28, Paragraph 1

There is general agreement that this birds-eye oil painting is not of the McKay Flying Cloud but of another one of the same name, often termed Flying Cloud II. It is not known if this is the New Brunswick ship or not.

Page 28, Paragraph 2

The original Chinese painting has recently been located in Marblehead and attempts are being made to obtain it for the Peabody Museum. Because this painting actually belonged to Capt. Creesy and because of the accurate method used in laying out these paintings it is considered the best reproduction which could be obtained at present, even superior to the lithograph.

Page 28, Paragraph 4

It should be noted that the April, 1959, issue of the American Neptune gives original photographs of several of McKay's ships which would indicate that there is always a possibility of coming upon one of the Flying Cloud in the future. The January, 1959 American Neptune pictures all of the Currier and Ives lithographs of ships made from excellent prints. It may be possible to determine the coppering arrangement from the photographs.