Murray The printer, why such a long wait ? Col

So, as my 3D printer is still a few months away, I have decided to focus on areas other than the hull and make a start.

To that end, I asked my increasingly friendly AI agent to give me the deck width profile for the vessel's length, which are attached, and then its off to get some graph paper to see if we can't start to put some bones into to place and get the actual build started.

Cheers

@AlessandroSPQR

Ad essere onesto, non ho ancora idea di cosa sto facendo...

@ColRay

Correct Col.

RMS = Royal Mail Ship.

@ColRay

What's that Col?

Burn myself or get the build instructions?

The burn was when, as an 8 year old, I tried to connect a speaker to the input side of a 240VAC transformer instead of the output side of a 5W amplifier.

The build manual was a little easier... and less painful.

Alessandro will be another must view project Col

@Avoca
Excellent Murray, you're doing well, I'm rooting for you.

Take that first step and we should soon see
RMS ( is that Royal mail Ship ?) Tayluer

Murray How did you do that ? Col

OK, now I got my first burn from touching a transformer in the wrong way in about 1967!

Joined the Army to be an electronics technician in 1975.

Since then my work has been in computers, electronics, yada, yada, and I HATE, HATE, HATE having AI shoved down my throat and resist it at all levels(love the tech, hate the implementation).

BUT, I gotta admit, under some circumstances, its pretty awesome.

Please find attached an AI generated .pdf file with full build and fit out instructions for a 1/80th scale model of the RMS Tayleur from start to finish.

Enjoy.

Unbelievable!

@AlessandroSPQR

Thanks,

Its such a human thing though...

"Oooops, sorry. Next time we'll get it right..."

Its an interesting subject though, lifeboats.

632 folk on the Tayluer, around 400 lost.

I wonder if lifeboats, number or use of, played any role in that?

Cheers.

@Avoca

You are right to be surprised, Murray, about how compasses can be misled by a ship's iron; however, bear in mind that many of the concepts, rules, and procedures we take for granted today are the result of past errors—some of them tragic. Equipment and instruments that are mandatory today were not always so; they became required only in the wake of disasters.
You mentioned the Titanic, and that is a perfect example. The Titanic disaster of 1912 led to a radical overhaul of maritime safety laws and mandated that there be enough lifeboats for everyone on board, replacing the outdated and inadequate regulations of the time.
Before the tragedy, the British Board of Trade regulations dated back to 1894. These rules calculated the required number of lifeboats based on the ship's tonnage rather than the actual number of passengers. Since the regulations only covered ships up to 13,000 tons, the Titanic (weighing over 46,000 tons) was legally compliant even though it carried enough lifeboats to save only about a third of the people on board.
Immediately after the sinking, inquiry commissions in the United States and the United Kingdom pushed for immediate, sweeping changes. Key reforms included:
• Lifeboats for all: A strict rule was introduced requiring the total lifeboat capacity to accommodate 100% of the people on board (both passengers and crew). • The birth of the SOLAS Convention: In 1914, the first International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) was signed—a treaty that remains fundamental to maritime safety today.
• Mandatory training: Periodic abandon-ship drills were introduced for both crew and passengers, alongside a requirement to maintain a continuous 24-hour radio watch.

@AlessandroSPQR

"
...Hi Murray, it doesn't look very accurate from the photos, but as you say it might be a good place to start. You need to acquire as much information as possible from the original, texts and images, especially images....
"
I agree totally Alessandro,

This is really going to be a LOT of research, and even then, the finished product is going to be a work of fiction and vivid imagination I think.

Ma, alla fine, serve solo a dare alle generazioni future una prospettiva e una migliore comprensione di ciò che i loro parenti hanno sopportato per una vita migliore.

However, if I can achieve a reasonably accurate hull as a CAD file, who knows what archival discoveries will come along.

At the moment there isn't really a centralised source, a 'collection' as such on the vessel, maybe my work can contribute to one.

I find it amazing actually, that as it was, apparently, such an avoidable thing, an 'own-goal' if you like, by The White Star Line, closer attention might have been paid to the Titanic's maiden voyage.

And, given the result of both voyages, more details of the Tayluer would have been preserved.

I mean, the scarce consideration given to how much influence an iron hull would have on a magnetic compass???

Good grief.

Here's an extract from some information I found about the compasses.

"
The three main compasses fitted to RMS Tayleur were made by John Grey, who held the title "Compass maker to Her Majesty" (Queen Victoria). This information comes from the Coroner's Inquest into the ship's sinking and is confirmed by multiple historical sources.

Who made them (John Grey)
When they were fitted (approximately 2 months before the January 1854 maiden voyage)
That they were improperly compensated for the ship's iron hull

The compass issue became central to the Tayleur disaster. The ship's iron hull caused magnetic deviation that wasn't properly corrected during compensation. During the maiden voyage, the pilot noticed discrepancies between compasses, and ultimately the crew believed they were sailing south through the Irish Sea when they were actually heading west toward Ireland—leading to the wreck on Lambay Island on January 21, 1854.

The Coroner's Inquest blamed the ship's owners for allowing the vessel to depart without compasses properly adjusted, rather than blaming the captain directly.
"

@Avoca
Sorry, I hadn't pasted the translation. I've edited the post.

Hi Murray, it doesn't look very accurate in the photos, but as you say, it could be a good starting point.
We need to gather as much information as possible from the original—text and images, especially images.



Ciao Murray, non sembra molto accurato dalle foto, ma come dici tu potrebbe essere un buon punto di partenza.
Bisogna acquisire più informazioni possibili dall'originale, testi e immagini, soprattutto immagini.

Ok, so it can be done in 3D CAD.

Just some random design I think rather than a specific ship.

At last, its a starting point.

Now to workout how to convert their files to my software...

...bah, tomorrow's job!

https://www.cadnav.com/3d-models/model-50433.html

Further research shows the Tayluer was originally designed to be a 'screw steamer', but modified to a 'clipper' during manufacture.

Though this is not widely documented, it is, if true a significant change.

"...Some sources indicate the ship was originally designed at 225 ft × 39.4 ft × 27.6 ft before modification from screw steamer to clipper form during construction..."

Extracts from summaries of the official enquiry into the disaster noted...

"... Captain John Noble's testimony from the inquiry noted that the three masts were spaced further apart than normal, which he correctly identified would negatively affect maneuverability. However, specific mast-to-mast distance measurements are not published in accessible online sources..."

And, as for the angle the masts where set at, that's still just speculation I think, and will probably remain so.

Cheers.

Murray.

Courtesy RMG research team.

"...an image of the ship from an Illustrated London News woodcut..."

So, assuming the black squares along the vessel in the image are 'ports', and the number of them in the image is accurate, combined with the advert for the voyage that claims ..."there are ports every seven feet...", for ventilation and light, as a starting point, that distance is 126 feet.

With that, it appears as though the fore(?) mast looks almost in line with the fourth port and the aft(?) mast with the last port. So the masts would be distributed somehow over roughly 91 feet.

But they don't look 'evenly' spread...

I can see room for, maybe two more ports to the bow and maybe one to the stern which would add an extra 21 feet to the 'ports' length giving an overall, guesstimate, vessel length of 147 feet.

Well, at least between the back and the pointy bit.

Any takers...?

Information like this will add to the design recipe.

As long as future generations get a basic grasp on what the Tayluer might have looked like and what it was not, I guess its 'job done' to a certain extent.

Cheers.

@ColRay

At the end of the day Col, I think that is the best I can hope for.

Though there are only a few 'life-like' etchings around, and most of the paintings are of the actual grounding, there seems to be an extensive amount of written information around.

Even my own Aunt spent an enormous amount of time researching the event for our Family Tree records.

So, lots of reading to be done with little snippets here and there collected to help 'fine-tune' a final product.

For example, my cousin, who has actually stood on the very rocks of the accident*, had read that, part of the blame for the wreck was the Tayluer's masts had been set at a slightly greater distance apart and at a more 'windswept' angle than would have been traditional.

As weird as it sounds, if you compare the etching of the Tayluer and 'painting' of the Cutty Sark in the Build blog I have for the project, I can see a potential difference myself.

So, "read on, McMuzz..." I guess...

Cheers

*
The island where the grounding occurred is owned by members of a wealthy banking family who are notoriously private, possibly a little too trusting in a particular Singapore based trader though, and actual access to the beach itself is very rarely granted.

My Aunt and Uncle travelled from Australia to visit the location, but were refused access, yet 10 years later, the cousin I mentioned, managed to get permission.

Luck of the draw I guess.

250 anni dopo, i britannici hanno ANCORA il piede sulla gola della mia famiglia

@Avoca
Best of luck (un grandissimo in bocca al lupo), Murray.

Auguro anche a te un'ottima settimana. Grande.

Murray From your info file on the ship

one: year of manufacture
two: vessel type / rigging
three: where was the keel laid
four: other shipwrights
five: and last of all the one item that's worth is it's weight in good research material is the painting of the ship.
Using all the info on hand with a little luck you may/should find a ship that could be it's sister/ twin ect Col

Well, there go...

...no sooner had I sent my last update when, low and behold, an email arrives from the Royal Museums Greenwich folk.

Unfortunately no records.

Also the ship-builder, William Rennie's archives haven't survived

and, since checking on their advice, the Wirral Archives have no records either.

So, dead-end atm.

Cheers.

@AlessandroSPQR

Hi Alessandro,

Thanks and I totally agree with you about 'modifying' an existing kit, but you never know.

As you suggested, I emailed the Cairn Library last Friday, and the auto-response email said it could take up to 15 days to get back to me, if at all I guess.

I laid out my case as a direct descendent of the disaster, even listing my relatives names to try and give some verification to the request.

I guess they will come back with what help they can offer at some point.

We'll see, but some detailed drawings/plans would be very helpful as one of my options is to 3D print the hull, at least.

I have no issue spending hours in CAD software, if needs be, to get some accuracy.

But, we'll see what the experts come back with and go from there.

I appreciate your time and effort searching though, thanks.

I'll keep you updated as I get more info.

Spero che tu abbia una splendida settimana, amico mio.

Ciao.

@Avoca
Hi Murray, after scouring the internet, I’ve concluded—though I hope I’m wrong and that other members have had better luck—that there isn't a single model-making company selling kits or construction plans for the RMS Tayleur.

Finding construction plans for the RMS Tayleur on your own is a daunting task.
The Caird Library (located within the museum in Greenwich) is often cited online.
It is said that the museum has a specific section for technical drawings called the Ship Plans Collection. Many historical plans can be viewed or purchased as prints directly from their dedicated "Prints" website.
Honestly, I don't know how reliable this is, but I’d give it a try—it costs nothing—and I’d even send them an email to see if they have anything relevant to your search.

I don't think using a kit for a similar ship—like the Cutty Sark or Thermopylae—is a good idea.
I wouldn't do it because, to do a good job, you’d need excellent photographic sources to modify the Cutty Sark or Thermopylae as accurately as possible to resemble the RMS Tayleur (and the dimensions would differ anyway).
I suspect there aren't many photographic sources for the RMS Tayleur.
On the other hand, building the Cutty Sark or Thermopylae and simply changing the nameplate to "RMS Tayleur" is a terrible idea.

Let us know if you get any useful answers.

@Avoca

Murray, I'm looking, but I haven't found anything yet.

Murray That would be a really interesting project Col