Cutty Sark restoration

Thank you for the update and the BBC link, John. I have to agree with you, the "building" is pretty bad. But being able to view the hull without it resting on keelblocks is pretty dang cool.

But already an award winner (of dubious distinction):

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewgilligan/100169643/cutty-sark-horror-nominated-as-worst-new-building-in-britain/

Enjoy

At least we each probably have the old Revell model with which we can see her graceful lines!

Bill

Thanks for the report and video.  Now it can be truly said, "I ate lunch under the Cutty Sark".  If a reconsideration is determined to remove the whoop-dee glass structure (it won't be) I'll have the our folks take a look at bringing the structure to Vigor Shipyard here in Seattle to be used to control environmentals for painting ship hulls; though you wouldn't want to eat your lunch in there during sandblasting .

I must say that I like to be hopefull of the future, so I hope Mr. J. Masefield is wrong.  (I know, gasp!) Ships may never again be built of timber like that, but if we can get a hold of this carbon emissions thing, we may return to an age of sail for our commerce once again.

It's amazing to me how different the "artist's impression" of the glass "sea" and the final result are.  To be frank, I hate the new glasshouse and it has completely destroyed Cutty Sark for me.  I will certainly never pay £12 to go inside.  Although the underwater part of the hull is interesting, by far the most appealing part is the part of the hull above the waterline, which I think has been made almost impossible to enjoy.  I think I've lost a lot to gain - what exactly?  Being able to walk under the keel of a ship may be exciting .. if you are 10 years old.

I much preferred the previous way the ship was displayed.  I think the large door was cut into the side to allow disabled access and I think the unsightly lifts are there to provide disabled access to the upper decks and I wouldn't argue against these.

I'm sure with this award, the architects will be crying all the way to the bank.

It may be good news that it is reversible, but I wonder if it will ever be done?  It would be much better to get it right first time.  

cerberusjf

  Being able to walk under the keel of a ship may be exciting .. if you are 10 years old.

 

 

Not necessarily if you are "ten years old". I have under ship's hulls in drydock for forty years and have always been in awe of them, from barges and tugs to destroyers, cruisers, fast attack subs, boomers , battleships and super carriers (Ever want to feel tiny and squashable? Walk under a Nimitz class carrier!) but they have always been resting on keelblocks. To be under a ship's hull that is suspended over you could only be duplicated if you were under water in incredibly clear conditions. I would pay 12 pounds to see that. Once!

I have been under some ships too and I did feel squashable for a while, but not really excited.  It always strikes me how much bigger they suddenly appear to be when they're out of the water (for me at least).  

I can't imagine sitting having a coffee underneath Cutty Sark's keel being a comfortable experience.  And I can't think of a ship that I'd prefer to walk under the keel of rather than walk alongside, not even a type 45 destroyer..

The Cutty Sark certainly was in need of restoration as her steel infrastructure was starting to fail. It does seem that they did a good job of restoring her. The problem starts with idea of suspending her in mid air which required additional infrastructure. The result is that the Cutty Sark that we see today, with much of the original fabric, is not the original Cutty Sark. It seems that the main focus is to create a museum piece that will make money!

I personally prefer the old display of the real Cutty Sark. The problem with that is even with a restored original infrastructure, the Cutty Sark was not built to sit on her keel indefinitely.

The older a ship is, the less of the original is left. That is the nature of the beast. Modifications and repairs make this inevitable.

Well I for one am very glad they decided to "restore" her at any rate. far too many are going by the way-side.

This what would have happened if the HMS Victory woudl have burned?  Would they have rebuilt her?  

One unhappy by-product of all this:  it seems the people responsible have changed, and dumbed down, the ship's website.  It used to contain all sorts of nice stuff:  a good assortment of photos, in-progress accounts and photos of the restoration, press releases, etc.  For a while the site featured the full text (with drawings and other graphics) of a fascinating survey that had been done shortly before the fire, describing in detail just what parts of the ship were original and which were replacements - from her days as a school ship and as a museum ship.  (A surprising amount of the original stuff is still there.)  And there was a "shopping" section where one could by, among many other things, the George Campbell drawings (one of the biggest bargains in ship modeling.

I've spent a bit of time trolling the web for Cutty Sark sites during the past few days.  So far as I can tell, this is the revised version of the old one:  http://www.cuttysark.com/ .  It's a sorry shadow of its former self.  There's scarcely any information beyond the level of the casual tourist, nothing about the restoration (except "plan your visit" stuff), and a "shop Cutty Sark" page that, though it contains some nice stuff (including some old photos I hadn't seen), does NOT include the Campbell plans.

Maybe I've missed something.  If any other Forum member can find a Cutty Sark site like the old one - or, for that matter, a web source for the Campbell drawings - please let us know.