Hi

"Backyard Renegade" skrev i en meddelelse
om...
I was kinda hoping to hear from Designers and Builders, not some silly
software designer who never built a boat!

Just to start things right, there is nothing Honeycomb about your
designs, there are only standard bulkheads and stringers. You have
cleverly (stupidly) turned them at a 45 degree angle to the logical
placement, making for much more time and material intensive building
process leaving lot's of mis-shaped areas in the boat that need to be
covered and are only good for pouring in foam.


Exactly, and if you ever build a tradisional wooden boat , you know that what
take time is not the hull but the deck , the edges the troubled small corners ,
floor foundations all those small but time comsuming things that is simply not
there, when there are an outher hull and an inner hull with the room inbetween
that will hold the flotation.

The current Stitch and Tape builders are designing and building much
more modern boats than you, and with logical, useable shapes, so stop
saying we build ugly boxes. Have you seen my boats, CLC, etc. We have
taken the old designs and changed them drastically to fit today's
environment and boating needs.

That attitude is your choice, I would prefere to make new and exiting designs,
and at the same time develob new methods, more exiting designs , easier build
and in any sheet material.

For instance, take my "Joe". Looks
enough like the old D4 or Sabot, but look closer there is a lot of
difference. The aforementioned boats were developed long ago, for sail
and oars. I have redesigned mine completely to take advantage of small
engines which are much more popular now than back then. There are
those that are building Driftboats, Whitehalls, Wherry's and other
beautiful, round boats of S+T, you are just blind to them because of
your personal narrow-mindedness.


So SandG is more than one thing ,becaurse different designs is produced, -----
it can't be it is just one method , and you call me narrow minded )

You say we are the closed minded ones but in reality, almost every one
of us (your detractors) have tried to give you the benefit of the
doubt in the past. Each until you started tearing us down for asking
questions, most of which, to this day, remain unanswered.

Wrong again, you just need to check the old Cyber-Boat sites that ansvered a lot
of questions, -------- but not those that you can smell is nothing but fish.

Everyone who
watches this group knows well how much you hate Bolger boats and my
type of operation...

No not quite, I do not like the Bolger attitude, but your buisness is none of
my buisness.

But in 30 seconds, last year, in the middle of
the night, while sleeping, Bolger designs sparked more boat builders
into their first boat then you have in your entire lifetime!


"Sparked" ? ------- all I seen of Bolgers designs is flat bottomed and drawn to
fit the need of Popular Mechanics back 50' . or somthing that rather look like
a copy of what all boatbuilders made in the 20' , ------- Now I don't blame
flat bottomed boats as a lot of lake or river boats work perfect with flat
bottom , but why don't they make atlantic racers in Bolger style, why don't they
produce lifeboats Bolger style why don't they use plywood instead of steel or
epoxy.

Per, you are a bitter man who shot his wad and failed miserably,
understandably so. You took some pretty logical construction methods
(stringers and bulkheads) and turned them to a 45 degree angle to a
definite fore and aft structure.

Well Im'e sorry that F.A.A. describe the method as an attractive building method
for small aeroplanes, but please ansver what you think give the strength with a
stringer if it's not the structure it acturly form. Have you ever wondered how
these tiny ribs and thin stringers and planking can form such strong
structures, --------- maby you think the strength come from the stringer or tiny
ribs that is so easily broken , but not easily broken when glued together.

Personally, I look at your scam as
Intellectually lazy, and as I noted before, impractical from any real
boat building point of view.

And you say so without even a scale model, while F.A.A. call it an attractive
building method.

Then when we tried to make suggestions,
in a constructive manner, you attack us as a group, call us stupid,
lazy, unsafe, etc.

No that was the Elegant Elefant, I wouldn't like to drown in one of those
nomatter how many lawn cruisers that made..

Your plans from what I have seen, don't even
address the simple fact of flotation, and you consider yourself a
responsible designer?

What !!! ------- Dizzie a 5 meter true lapstrake take 3 grown up at one side of
the boat and you can hardly notis, maby you shuld look into the design of that
if you want to make your D4 more stable , -------- the smallest pram I build
loads of would hold 450 Kg with 2.08 meter length , and the 3.8 meter Dizzie not
published but build will manuver in a crowded harbour with almost no wind
, ---------- the only true sailing pram that acturly work with sails.

Anyone can draw lines on a computer,

No they can't , ------ you wouldn't even be able to figur out to place the
defination lines producing the most accurate and detailed boat shape that my
software offer, --- Software that make you morph 3D between two different
designs , not just morf 2D as you do with graphic , ------- do you even know the
difference ?

even put in
a fancy "right angle" (nothing honeycomb about it) texture, but do you
know what the joint is going to look like that supports the helm, what
material, what adhesive or fastener. How the hell is someone supposed
to build a boat from a cartoon?


What are you talking about , --------- I put 12 different boats on display each
and every one acturly build , then I develob a new building method that even F.
A.A.

My suggestion is that you go back to software development. Although
your designs from my point of view are just silly and useless, they do
look pretty cool. Maybe you should try to sell your software to
artists, TV commercial producers, or even childerns toy makers.


And my suggestion is that you try emagine your D4 and how much easier it will be
to build, leaving a honeycomb core cut in ply , easy to produce with full-scale
plans and a jigsaw . You se when there is a reliable building jig and perfect
unfolded panels , amature boatbuilding is that much easier than troubled edges
and no backing or nails in endwood. My advise is that you open your mind and
realise that even Bolger did his best to make boatbuilding into somthing that
deal with only plywood and materials and building methods avaible in the 50' ,
the 3D-H method will perform any small boat safer, stronger and easier build
, --------- but you guy's want to stay with old fasion stitch and glue in a way
where you fight the materials and only se the epoxy as the chains to hold rigid
Ply. S and G acturly can be much more than fighting the materials , but I don't
wonder all the trouble with these old fasion plans , made for a different
material in another time. For my sake you are welcom to stay with that, also
for my sake you are welcom to stay with Bolger , the childish claims I heard
about 3D-Honeycomb all showed the lack of knowleage of the ones trying to make
the group into what they realy love. Their lack of experience simply shine thru
the wish to throw dirt and say the one hit stink . And most often these
"profesionals" , just showed their lack of skills and experience , --------
throwing dirt ; realy there are people who fill their life with that.
Then there is other people who suggest anyone with a real interest in
boatbuilding, to build in a method that bring a boat at a third the cost, four
times stronger and much easier build , You made your choice I made mine.

P.C.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cyber-Boat/