On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 14:11:05 -0500, DSK wrote:

felton wrote:


By
"scientifically trained sailors", who would that be in reference to?

Graduates of the JAXAshby Advanced School of Scientific Sounding Sailboat Gibberish.

Is there a correspondence course? Do they offer any electives in
diesel mechanics? I doubt I could get in...I struggle with math.

JAXAshby wrote
Bob Perry would say different, but then Bob has publicly called me an asshole,

but Bob has also publicly stated that he has struggled with math all his life,
a statement on his part that I do not doubt.

Actually, I don't doubt either statement

Actually, I suspect that this is no more true than any other of Jax's claims, such
as having sex with various well known actresses or sailing around the Atlantic
looking for the Gulf Stream for a week.

I am fairly certain that Bob called Jax an asshole in the old Cruising
World forum. Then again, I suspect that it wasn't the first or last
time Jax has been "misidentified" as an asshole, so I am not certain
what that has to do with the boat, or the designer in question



..... Are you suggesting that yacht
design is ultimately a mathmatical exercise and the best slide rule
operator will design the best boat? That would be an interesting
theory to test.

It's already been tested. Ever since the origin of geometry, people have tried to
use math to design better (usually meaning faster) boats. While the use of large
computers has advanced the practice quite a bit lately, it seems that there is more
to it than pure abstract number crunching. As proven by a certain groups highly
advanced number crunched design that also crunched spars.....



I think Bob's success speaks for itself. The boat has been a success,
commercially and out on the water for over 30 years and is in the
Sailboat Hall of Fame. If "scientifically trained sailors" wish to
nitpick, then so be it.

My only nitpick would be that the canoe stern reduces reserve bouyancy, and makes it
awkward to mount hardware back there. Some people seem to think that the Valiant is
similar in more than superficial aesthetics to some kind of historic pilot cutter or
rescue vessel from the days of sail, but it is really a modern (1970s era) design.
In it's day it was not a crab-crusher, rather it was on the light end of the
displacement/length scale.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King


Well, I agree it is an "old" design. I have asked the Valiant folks if
they have considered that a newer design might be about due, but they
seem to feel that "if it aint broke, why fix it." Hard to argue with,
I suppose. While I have never been aboard a Passport, I suspect that
it might be a design that would have more appeal to me, particularly
the stern, as you mention. A large part of why I admire the Valiants,
though, is knowing the people who build them and seeing the way they
are put together. They are very well made, and that is something that
is every bit as important as the design.

Graduates of the JAXAshby Advanced School of Scientific Sounding Sailboat Gibberish.

felton wrote:
Is there a correspondence course? Do they offer any electives in
diesel mechanics?

LOL
and a Ph.D in sissy footwells.


I doubt I could get in...I struggle with math.

Too bad. Jax doesn't struggle with math, he ignores it completely except for a few
impressive sounding words he tosses in at random. For Jax, "science" is roughly akin to
"free word association."


.... Some people seem to think that the Valiant is
similar in more than superficial aesthetics to some kind of historic pilot cutter or
rescue vessel from the days of sail, but it is really a modern (1970s era) design.
In it's day it was not a crab-crusher, rather it was on the light end of the
displacement/length scale.



Well, I agree it is an "old" design. I have asked the Valiant folks if
they have considered that a newer design might be about due, but they
seem to feel that "if it aint broke, why fix it." Hard to argue with,
I suppose.

Sure. As Edey & Duff once said, the sea hasn't changed much.

OTOH it would be silly to ignore what has been learned about materials and design since
the 1970s, especially when applicable to whatever your particular goal might be. From
what I've read, Valiant has changed a few things including not using fire-retardant resin
any more.


While I have never been aboard a Passport, I suspect that
it might be a design that would have more appeal to me, particularly
the stern, as you mention. A large part of why I admire the Valiants,
though, is knowing the people who build them and seeing the way they
are put together. They are very well made, and that is something that
is every bit as important as the design.

I haven't been more than a casual guest on any Passports or Valiants either one, and so
can't comment on thier relative build quality. But one thing I like about the Valiants is
that they sail pretty well for their looks and their capacity, good design priorities.
IMHO their record offshore speaks to the judgement & skills of some of the people who
have chosen them.

At times past I've criticised this general type as "faux Colin Archers" (which they are),
but some of them are still good boats in their own right. There's a Valiant 40 at our
marina which has been getting an ambitious program of upgrades this past fall, it will be
interesting to meet the owner and see what he's got in mind.

FB
DSK

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 16:45:35 -0500, DSK wrote:



Graduates of the JAXAshby Advanced School of Scientific Sounding Sailboat Gibberish.

felton wrote:
Is there a correspondence course? Do they offer any electives in
diesel mechanics?

LOL
and a Ph.D in sissy footwells.


I doubt I could get in...I struggle with math.

Too bad. Jax doesn't struggle with math, he ignores it completely except for a few
impressive sounding words he tosses in at random. For Jax, "science" is roughly akin to
"free word association."




.... Some people seem to think that the Valiant is
similar in more than superficial aesthetics to some kind of historic pilot cutter or
rescue vessel from the days of sail, but it is really a modern (1970s era) design.
In it's day it was not a crab-crusher, rather it was on the light end of the
displacement/length scale.



Well, I agree it is an "old" design. I have asked the Valiant folks if
they have considered that a newer design might be about due, but they
seem to feel that "if it aint broke, why fix it." Hard to argue with,
I suppose.

Sure. As Edey & Duff once said, the sea hasn't changed much.

OTOH it would be silly to ignore what has been learned about materials and design since
the 1970s, especially when applicable to whatever your particular goal might be. From
what I've read, Valiant has changed a few things including not using fire-retardant resin
any more.

In fairness, that was back in the days when Valiants were built in
Washinton by Uniflite. That unfortunate episode resulted in the
demise of "old Valiant" and the birth of "Texas Valiant". No more
blister boats. Beyond that, they added bowsprits to the 40 and 47 and
now call them the 42 and the 50. They discontinued the 32 and the 37.
I thought the 37 was a good looking boat, but such is the way of the
boat business. It seems it costs almost as much to build a 37 as a
40, so why build the smaller boats.


While I have never been aboard a Passport, I suspect that
it might be a design that would have more appeal to me, particularly
the stern, as you mention. A large part of why I admire the Valiants,
though, is knowing the people who build them and seeing the way they
are put together. They are very well made, and that is something that
is every bit as important as the design.

I haven't been more than a casual guest on any Passports or Valiants either one, and so
can't comment on thier relative build quality. But one thing I like about the Valiants is
that they sail pretty well for their looks and their capacity, good design priorities.
IMHO their record offshore speaks to the judgement & skills of some of the people who
have chosen them.

At times past I've criticised this general type as "faux Colin Archers" (which they are),
but some of them are still good boats in their own right. There's a Valiant 40 at our
marina which has been getting an ambitious program of upgrades this past fall, it will be
interesting to meet the owner and see what he's got in mind.

FB
DSK

From
what I've read, Valiant has changed a few things including not using
fire-retardant resin
any more.

a quick study you are, doguies, that happened about a quarter century ago.

...Passports or Valiants either one, and so
can't comment on thier relative build quality.

Passport quality is excellent, as is usually Valiant.

But one thing I like about the Valiants is
that they sail pretty well for their looks and their capacity

nah. They sail okay "for their looks and capacity" but less so than other boat
of similar looks and capacity.

At times past I've criticised this general type as "faux Colin Archers"
(which they are)

A Passport looks like a Colin Archer? Since when?

And Valiant only looks like a Colin Archer from the deck up.

But one thing I like about the Valiants is
that they sail pretty well for their looks and their capacity

while a Passport, as beautiful as it is, is one seriously dog slow boat. A
Passport 37 is **ten THOUsand pounds** heavier than design weight. The
designer blames the builder and the builder says he built the boat he asked to
be designed.

A pretty boat of a high quality build, but slooooooow.

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 19:58:17 GMT, felton wrote:

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 14:11:05 -0500, DSK wrote:

felton wrote:


By
"scientifically trained sailors", who would that be in reference to?

Graduates of the JAXAshby Advanced School of Scientific Sounding Sailboat Gibberish.

Is there a correspondence course? Do they offer any electives in
diesel mechanics? I doubt I could get in...I struggle with math.

JAXAshby wrote
Bob Perry would say different, but then Bob has publicly called me an asshole,

but Bob has also publicly stated that he has struggled with math all his life,
a statement on his part that I do not doubt.

Actually, I don't doubt either statement

Actually, I suspect that this is no more true than any other of Jax's claims, such
as having sex with various well known actresses or sailing around the Atlantic
looking for the Gulf Stream for a week.

I am fairly certain that Bob called Jax an asshole in the old Cruising
World forum. Then again, I suspect that it wasn't the first or last
time Jax has been "misidentified" as an asshole, so I am not certain
what that has to do with the boat, or the designer in question



..... Are you suggesting that yacht
design is ultimately a mathmatical exercise and the best slide rule
operator will design the best boat? That would be an interesting
theory to test.

It's already been tested. Ever since the origin of geometry, people have tried to
use math to design better (usually meaning faster) boats. While the use of large
computers has advanced the practice quite a bit lately, it seems that there is more
to it than pure abstract number crunching. As proven by a certain groups highly
advanced number crunched design that also crunched spars.....



I think Bob's success speaks for itself. The boat has been a success,
commercially and out on the water for over 30 years and is in the
Sailboat Hall of Fame. If "scientifically trained sailors" wish to
nitpick, then so be it.

If memory serves correctly a few years ago there was an article in Good Old Boat
magazine on factors affecting hull speed. The canoe stern doesn't allow as
clean a separation of the stern wave in addition to a slightly shorter effective
waterline at hull speed, both of which add a little drag.

In another article the designer of the Valiant acknowledged the design
limitations of the canoe stern but it was a requirement of the customer and that
he worked very hard to minimize them.

But above all, remember ALL boats are a compromise.

JJ


My only nitpick would be that the canoe stern reduces reserve bouyancy, and makes it
awkward to mount hardware back there. Some people seem to think that the Valiant is
similar in more than superficial aesthetics to some kind of historic pilot cutter or
rescue vessel from the days of sail, but it is really a modern (1970s era) design.
In it's day it was not a crab-crusher, rather it was on the light end of the
displacement/length scale.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King


Well, I agree it is an "old" design. I have asked the Valiant folks if
they have considered that a newer design might be about due, but they
seem to feel that "if it aint broke, why fix it." Hard to argue with,
I suppose. While I have never been aboard a Passport, I suspect that
it might be a design that would have more appeal to me, particularly
the stern, as you mention. A large part of why I admire the Valiants,
though, is knowing the people who build them and seeing the way they
are put together. They are very well made, and that is something that
is every bit as important as the design.

James Johnson
remove the "dot" from after sail in email address to reply

James Johnson wrote:
If memory serves correctly a few years ago there was an article in Good Old Boat
magazine on factors affecting hull speed. The canoe stern doesn't allow as
clean a separation of the stern wave in addition to a slightly shorter effective
waterline at hull speed, both of which add a little drag.

In another article the designer of the Valiant acknowledged the design
limitations of the canoe stern but it was a requirement of the customer and that
he worked very hard to minimize them.

But above all, remember ALL boats are a compromise.

JJ

That's definitely true.

One benefit of the canoe stern that I don't think anybody has mentioned
yet is that it is structurally stronger (all else being equal) than a
transom.

FB
Doug King

dougie, a "benefit" is something that adds to the overall effect. In this case
there is no benefit because there is no problem with transoms not being strong
enough on the size and type sailboats under discussion. Calling it a benefit
doesn't make it one. Don't you sell concrete slabs to trailor home people?
You should know the difference between a feature, an advantage and a benefit.

James Johnson wrote:
If memory serves correctly a few years ago there was an article in Good Old
Boat
magazine on factors affecting hull speed. The canoe stern doesn't allow as
clean a separation of the stern wave in addition to a slightly shorter
effective
waterline at hull speed, both of which add a little drag.

In another article the designer of the Valiant acknowledged the design
limitations of the canoe stern but it was a requirement of the customer and
that
he worked very hard to minimize them.

But above all, remember ALL boats are a compromise.

JJ

That's definitely true.

One benefit of the canoe stern that I don't think anybody has mentioned
yet is that it is structurally stronger (all else being equal) than a
transom.

FB
Doug King

JAXAshby wrote:
dougie, a "benefit" is something that adds to the overall effect. In this case
there is no benefit because there is no problem with transoms not being strong
enough on the size and type sailboats under discussion. Calling it a benefit
doesn't make it one.

Let's see... an inherently stronger structure is not better than an
inherently weaker one? What sort of engineering is this? Oh wait, it's
JAXINEERING!



.... Don't you sell concrete slabs to trailor home people?

No. Why, do you need to buy a concrete slab for your trailer home?

Dsk

so, making a transom (that doesn't break) 10 times stronger is a *benefit*?

Sounds like a disadvantage to me. Extra cost, extra weight, slower boat speed,
all to fix a problem that doesn't exist.


JAXAshby wrote:
dougie, a "benefit" is something that adds to the overall effect. In this
case
there is no benefit because there is no problem with transoms not being
strong
enough on the size and type sailboats under discussion. Calling it a
benefit
doesn't make it one.

Let's see... an inherently stronger structure is not better than an
inherently weaker one? What sort of engineering is this? Oh wait, it's
JAXINEERING!


Dsk