Handbook on daysailer /dinghy design
 

I'm looking for The daysailer /dinghy design handbook

1 book (hull, rig, fittings, etc)
handbook style
like a formula collection (preferrably SI units)
with handy comments
and a few examples
....and no bla, bla, bla, romantics

Please tell it's title.

Thanks!

Morgan O.

Morgan Ohlson wrote in message ...
I'm looking for The daysailer /dinghy design handbook

1 book (hull, rig, fittings, etc)
handbook style
like a formula collection (preferrably SI units)
with handy comments
and a few examples
...and no bla, bla, bla, romantics

Please tell it's title.

Thanks!

Morgan O.

Try this:
Marine Design Books covering Powerboat Design and Sailboat Design ...
.... How to Design a Boat by John Teale How to Design a Boat by John
Teale John Teale,
Naval Architect and editor of Motor Boat and Yachting for years, takes
the ...
www.boat-design.net/Technical_ Resources/Books_-_Boat_Design/ - 32k -
Cached - Similar pages

racing dingy, cruising dingy, or pleasure sailing dingy?

Morgan Ohlson ) writes:
I'm looking for The daysailer /dinghy design handbook

1 book (hull, rig, fittings, etc)
handbook style
like a formula collection (preferrably SI units)
with handy comments
and a few examples
...and no bla, bla, bla, romantics

Please tell it's title.

Thanks!

Morgan O.


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

Hmmm...let's see: he wants a book on daysailer/dinghy design:

Is that description like a racing dinghy? No, I don't think so.
Or a cruising dinghy? Can't go far in a day, I don't suppose.
Or a pleasure sailing dinghy? As that's the only category left
- I guess that most be it, wouldn't you think?

Brian W

On 3 Oct 2004 19:39:20 GMT, (William R.
Watt) wrote:
racing dingy, cruising dingy, or pleasure sailing dingy?


Morgan Ohlson ) writes:
I'm looking for The daysailer /dinghy design handbook
///
Thanks!

Morgan O.

Brian:

That's a rather sarcastic answer to a pretty legitimate question. The
dinghies Watt mentioned could all be possible answers to the original post.
I can think of an example from all three of his suggestions that MIGHT fit
the posters needs. Like Watt, I'd like a bit more info too.

Lighten up a bit? Or this guy with the question might think us
unfriendly...(c;

"Brian Whatcott" wrote in message
...
Hmmm...let's see: he wants a book on daysailer/dinghy design:

Is that description like a racing dinghy? No, I don't think so.
Or a cruising dinghy? Can't go far in a day, I don't suppose.
Or a pleasure sailing dinghy? As that's the only category left
- I guess that most be it, wouldn't you think?

Brian W

On 3 Oct 2004 19:39:20 GMT, (William R.
Watt) wrote:
racing dingy, cruising dingy, or pleasure sailing dingy?


Morgan Ohlson ) writes:
I'm looking for The daysailer /dinghy design handbook
///
Thanks!

Morgan O.

Thank you for giving me yet another opportunity to eat
humble pie on account of my extremely rudimentary
social graces.
I hear you, and will try to be a more helpful, less sarcastic person.
But I have been trying in that particular area
for 40 or 50 years, so I don't suppose there's much hope for instant
improvement...

Now a tip for you: when handing out comments, I use my full name
yes, my real one. And a real email. Like the other folks in this
thread. Except you.
Then if I write something dumb, you know who's speaking.

Brian W.

On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 14:30:23 -0700, "Dan" wrote:

Brian:

That's a rather sarcastic answer to a pretty legitimate question. The
dinghies Watt mentioned could all be possible answers to the original post.
I can think of an example from all three of his suggestions that MIGHT fit
the posters needs. Like Watt, I'd like a bit more info too.

Lighten up a bit? Or this guy with the question might think us
unfriendly...(c;

"Brian Whatcott" wrote in message
.. .
Hmmm...let's see: he wants a book on daysailer/dinghy design:

Is that description like a racing dinghy? No, I don't think so.
Or a cruising dinghy? Can't go far in a day, I don't suppose.
Or a pleasure sailing dinghy? As that's the only category left
- I guess that most be it, wouldn't you think?

Brian W

On 3 Oct 2004 19:39:20 GMT, (William R.
Watt) wrote:
racing dingy, cruising dingy, or pleasure sailing dingy?


Morgan Ohlson ) writes:
I'm looking for The daysailer /dinghy design handbook
///
Thanks!

Morgan O.

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 20:20:53 GMT, Brian Whatcott wrote:

Hmmm...let's see: he wants a book on daysailer/dinghy design:

Is that description like a racing dinghy? No, I don't think so.
Or a cruising dinghy? Can't go far in a day, I don't suppose.
Or a pleasure sailing dinghy? As that's the only category left
- I guess that most be it, wouldn't you think?

Brian W

On 3 Oct 2004 19:39:20 GMT, (William R.
Watt) wrote:
racing dingy, cruising dingy, or pleasure sailing dingy?


No, but there is a better answer, I think...

The formulas are the same, as well as the process itself. A seaworthy dinghy
may also be slow, but both aspects apply, but in different perspektives.

So, basicly a good handbook on design should deal with different goals.
Isn't that the essence of design?

I'm not looking for instant plans.


Morgan

Morgan Ohlson ) writes:

The formulas are the same, as well as the process itself. A seaworthy dinghy
may also be slow, but both aspects apply, but in different perspektives.

So, basicly a good handbook on design should deal with different goals.
Isn't that the essence of design?

I'm not looking for instant plans.

the design of a racing dingy is quite a lot different from the design of
a cruising dingy which differs again from the design of a pleasure sailing
dingy. I have not come across anything which covers all three.

racing dingy's are lightwight, uncomforatable, and festooned with
expensive "gofasts". a good crusing dingy is heavy, high sided,
comfortable, more decked over, adn can be made of less expnesive, often
home built, hardware. a good day sailer is usually light and responsive
without the expense of the racer, or large and comodious, dependign on
it's indended use.

People who design racing dingy's are not much interested in cruising and
people who design crusing dingy's are usually trying to get away from the
dominance of racing dingy's. they tend not to write design books covering
both types. most yacht design book focus on big boats where the money is.
big boats don't usually scale down well. for example, weight of materials,
ballast and heeling on a small boat are quite different.

I went through what you are doing and that is what I found.

You might be interested in an effort I made to document the design
process for a cruising dingy by an amateur. It's at
www.ncf.ca/~ag384/Boats.htm. Look under "Designs" and "Solo15".

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

Brian

I didn't mean to serve you humble pie. Just wanted the new guy to feel
welcome. (c;

And sorry, but there is a very long standing "news group etiquette" among
nettizens that precludes using full names or real e-mail addresses. It
prevents spammers from mining names and addresses with which to send out
their junk.

I dutifully read the criticism of my mistakes, errors and my hasty remarks
by simply reading replies within the NG. Thanks.

Cheers,

Dan

"Brian Whatcott" wrote in message
...
Thank you for giving me yet another opportunity to eat
humble pie on account of my extremely rudimentary
social graces.
I hear you, and will try to be a more helpful, less sarcastic person.
But I have been trying in that particular area
for 40 or 50 years, so I don't suppose there's much hope for instant
improvement...

Now a tip for you: when handing out comments, I use my full name
yes, my real one. And a real email. Like the other folks in this
thread. Except you.
Then if I write something dumb, you know who's speaking.

Brian W.

On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 14:30:23 -0700, "Dan" wrote:

Brian:

That's a rather sarcastic answer to a pretty legitimate question. The
dinghies Watt mentioned could all be possible answers to the original
post.
I can think of an example from all three of his suggestions that MIGHT fit
the posters needs. Like Watt, I'd like a bit more info too.

Lighten up a bit? Or this guy with the question might think us
unfriendly...(c;

"Brian Whatcott" wrote in message
. ..
Hmmm...let's see: he wants a book on daysailer/dinghy design:

Is that description like a racing dinghy? No, I don't think so.
Or a cruising dinghy? Can't go far in a day, I don't suppose.
Or a pleasure sailing dinghy? As that's the only category left
- I guess that most be it, wouldn't you think?

Brian W

On 3 Oct 2004 19:39:20 GMT, (William R.
Watt) wrote:
racing dingy, cruising dingy, or pleasure sailing dingy?


Morgan Ohlson ) writes:
I'm looking for The daysailer /dinghy design handbook
///
Thanks!

Morgan O.

On 3 Oct 2004 11:30:46 -0700, Rob wrote:

Morgan Ohlson wrote in message ...
I'm looking for The daysailer /dinghy design handbook

1 book (hull, rig, fittings, etc)
handbook style
like a formula collection (preferrably SI units)
with handy comments
and a few examples
...and no bla, bla, bla, romantics

Please tell it's title.

Thanks!

Morgan O.

Try this:
Marine Design Books covering Powerboat Design and Sailboat Design ...
... How to Design a Boat by John Teale How to Design a Boat by John
Teale John Teale,
Naval Architect and editor of Motor Boat and Yachting for years, takes
the ...
www.boat-design.net/Technical_ Resources/Books_-_Boat_Design/ - 32k -
Cached - Similar pages

I looked it up and ordered it!

Thanks!


Morgan O.

On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 10:03:58 -0700, "Dan" wrote:

Brian
//
And sorry, but there is a very long standing "news group etiquette" among
nettizens that precludes using full names or real e-mail addresses.
///
Dan

It's at this point, if I weren't such a 'umble fellow, that I would
start mentioning my posting history of about 15 years on Arpa/Internet
News: I didn't think anybody has been standing very much longer than
that, but as I say, I could be wrong, so i won't... :-)
..
So feel precluded from using your real name if you must, but I ain't
chicken..... an I do know how to tuck the napkin in my collar, even,
an all that etiquette stuff.

/jest jokin'!

The Joker at FakeNet.net

I think Morgan is looking for a book covering the design basics. His
description of "day sailer/dinghy" means no me just that - a vessel
perhaps for the family to go out in for a jolly on the water. I
certainly do not get any inference that he wishes to design a racing
dinghy.

The John Teale book is an excellent book as an introduction to boat
design and I used it to design a 72ft steel vessel. I also bought two
Dave Gerr books:

The Nature of Boats - excellent on every topic of
power/sail/crusing/racing with loads of useful information in it. A
must if starting from scratch as it will make you pull things apart
afterwards.

Boat Strength - his simplification of all the construction standards
to achieve the correct hull strength in any building material. Again
used in the design of my 72 ft steel vessel to check the hull
scantling strengths.

On 5 Oct 2004 02:15:11 -0700, Rob wrote:

I think Morgan is looking for a book covering the design basics. His
description of "day sailer/dinghy" means no me just that - a vessel
perhaps for the family to go out in for a jolly on the water. I
certainly do not get any inference that he wishes to design a racing
dinghy.

The John Teale book is an excellent book as an introduction to boat
design and I used it to design a 72ft steel vessel. I also bought two
Dave Gerr books:

The Nature of Boats - excellent on every topic of
power/sail/crusing/racing with loads of useful information in it. A
must if starting from scratch as it will make you pull things apart
afterwards.

Boat Strength - his simplification of all the construction standards
to achieve the correct hull strength in any building material. Again
used in the design of my 72 ft steel vessel to check the hull
scantling strengths.

If I get the feeling that I can't get far enough with Teale's Book, wich one
do you consider to be the best complement?

Still going for daysaling.


Morgan O.

Morgan Ohlson ) writes:

If I get the feeling that I can't get far enough with Teale's Book, wich one
do you consider to be the best complement?

I got started with TF Jones "Boats to Go" (1990?). Not racers but, light
displacement daysailers, canoes, kayaks, garveys, that "go fsst with low
power". Builds mostly in plywood. Leans toward classic desings.
Experiments with multihulls. Includes many notes about calculations and
materials. He followed up with "New Plywood Boats" in 2000 so the info is
pretty current. www.jonesboats.com. the Dobler 16 on his website is a
large light fast daysailer but not the most comfortable. I think
athwarship seating would impreove it. the seating on the desing (which
isn't his) is used in racing dingy's.

However I have read over 80 books on boatbuilding and design (that's how
many there are in the Ottawa public library system) from which I've made
many notes and photocopies. There's no one book covering all you need to
know on dingy design. the marekt probably isns't big enough to justify
publication. I think it's more economical to put what you know on a
website than to try an publish a book for a limited market. Many people
do that, one of the big benefits of the Internet IMHO.


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

On 5 Oct 2004 15:02:40 GMT, William R. Watt wrote:

Morgan Ohlson ) writes:

If I get the feeling that I can't get far enough with Teale's Book, wich one
do you consider to be the best complement?

I got started with TF Jones "Boats to Go" (1990?). Not racers but, light
displacement daysailers, canoes, kayaks, garveys, that "go fsst with low
power". Builds mostly in plywood. Leans toward classic desings.

Some yeras ago a collegue of mine said:
"- Some read all books, others read a few ten times each and consentrate on
developing the feeling for it."

A book can only give a few facts and formulas. The undertanding and feeling
is up to the reader.


There's no one book covering all you need to
know on dingy design.

What do a designer need...and what is preferred?

Do anyone know everything?


Morgan O.

Morgan Ohlson writes:
The formulas are the same, as well as the process itself. A seaworthy dinghy
may also be slow, but both aspects apply, but in different perspektives.

So, basicly a good handbook on design should deal with different goals.
Isn't that the essence of design?

AFAIK, yes. To make sure I get what you're saying, you want to know how
to derive the basic proportions of a small sailboat to get the result of
a boat with the performance characteristics you want. That certainly
sounds like the essence of design.

Unfortunately, it's a fairly involved process if you're starting from a
blank piece of paper. It's much easier (and much more common) to start
wiht a boat that behaves approximately the way you want, and then change
a few things about it to make it closer to your ideal. With some fairly
elementary design & engineering knowledge, you can do this and quantify
the expected results.


I'm not looking for instant plans.

Good- although IMHO the "instant boats" offer a wide range of
capabilities with a substantial benefit of easy building.


William R. Watt wrote:
the design of a racing dingy is quite a lot different from the design of
a cruising dingy which differs again from the design of a pleasure sailing
dingy.

Actually, they're all the same process. The only difference is applying
different priorities to obtain different results.


... I have not come across anything which covers all three.

The best text IMHO is Lars & Eliasson 'Principles of Sailing Yacht
Design' although the example given is a keelboat. They do explain all
the principles so that it is very easy to infer how to manipulate teh
specs of a boat being designed toward a desired goal.


racing dingy's are lightwight, uncomforatable, and festooned with
expensive "gofasts".

Baloney. Racing dinghies are dinghies that are raced. Is a Flying Scot
lightweight or uncomfortable?

If you're talking about comparing strictly by performance type rather
than usage, then you're still way wrong. A *fast* dinghy has a high sail
are -to- weight ratio, a high righting moment -to- weight ratio, and
usually rather flattish aft sections.

You cannot bolt on "gofast." You can design & build a rig to be
controllable & highly adjustable, and put on rigging to accomplish same.
It need not be expensive or complex. OTOH many "cruising" oriented boats
(not just dinghies) are unnecessarily difficult to handle because the
rigs are cumbersome in an attempt to be "strong" and they have
sacrificed too much controllability.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:18:46 -0400, DSK wrote:



You cannot bolt on "gofast." You can design & build a rig to be
controllable & highly adjustable, and put on rigging to accomplish same.
It need not be expensive or complex. OTOH many "cruising" oriented boats
(not just dinghies) are unnecessarily difficult to handle because the
rigs are cumbersome in an attempt to be "strong" and they have
sacrificed too much controllability.

Could you explain this, please. I undertand you mean that omthing in some
cruiser rigs is "to much" and contra productive.... How?

What to beware of?


Morgan

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:33:45 GMT, Morgan Ohlson
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:18:46 -0400, DSK wrote:



You cannot bolt on "gofast." You can design & build a rig to be
controllable & highly adjustable, and put on rigging to accomplish same.
It need not be expensive or complex. OTOH many "cruising" oriented boats
(not just dinghies) are unnecessarily difficult to handle because the
rigs are cumbersome in an attempt to be "strong" and they have
sacrificed too much controllability.

Could you explain this, please. I undertand you mean that omthing in some
cruiser rigs is "to much" and contra productive.... How?

What to beware of?

I expect DSK can answer for himself, but an obvious one is a stiff,
heavy mast that doesn't allow convenient flattening of the sail.

NB: The following is not intended to be a flame. Many of your
questions sound as if you are not familiar with small-boat sailing. If
you get some significant sailing under your belt in existing
production boats, you will have a much better idea of where you wanbt
to go, and how to get there.

If you are not racing, it is all the more important that you _like_
the behavior of the boat you are sailing. The only way to find out
what you like is to sail, a lot.




Rodney Myrvaagnes J36 Gjo/a


Does one child rape really change Strom Thurmond's lifetime record?
For better or worse?

Rodney Myrvaagnes ) writes:

If you are not racing, it is all the more important that you _like_
the behavior of the boat you are sailing. The only way to find out
what you like is to sail, a lot.

First time boatbuilders tend to like any boat they build regardless of
performance, and defend their ideosyncracies. Dingy cruisers tend to
ignore performance while praising versatility and other such advantages,
as evidenced by the many Potter's, Comapacs, Dovekies, and such. I suspect
many dingy cruising sailors are campers and wanderers first, and sailors
last. :)


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 20:28:13 -0400, Rodney Myrvaagnes wrote:

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:33:45 GMT, Morgan Ohlson
wrote:

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:18:46 -0400, DSK wrote:



You cannot bolt on "gofast." You can design & build a rig to be
controllable & highly adjustable, and put on rigging to accomplish same.
It need not be expensive or complex. OTOH many "cruising" oriented boats
(not just dinghies) are unnecessarily difficult to handle because the
rigs are cumbersome in an attempt to be "strong" and they have
sacrificed too much controllability.

Could you explain this, please. I undertand you mean that omthing in some
cruiser rigs is "to much" and contra productive.... How?

What to beware of?

I expect DSK can answer for himself, but an obvious one is a stiff,
heavy mast that doesn't allow convenient flattening of the sail.

NB: The following is not intended to be a flame. Many of your
questions sound as if you are not familiar with small-boat sailing.

The first problem is my "sail english". The second is that I havn'yt sailed
much reasently and the third is that
;o) may aim isn't relly to sail, more to transport.

This makes me probably more than usually foused on solving a line of
dilemmas as fast as possible without the big bucks.

The ultra lite sailer I intend doesn't even exist. The Wayfarer has a weight
of 80% more then my maximum. Still it is the closest manufactured
alternative so far.


If
you get some significant sailing under your belt in existing
production boats, you will have a much better idea of where you wanbt
to go, and how to get there.

As I say, I'm not into sailing for sailing, more like lake hiking.


If you are not racing, it is all the more important that you _like_
the behavior of the boat you are sailing. The only way to find out
what you like is to sail, a lot.

Not an alternative in practice.

But a reasonable suggestion.


Morgan O.

On 12 Oct 2004 11:49:08 GMT, William R. Watt wrote:

Rodney Myrvaagnes ) writes:

If you are not racing, it is all the more important that you _like_
the behavior of the boat you are sailing. The only way to find out
what you like is to sail, a lot.

First time boatbuilders tend to like any boat they build regardless of
performance, and defend their ideosyncracies.

Probably true.


Dingy cruisers tend to
ignore performance while praising versatility and other such advantages,
as evidenced by the many Potter's, Comapacs, Dovekies, and such.

Yes. Definitely praising versatility and other such advantages!


I suspect
many dingy cruising sailors are campers and wanderers first, and sailors
last. :)

In my case, yes...

But, if making The Big effort to design and buid a dinghy I will not let it
be bad in any sense since it would be a waist of time and money.

Versatile, balanced, stable, reliable, roomy...
....wich doesn't seem to outrule a fast under waterline-body.

2 x 40kg pivoting centerboards (for low D)
water ballast
outboard well
at the weight of maximum 70Kgs (empty 17½' x 6½ hull).

....some luxeries wich naturally will slow the vesell down, but not more then
nesessary.

From the beginning I thought of some skegs wich are now outruled. Only true
foiles under WL!!!


Morgan O.

... OTOH many "cruising" oriented boats
(not just dinghies) are unnecessarily difficult to handle because the
rigs are cumbersome in an attempt to be "strong" and they have
sacrificed too much controllability.

Morgan Ohlson wrote:
Could you explain this, please. I undertand you mean that omthing in some
cruiser rigs is "to much" and contra productive.... How?

What to beware of?

Things to be wary of-

mast too heavy and/or too stiff.

stays too heavy and/or placed where they limit sail travel

Fittings not installed, or too big, and/or placed for looks (or
strength)instead of where most effective

running rigging too heavy and not allowing proper travel

For example, a mainsheet that does not run easily because the blocks &
rope are too big for the sail, and not long enough because the bigger
rope makes a cumbersome mass in the cockpit... seen this many times!

Another example is the vang & downhaul on many classic small craft...
they tend to be undersized or placed where they are unobtrusive, instead
of being rigged where they have maximum effective control... result is
that the rig goes all floppy & baggy in gusts, making the boat
frustrating to sail in anything but ideal conditions.

Many years ago I was invited to join a bunch of people racing a fleet of
beautiful small classics (in fact they were Herrshoff gaffers). After
gladly accepting, I spent about 45 minutes re-rigging the halyards &
downhaul & improvising a vang. The result was that I had a great time
sailing the boat, also won three races and their only comment was, "Look
what you've done to that poor boat!" But that's the nature of sport,
you're supposed to spend your time & effort overcoming a bunch of
artificially imposed barriers ;)

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

William R. Watt wrote:
First time boatbuilders tend to like any boat they build regardless of
performance, and defend their ideosyncracies.

That's true. It's also why, in extreme cases, the builders are assumed
to be rather eccentric!


... Dingy cruisers tend to
ignore performance while praising versatility and other such advantages,
as evidenced by the many Potter's, Comapacs, Dovekies, and such. I suspect
many dingy cruising sailors are campers and wanderers first, and sailors
last. :)

Also very true. Anything is more fun if you can do it in a boat.
However, if you're going to be sailing anyway, why not make it fun?

Personally, I think sailing a boat is the most fun you can have with
your clothes on.

DSK

Morgan Ohlson wrote:

[...]

But, if making The Big effort to design and buid a dinghy I will not let
it be bad in any sense since it would be a waist of time and money.

Versatile, balanced, stable, reliable, roomy...
...wich doesn't seem to outrule a fast under waterline-body.

2 x 40kg pivoting centerboards (for low D)
water ballast
outboard well
at the weight of maximum 70Kgs (empty 17½' x 6½ hull).

...some luxeries wich naturally will slow the vesell down, but not more
then nesessary.

From the beginning I thought of some skegs wich are now outruled. Only
true foiles under WL!!!

Thos 70 kg's will not get you much boat. assuming a sg of 400 kg per m^3
those 70 kg will get you a stack of about 9 sheets of 6 mm ply. If you look
at other designs in this lengt range, you'll find that 9 sheets is pretty
low. But what are the ballasted boards and water ballast for? preventing
you to get on a plane? the ballasted boards will only do much good in a
capsized situation, but do you really want the boat to get get up again
after it has thrown you out? Sure it will lower the center of gravity
somewhat, but in the end it is only the vertical projection of the mass
that counts. moving your body around is much more effective then leting the
boat fall over.
Water ballast will make your boat more stable. At the cost of (at lot of)
space inside, it will save you from putting heavy ballast or floorboards
in. But it will probably prevent your boat from getting on a plane as it is
too heavy.

Maybe a catamaran style boat is what you are looking for? no need for water
ballast, can be built with less material (actually it is less boat anyway)
and will go faster than a dinghy, is more stable while still allowing a
narrow waterline.
Downside is that you will sit more exposed on it and that you will have much
less carrying capacity.

Some designers who's designs i like are Iain Ougthred (sp?) and John
Welshford. Youmight have a look at their designs first before designing
your own.

The Teal book is quite a good read, IMHO, but you should be able to find
some books focussed on smaller boats.

I designed and built (or better built & designed) my own folding dinghy, but
would go for plans next time. It takes too much time to think out the next
steps if you do not have a plan. and the cost is offset by the chance you
end up with a boat that is not what you thought it would be.

--
vriendelijke groeten/kind regards,

Jelle

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:41:59 +0200, Jelle wrote:

Morgan Ohlson wrote:

[...]

But, if making The Big effort to design and buid a dinghy I will not let
it be bad in any sense since it would be a waist of time and money.

Versatile, balanced, stable, reliable, roomy...
...wich doesn't seem to outrule a fast under waterline-body.

2 x 40kg pivoting centerboards (for low D)
water ballast
outboard well
at the weight of maximum 70Kgs (empty 17½' x 6½ hull).

...some luxeries wich naturally will slow the vesell down, but not more
then nesessary.

From the beginning I thought of some skegs wich are now outruled. Only
true foiles under WL!!!

Thos 70 kg's will not get you much boat.

**** off, please!

This kind of person is only around here to convinse me and you (other
builders) that we never should try to do any boat that wouldn't be
profitable for standard manufacturing.

The truth is that we can build boats far better compared to standard factory
modells. They blow their ****ing glass strands at random in a mould... and
talk about what is good and not. The fact is that the open camping cruiser
I'm on to would cost probably 10.000$ if built profesionally at my spec's.

I have met this kind of dooms day priests at some other forum before... and
they are only in it to bragg and to disincourage anyone trying to beat them
pro's. In one forum a person who claimed to be a pro stated that it was
impossible to build liter in GRP compared to plywood...

They have the idea that all hombuild always must look like a home built from
a kilometer or two.

Plywood is a good material, but everything else pro's like to keep for
themselves....

Arrrghhhh.....
Now I will take hot bath to relax from the pessimist salesman.

Greetings to all you serious home designers and builders.


Morgan O.
Former engineer in the aircraft industry.

Morgan Ohlson wrote:

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:41:59 +0200, Jelle wrote:

Morgan Ohlson wrote:

[...]

But, if making The Big effort to design and buid a dinghy I will not let
it be bad in any sense since it would be a waist of time and money.

Versatile, balanced, stable, reliable, roomy...
...wich doesn't seem to outrule a fast under waterline-body.

2 x 40kg pivoting centerboards (for low D)
water ballast
outboard well
at the weight of maximum 70Kgs (empty 17½' x 6½ hull).

...some luxeries wich naturally will slow the vesell down, but not more
then nesessary.

From the beginning I thought of some skegs wich are now outruled. Only
true foiles under WL!!!

Thos 70 kg's will not get you much boat.

**** off, please!

Usenet is not a nice place, but no need for you to make it more friendly.
You seem to forget that I spent time to answer your questions with some of
my experience, and asking nothing in return. Please accept that people on
usenet will seem/act a bit belingerent, just as we accept you acting like a
prick...

This kind of person is only around here to convinse me and you (other
builders) that we never should try to do any boat that wouldn't be
profitable for standard manufacturing.

Right. But where did i tell you to use standard manufacturing techniques? If
you have the skill to succesfully make a carbon/glass epoxy boat: fine go
ahead, and let us know of your successes. Most novice boatbuilders have
more luck with plywood, because it is relatively light and easy to work
with.

The truth is that we can build boats far better compared to standard
factory modells. They blow their ****ing glass strands at random in a
mould... and talk about what is good and not. The fact is that the open
camping cruiser I'm on to would cost probably 10.000$ if built
profesionally at my spec's.

So? Manufacturing boats is a though job? manual labour is expensive? As a
(former?) aircraft engineer, you must be used to getting a heafty hourly
wage. Now factor in normal overhead expenses and the like, what would your
boat cost?

I have met this kind of dooms day priests at some other forum before...
and they are only in it to bragg and to disincourage anyone trying to beat
them pro's. In one forum a person who claimed to be a pro stated that it
was impossible to build liter in GRP compared to plywood...

I am no pro, don't claim to be anything other an amateur. If you can make a
Glass reinforced boat that is lighter than a plywood boat of the same
strenght: go right ahead. Myself I will not try that route, not because I
don't believe your claim, but because you need to build a mould first, and
possibly need other vacuum kit as well. It is just too messy. I don't think
it is worth that much effort.

The book that you have not read by John Teal list GPR just a small rung
above building in steel, and I have a tendency to believe him more than
you.

They have the idea that all hombuild always must look like a home built
from a kilometer or two.

I can think for myself, and hopefully so can you. But you don't need to
imagine your ideas in my head, that only makes life more difficult.

Plywood is a good material, but everything else pro's like to keep for
themselves....

I would venture that more epoxy is sold to homebuilders than to professional
boatbuilders. (as pro's would go for cheaper polyester resins)

Arrrghhhh.....
Now I will take hot bath to relax from the pessimist salesman.

Greetings to all you serious home designers and builders.


Morgan O.
Former engineer in the aircraft industry.
And a lot of hands on experience with GPR in that industry I presume?

--
vriendelijke groeten/kind regards,

Jelle

begin msblaster.pif

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 21:28:12 +0200, Jelle wrote:

Morgan Ohlson wrote:

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:41:59 +0200, Jelle wrote:

Morgan Ohlson wrote:

Morgan O.
Former engineer in the aircraft industry.
And a lot of hands on experience with GPR in that industry I presume?

Yes, in the department I worked everybody, except for adminstrators worked
with some kind of composites. At that time we didn't work with for instance
Spectra, but that I did later on...

Perhaps could understand that there is basicly no difference at all in
building a graphite mast or a GRP mast...

Basicly there are no difference between vacuume or non-vacuum processes
either.... only the resulting percentage of voids.


Morgan O.

Morgan Ohlson wrote:
[...]
Yes, in the department I worked everybody, except for adminstrators worked
with some kind of composites. At that time we didn't work with for
instance Spectra, but that I did later on...

Mind if I ask what your age is? Spectra/kevlar/aramide etc have been around
for about 10 ? years and you are a former aircraft engineer (saab?)... =

Perhaps could understand that there is basicly no difference at all in
building a graphite mast or a GRP mast...
sure. but the site you mentioned was not detailing a very good grp mast was
it?

Basicly there are no difference between vacuume or non-vacuum processes
either.... only the resulting percentage of voids.
and the excess resin? and the shape and surface? I am not an expert, but I
can imagine these things will be much easier if you make a mold. And if you
have the mold, why not use a vacuum on it. after all, most carpenters clamp
their joints when they are glueing it, and this is 'just' glueing a bunch
of fibres together.



Morgan O.

--
vriendelijke groeten/kind regards,

Jelle

begin thereisnothinghere.exe

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:52:28 +0200, Jelle wrote:

Morgan Ohlson wrote:
[...]

and the excess resin?

Can easily be controlled with peel plies.


Morgan O.