Here in Oregon, they differentiate between 'architect' (no PE required) and
'engineer'. Boat design still falls under 'architect'. The State guys get
all pinch-faced and whiney when you ask them about it...you can tell there's
pressure to get licensing onto boat design. Knowing Oregon, they'll put a
Grey Davis TAX on it too.

Brian


"Michael Porter" wrote in message
...
"Brian D" wrote:


I'd rank the Landing School (if you can afford a year off) and Westlawn
higher. Westlawn (now run by Dave Gerr) is now associated with the
American
Boat and Yacht Council (ABYC) and was previously associated with the
National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA) ...two huge greats in
the
boat industry.
snip I agree

Two states now require the naval architecture PE. Others may follow.

Actually, almost all states do -- now that there is a PE exam, naval
arch falls under the def of engineering, which is quite broad in most
states. Maine has just passed a law exempting work on boats under
200', RI (and maybe one other state) explicitly exempts naval arch,


I would not want to be starting out now without an engineering degree.

Cheers,

Michael Porter

Michael Porter Naval Architect / Boatbuilder
mporter at mp-marine dot com
www.mp-marine.com

While I agree that a background in engineering is a must to design yachts,
the PE requirement is completely stupid.
A PE license does not show that you are able to design boats. In addition to
a good engineering base, a yacht designer must qualify in two other fields:
extensive experience at sea and experience in boat building.
I have seen monstruosities designed by PE's while most beautiful and
efficient boats were designed by people without a PE.
The licensing requirement would have very negative effects on yacht design,
on new designs availabilty and price, on boats prices and on boating in
general.
Most of the people who design boats today, while very able, do not have a
PE. They may be mechanical engineers, architects or as in my case, have
degrees in chemistry and physics. Some may just be autodidacts and there is
nothing wrong with that.
The requirements of today's designs make the selection automatic: you will
not get a job as a yacht designer if you can not do your basic calculations.
The reason for that licensing requirement was the move of many US ship
building activities to other parts of the world. Large ship naval architects
were looking for work and discovered yacht design. A licensing requirement
would have them "supervise" the work of real yacht designers but the PE's
would charge for their stamp of approval thereby increasing the costs of
designing new boats and almost certainly killing creativity. They just want
their cut . . .
I have no immediate concerns because I don't design large yachts but
tomorrow, the requirement may extend to the type of boat I design, less than
65'.

I became a member of the SNAME at a time when membership required two senior
fellows a sponsors. That was a sufficient guarantee of expertise: work a few
years for another designer and then for a yacht manufacturer and they'll
decide waht you are worth.
An exam during which I would have to calculate the efficiency of a steam
engine will not prove that I am able to design a yacht.
No school or diploma will ever give you all what is needed to become a good
yacht designer. To take a beating in a mean storm and hands on boat building
experience are absolutely necessary but not taught in schools.
If one day I need the help of a PE, I will ask for it. I worked with an
excellent one at James Krogen. I don't think that I would get a commission
to design a larger yacht without setting up such a collaboration but let's
not make it a blanket requirement. It would kill our profession.


--
Jacques
http://www.bateau.com

"Brian D" wrote in message
news:9Agfb.670589$Ho3.141187@sccrnsc03...
Here in Oregon, they differentiate between 'architect' (no PE required)
and
'engineer'. Boat design still falls under 'architect'. The State guys
get
all pinch-faced and whiney when you ask them about it...you can tell
there's
pressure to get licensing onto boat design. Knowing Oregon, they'll put a
Grey Davis TAX on it too.

Brian


"Michael Porter" wrote in message
...
"Brian D" wrote:


I'd rank the Landing School (if you can afford a year off) and
Westlawn
higher. Westlawn (now run by Dave Gerr) is now associated with the
American
Boat and Yacht Council (ABYC) and was previously associated with the
National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA) ...two huge greats in
the
boat industry.
snip I agree

Two states now require the naval architecture PE. Others may follow.

Actually, almost all states do -- now that there is a PE exam, naval
arch falls under the def of engineering, which is quite broad in most
states. Maine has just passed a law exempting work on boats under
200', RI (and maybe one other state) explicitly exempts naval arch,


I would not want to be starting out now without an engineering degree.

Cheers,

Michael Porter

Michael Porter Naval Architect / Boatbuilder
mporter at mp-marine dot com
www.mp-marine.com

Hi

"Jacques Mertens" skrev i en meddelelse
.. .

Snip
I have seen monstruosities designed by PE's while most beautiful and
efficient boats were designed by people without a PE.

But it never harmed a good design, that the one making the plans can do just a
bit math.

P.C.

Per, read the whole post before responding.
I agree with you.


--
Jacques
http://www.bateau.com

"P.C." wrote in message
k...
Hi

"Jacques Mertens" skrev i en meddelelse
.. .

Snip
I have seen monstruosities designed by PE's while most beautiful and
efficient boats were designed by people without a PE.

But it never harmed a good design, that the one making the plans can do
just a
bit math.

P.C.

"Jacques Mertens" wrote in message ...
Per, read the whole post before responding.
I agree with you.


--
Jacques
http://www.bateau.com

Just curious… And I ask this in all seriousness, not to start a war.
What about guys like me? Small boat builder and amateur designer (very
amateur), do we have a place here, or would you exclude us from the
mix as organizations such as SNAME would, if I am reading their
"cannon" correctly?
Scotty from SmallBoats.com


"P.C." wrote in message
k...
Hi

"Jacques Mertens" skrev i en meddelelse
.. .

Snip
I have seen monstruosities designed by PE's while most beautiful and
efficient boats were designed by people without a PE.

But it never harmed a good design, that the one making the plans can do
just a
bit math.

P.C.

(Backyard Renegade) lifted the trapdoor, peered
around and wrote:

Just curious… And I ask this in all seriousness, not to start a war.
What about guys like me? Small boat builder and amateur designer (very
amateur), do we have a place here, or would you exclude us from the
mix as organizations such as SNAME would, if I am reading their
"cannon" correctly?
Scotty from SmallBoats.com

I am new here too ... but here is some of what I know of Usenet:

No one can *exclude* you! This forum is not moderated, you are entirely
free to post what you want. Whether or not you get useful replies, depends
on the prescence of like-minded posters.

All newsgroups attract the "opinionated" ... and this is not necessarily a
bad thing After all, opinion is often just what is being sought, and you
really would benefit from the following: Take what you need, and leave the
rest. If you can also contribute, that helps.

I have no idea who SNAME are, but as the old saying *sort of* goes:

If they wanted me, I probably wouldn't want to join ... lmao

Don't ever lose your sense of humour on Usenet, that way lies the asylum

steveb
---
Nervous breakdowns are hereditory.
We get them from our children
---

Steve:

If I read Scotty's post correctly, I think he is referring to the general
omission of "hobbyist" level sources for training in yacht design, rather
than anything regarding newsgroups.

In reply to Scotty (assuming I read his question correctly), I guess you
need to put this in context. SNAME (The Society of Naval Architects and
Marine Engineers) and other professional societies cater to professionals.
Educating the hobbyist is just not part of their mandate. We pay a sizable
annual membership fee (something like $150/year) for the services that they
provide. So it is not surprising that you'll find very little from them.

Let me offer some thoughts based on my requirements as an instructor of an
Intro to Naval Architecture class I teach that the Univ of New Hampshire. I
have a semester to introduce the subject to mechanical engineering seniors
(it is a technical elective class). I use "Naval Architecture for Non-Naval
Architects" as a text (published by SNAME), along with information gleaned
from other naval architects and writers (much of which you can find in trade
magazines such as Professional Boatbuilder). (In particular, look for Dudley
Dawson's article "Once Around the Design Spiral", from Professional
Boatbuilder Oct/Nov 1997.) For students who want to try developing lines, I
point them first to Greg Carlson's small freeware chine hull program. Its
not without its limitations and holes, but it is a pretty nice little tool -
with almost no learning curve. And they can punch out DXF files of shell
plates and bulkheads to build small models. By the time they are done, they
will have completed a small design project and write a tech paper on a naval
architecture subject of their choice. Certainly not a 4-year program in
naval architecture, but enough to get their feet wet.

Regards,

Don

Donald M. MacPherson
VP Technical Director
HydroComp, Inc.
http://www.hydrocompinc.com




"steveb" wrote in message
...
(Backyard Renegade) lifted the trapdoor, peered
around and wrote:

Just curious. And I ask this in all seriousness, not to start a war.
What about guys like me? Small boat builder and amateur designer (very
amateur), do we have a place here, or would you exclude us from the
mix as organizations such as SNAME would, if I am reading their
"cannon" correctly?
Scotty from SmallBoats.com

I am new here too ... but here is some of what I know of Usenet:

No one can *exclude* you! This forum is not moderated, you are entirely
free to post what you want. Whether or not you get useful replies, depends
on the prescence of like-minded posters.

All newsgroups attract the "opinionated" ... and this is not necessarily a
bad thing After all, opinion is often just what is being sought, and
you
really would benefit from the following: Take what you need, and leave the
rest. If you can also contribute, that helps.

I have no idea who SNAME are, but as the old saying *sort of* goes:

If they wanted me, I probably wouldn't want to join ... lmao

Don't ever lose your sense of humour on Usenet, that way lies the asylum


steveb
---
Nervous breakdowns are hereditory.
We get them from our children
---

"Backyard Renegade" wrote in message
om...


Just curious. And I ask this in all seriousness, not to start a war.
What about guys like me? Small boat builder and amateur designer (very
amateur), do we have a place here, or would you exclude us from the
mix as organizations such as SNAME would, if I am reading their
"cannon" correctly?
Scotty from SmallBoats.com


There is a lot of creativity in amateur designers and I would hate to see it
killed by some regulations.
I don't say that one should belong to the SNAME, I am in favor of leaving
the profession or hobby wide open.
Since you build your own boats, you know your limits and whatever plan you
produce will be buildable and float right side up.
Once you start selling plans, you have a duty to your builders but there is
no need for an oversight or for regulations. Natural selection will work
quickly and that is the way it should be.

"Jacques Mertens" wrote in message ...
"Backyard Renegade" wrote in message
om...


Just curious. And I ask this in all seriousness, not to start a war.
What about guys like me? Small boat builder and amateur designer (very
amateur), do we have a place here, or would you exclude us from the
mix as organizations such as SNAME would, if I am reading their
"cannon" correctly?
Scotty from SmallBoats.com


There is a lot of creativity in amateur designers and I would hate to see it
killed by some regulations.
I don't say that one should belong to the SNAME, I am in favor of leaving
the profession or hobby wide open.
Since you build your own boats, you know your limits and whatever plan you
produce will be buildable and float right side up.
Once you start selling plans, you have a duty to your builders but there is
no need for an oversight or for regulations. Natural selection will work
quickly and that is the way it should be.


Yes, that is what I was getting to. Natural selection, versus
creativity. Hopefully this will pan out so we don't end up like
builders in the UK where an operation like mine is almost impossible.
At the same time, I see guys drawing quick copies of old designs in
CAD programs and selling or giving them away, some not even addressing
basic safety rules and even flotation. I guess, I am probably nuts
here but I think either a little more regulation, or at least
enforcement of current regulation could stop a disaster that could
lead to a knee jerk reaction. I would not even be against say,
submitting plans to a group (even if there were a small fee) for
endorsement. Possibly a group like SNAME, but they would have to
renounce their exclusionary policies first. For instance, iirc, you
can go to all the schools, pay your dues for years at SNAME, then ****
someone off and get voted right out of their org by a 70% majority. If
they were the governing body, a gruff old troublemaker like myself
could be put right out of a job/livelihood, and I did not see any
other guidelines as to what type of action could initiate this vote.
Of course, the USCG may not be the ones to do it either the way they
cater to the corporate manufacturers, and of course with the endless
red tape and cover your ass salary workers, new ideas would never get
out of the box like in the UK where the little guys just can't
operate.
I know now, by the posts to this thread that there is a general cut
off at 200 feet, maybe with the recent changes in the industry, and
new technology that allow anyone to build a boat they should consider
bringing it down to 20 feet or at least enforce the USCG regs for
smaller boats as they are now. Last season a guy called me and told me
that he was with a company that had been hired by the USCG to inspect
small builders operations to see that they were following the rules.
He very well could have been just another jamoka that wanted a free
tour of my shop and some boatbuilding lessons but I heard him out. He
told me that he would be coming over to look at my op in about a week.
I asked him if he had received a complaint or otherwise had cause to
believe that I was not following the regulations, he answered no. I
told him to come on over and bring a search warrant, or else shove it
up his butt and go bother someone else, in the middle of summer, I had
no time for him. If this is enforcement, we got a problem. Anyway,
like I said, I see a lot of quick CAD Plan hawkers on the net, and
lot's of homemade boats on the water not in compliance with flotation,
generally accepted construction standards, improper documentation and
a host of other things. I have even seen this while getting my own
boats inspected, I keep my mouth shut there though. I know it would be
almost impossible to regulate the builders, but waiting for something
terrible to happen so "natural selection" (extreme litigation) put the
idiots out of business does not seem the way to go either. Joe Schmo
can not build a train and or an auto and put it on the road or the
track, why should a boat be any different?
Just thinking out loud, Scotty from, well, you know…

I hear what you're saying, and most of what you say is why the process of
making the PE required will be slow. But in spite of those make-sense
economics, several states have already done it, including the State of
Washington, where they have a very large boat design and manufacturing
industry. Precedents like these will make the PE trend tough to fight. So
will litigation against boat designers and the companies that manufacture
the boats. Liability insurance is not bad now, usually low cost and based
on last year's sales, but if the boat industry follows in the tracks of
others in this country, then that insurance will grow too expensive and
licensing will become required in order to obtain it. Write it down and
watch. None of us like it and most of us would disagree with the trend
....until you get your own PE and then you have the advantage that is.

As far as the issue of experience goes, I have to agree...I've watched
businesses go out of business when run by some MIT MBA with no real-life
experience while others that are run by people that worked their way up
through the ranks thrive. Experience is not something you can buy. In the
mean time, I would still encourage those interested in the yacht design
career path to pursue a PE license, even if not yet required for small
craft. A side benefit to such an individual is that he or she will have
more choice about what direction their career takes. Small craft
design/sales is not high income, but expensive or high-end custom work can
pay better. May as well line up your credentials and start earning
experience.

Brian


"Jacques Mertens" wrote in message
.. .
While I agree that a background in engineering is a must to design yachts,
the PE requirement is completely stupid.
A PE license does not show that you are able to design boats. In addition
to
a good engineering base, a yacht designer must qualify in two other
fields:
extensive experience at sea and experience in boat building.
I have seen monstruosities designed by PE's while most beautiful and
efficient boats were designed by people without a PE.
The licensing requirement would have very negative effects on yacht
design,
on new designs availabilty and price, on boats prices and on boating in
general.
Most of the people who design boats today, while very able, do not have a
PE. They may be mechanical engineers, architects or as in my case, have
degrees in chemistry and physics. Some may just be autodidacts and there
is
nothing wrong with that.
The requirements of today's designs make the selection automatic: you will
not get a job as a yacht designer if you can not do your basic
calculations.
The reason for that licensing requirement was the move of many US ship
building activities to other parts of the world. Large ship naval
architects
were looking for work and discovered yacht design. A licensing requirement
would have them "supervise" the work of real yacht designers but the PE's
would charge for their stamp of approval thereby increasing the costs of
designing new boats and almost certainly killing creativity. They just
want
their cut . . .
I have no immediate concerns because I don't design large yachts but
tomorrow, the requirement may extend to the type of boat I design, less
than
65'.

I became a member of the SNAME at a time when membership required two
senior
fellows a sponsors. That was a sufficient guarantee of expertise: work a
few
years for another designer and then for a yacht manufacturer and they'll
decide waht you are worth.
An exam during which I would have to calculate the efficiency of a steam
engine will not prove that I am able to design a yacht.
No school or diploma will ever give you all what is needed to become a
good
yacht designer. To take a beating in a mean storm and hands on boat
building
experience are absolutely necessary but not taught in schools.
If one day I need the help of a PE, I will ask for it. I worked with an
excellent one at James Krogen. I don't think that I would get a commission
to design a larger yacht without setting up such a collaboration but let's
not make it a blanket requirement. It would kill our profession.


--
Jacques
http://www.bateau.com

"Brian D" wrote in message
news:9Agfb.670589$Ho3.141187@sccrnsc03...
Here in Oregon, they differentiate between 'architect' (no PE required)
and
'engineer'. Boat design still falls under 'architect'. The State guys
get
all pinch-faced and whiney when you ask them about it...you can tell
there's
pressure to get licensing onto boat design. Knowing Oregon, they'll put
a
Grey Davis TAX on it too.

Brian


"Michael Porter" wrote in message
...
"Brian D" wrote:


I'd rank the Landing School (if you can afford a year off) and
Westlawn
higher. Westlawn (now run by Dave Gerr) is now associated with the
American
Boat and Yacht Council (ABYC) and was previously associated with the
National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA) ...two huge greats
in
the
boat industry.
snip I agree

Two states now require the naval architecture PE. Others may
follow.

Actually, almost all states do -- now that there is a PE exam, naval
arch falls under the def of engineering, which is quite broad in most
states. Maine has just passed a law exempting work on boats under
200', RI (and maybe one other state) explicitly exempts naval arch,


I would not want to be starting out now without an engineering degree.

Cheers,

Michael Porter

Michael Porter Naval Architect / Boatbuilder
mporter at mp-marine dot com
www.mp-marine.com