|
Yacht Design School
I'm about to start learning in " MacNaughton Yacht Design School "
can you give me some information to help me decide taking it or not thanks dan |
Yacht Design School
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. That not only holds a lot of weight in industry, but also in courts should you face legal action. MacNaughton is more for the self-run shop or custom design kind of guy while these others are more for those that want to work in the rest of the industry. Don't let that $50 entry fee entice you in until you've decided exactly what you're going to do with your life and career. Note also that there is ongoing pressure from feds and states to require a Professional Engineer (PE) license. That would require a degree in engineering, passing the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) test, putting in 4 years of experience, then taking the PE. It requires a bunch of recommendation letters and appropriate training and experience. This is normal for engineers if they want to do consulting or have their work insured or bonded. HOWEVER, the boat design/manufacturing industry is strongly against this move. A very significant portion of the boat companies would not be able to do business legally if all this comes to pass. Two states now require the naval architecture PE. Others may follow. If you want to play the safest bet, then go to school and get a degree in mechanical engineering followed by a highly respected yacht design school -or- get a degree in naval architecture (U. of Mich. etc). Follow this by taking the FE, putting in some time, joining SNAME and taking their PE preparation training, then getting your naval architecture PE. My personal bet is that all this will become necessary before too long. Why? Litigation. Lawsuits. Due diligence. I think the naval architecture/boat industry is going to be led down this track by a nose ring. Just my 2-bits. It's happened to all other technically based industries already ... Good luck. If you're serious, then do it seriously. Brian -- My boat project: http://www.advantagecomposites.com/tongass "Dany" wrote in message ... I'm about to start learning in " MacNaughton Yacht Design School " can you give me some information to help me decide taking it or not thanks dan |
Yacht Design School
"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 |
Yacht Design School
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 |
Yacht Design School
I have a Bsc in mechanical eng and I wanted to learn more about small craft
design (not only yachts) the price diefference between westlawn and MacNaughton is very big that the reason I wanted to get some more information about MacNaughton. thanks dan "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 |
Yacht Design School
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 |
Yacht Design School
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. |
Yacht Design School
I think the price difference probably accurately reflects the difference in
industry acceptance. Just my guess. Westlawn is accredited too. But it sounds like you're in great position to make the best of it. Are you thinking of doing design as a career? Or for personal interest or lighter weight efforts...if you're not trying to sell your resume to the big names, then MacNaughton would probably do. Brian "Dany" wrote in message ... I have a Bsc in mechanical eng and I wanted to learn more about small craft design (not only yachts) the price diefference between westlawn and MacNaughton is very big that the reason I wanted to get some more information about MacNaughton. thanks dan "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 |
Yacht Design School
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 |
Yacht Design School
Brian D wrote:
snip If you want to play the safest bet, then go to school and get a degree in mechanical engineering followed by a highly respected yacht design school -or- get a degree in naval architecture (U. of Mich. etc). Follow this by taking the FE, putting in some time, joining SNAME and taking their PE preparation training, then getting your naval architecture PE. snip As far as I know, the only places in the U.S. to get an undergraduate degree in naval architecture are Webb Institute (in NY), U Michigan, U of New Orleans, and the U.S. Naval Academy. MIT, U Mich, and Webb have graduate programs. I think all the undergraduate programs are actually naval architecture AND marine engineering. The various state merchant marine academys generally offer a degree in marine engineering that concentrates on machinery and systems with little or no exposure to stability, arrangements, hydrodynamics, or structures. When I was at Webb there was no academic coverage of recreational boats, although a far amount of interest among the students (and a very active racing program). The theory is of course all the same, but the examples and practical experience are on commercial and military ships. A 120' offshore tug was the smallest ship I remember. There were some small boat thesis topics senior year. Some of the students also found work in small boat design offices during summer breaks or winter work terms. At least one worked for free in order to get the experience. If a young(ish) person really wanted to get into small boat design, I'd go for the academic degree and work in a boatyard or on the commissioning crew of a new boat dealer during the first summer, and find employment in small boat design firms during the remaining summers as well as the winter if the break is long enough. Try to get in with Sparkman & Stephens for one of those work terms. Take the EIT Fundamentals of Engineering exam immediately on graduation; it is really hard to crank back up for it later. Start collecting material for a library early: look for design and installation guidance for engines and other systems, follow the publications and activities of the SNAME Small Craft Committee (one of my roommates chairs the sailing craft sub-committee), join the Royal Institution of Naval Architects and follow their small craft group (they recently started publishing journal of small craft technology), and follow boatdesign.net. dave B.S. Naval Architecture & Marine Engineering '82 no longer in the industry -- ----- news_bucket e-mail address goes to a blackhole. Sorry. Send e-mail to "respond" at the same domain. |
Yacht Design School
Couple of minor points .. - I think Berkeley has an NA program now, probably NA & ME as you mentioned ....been awhile since I looked - The E.I.T. (Engineer In Training) is now called the F.E. (Fundamentals of Engineering). As you mention, best taken about a month after you graduate (or less), e.g. long enough to do tons of cram sessions immediately prior to the (day long PITA) test. Glad I got it done long ago (1987). May I (we) ask why you are no longer in the industry? If I calculate right, you're either independently wealthy from the loads of cash you made in the boat world and retired early, or you've moved on to another type of career? Hmmm? I'm betting you're rich now ... ;) Brian -- My boat project: http://www.advantagecomposites.com/tongass "Dave Skolnick" wrote in message news:oYEfb.8825$N94.1308@lakeread02... Brian D wrote: snip If you want to play the safest bet, then go to school and get a degree in mechanical engineering followed by a highly respected yacht design school -or- get a degree in naval architecture (U. of Mich. etc). Follow this by taking the FE, putting in some time, joining SNAME and taking their PE preparation training, then getting your naval architecture PE. snip As far as I know, the only places in the U.S. to get an undergraduate degree in naval architecture are Webb Institute (in NY), U Michigan, U of New Orleans, and the U.S. Naval Academy. MIT, U Mich, and Webb have graduate programs. I think all the undergraduate programs are actually naval architecture AND marine engineering. The various state merchant marine academys generally offer a degree in marine engineering that concentrates on machinery and systems with little or no exposure to stability, arrangements, hydrodynamics, or structures. When I was at Webb there was no academic coverage of recreational boats, although a far amount of interest among the students (and a very active racing program). The theory is of course all the same, but the examples and practical experience are on commercial and military ships. A 120' offshore tug was the smallest ship I remember. There were some small boat thesis topics senior year. Some of the students also found work in small boat design offices during summer breaks or winter work terms. At least one worked for free in order to get the experience. If a young(ish) person really wanted to get into small boat design, I'd go for the academic degree and work in a boatyard or on the commissioning crew of a new boat dealer during the first summer, and find employment in small boat design firms during the remaining summers as well as the winter if the break is long enough. Try to get in with Sparkman & Stephens for one of those work terms. Take the EIT Fundamentals of Engineering exam immediately on graduation; it is really hard to crank back up for it later. Start collecting material for a library early: look for design and installation guidance for engines and other systems, follow the publications and activities of the SNAME Small Craft Committee (one of my roommates chairs the sailing craft sub-committee), join the Royal Institution of Naval Architects and follow their small craft group (they recently started publishing journal of small craft technology), and follow boatdesign.net. dave B.S. Naval Architecture & Marine Engineering '82 no longer in the industry -- ----- news_bucket e-mail address goes to a blackhole. Sorry. Send e-mail to "respond" at the same domain. |
Yacht Design School
Brian D wrote:
May I (we) ask why you are no longer in the industry? If I calculate right, you're either independently wealthy from the loads of cash you made in the boat world and retired early, or you've moved on to another type of career? Hmmm? I'm betting you're rich now ... ;) Ha! I looked around and realized that shipbuilding was not a growth industry. In the late 80's, even the Reagan defense build-up didn't result in much hope for design work: the Navy was building more each class, not more classes. The only companies consolidating faster than shipyards were design firms. Commercial design and shipbuilding was moving offshore. Lockheed Shipyard was bidding on municipal water and sewer projects to keep the doors open. So I managed a career shift over to defense and security, did some time at a federal agency, and returned to private industry. At least I'm working. Work keeps me in house, food, and boat-bucks, but I'm certainly not rich. dave -- ----- news_bucket e-mail address goes to a blackhole. Sorry. Send e-mail to "respond" at the same domain. |
Yacht Design School
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. |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
"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. |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
|
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
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 --- |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
"D MacPherson" lifted the
trapdoor, peered around and wrote: 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. You may be right, but I read that he was asking if he would be discouraged from posting "here" ie. in this ng, otherwise the reference to "flames" doesn't make much sense. Oh well, I'm sure he will say :) steveb |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
steveb (another one?) says:
You may be right, but I read that he was asking if he would be discouraged from posting "here" ie. in this ng, otherwise the reference to "flames" doesn't make much sense. Oh well, I'm sure he will say :) Actually, I think what Scotty is referring ot is the SNAME-backed desire for all designers (even us small-boat guys) to have a PE tacked to the many initials after our neames. My feeling is that if you have the education to be accepted into SNAME, then you should be qualified to design a boat, or engineer aboat (sys he quickly to avoid ****ing off the Marine Engineering crowd). If not , then SNAME has seriously lowered the gate in terms of membership qualifications. In the rest of the world, if you are qualified to join the professional body of you chosen field as a full member, then you are qualified to do the work, otherwise they would not let you in. Has anyone seen a member of the American Medical Assoc. who is not a doctor? Steve Stephen C. Baker - Yacht Designer http://members.aol.com/SailDesign/pr...cbweb/home.htm |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
steveb wrote in message . ..
"D MacPherson" lifted the trapdoor, peered around and wrote: 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. You may be right, but I read that he was asking if he would be discouraged from posting "here" ie. in this ng, otherwise the reference to "flames" doesn't make much sense. Oh well, I'm sure he will say :) steveb What I am really getting to I think is what as Marine Architects, and Marine Engineers, PE's etc. do you think of someone like myself building, designing, and even selling plans for a few small boats? Keeping in mind that I do abide by USCG regs and test my boats, full size, on the water, before I expose the public to them. If I am reading correctly, SNAME members should not deal with the likes of me at all. I am not trying to make this thread about just SNAME, I was actually hoping to hear from Jaques' and other schooled folks in the business. Scotty |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
Now now ...let's all just be friends. ;) For those that don't know, SNAME is the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. The PE is the new Naval Architecture Professional Engineer license (requires engineering degree, followed by passing the FE (Fundamentals of Engineering) exam, followed by 4+ years of experience (unless they changed the rules recently), then finally the passing of the PE exam). Note that this is a STATE GOVERNMENT issue, not a Federal issue. That means different states will write different rules about what the PE is required for, if anything at all. Most states do NOT require it. States that DO require it don't enforce it for small craft, which is (I believe) defined to 200' and less. Again, those rules will vary by the state, so take this as general knowledge only. For all those people doing small craft design, like even Scotty (I disagree on his self-ordained 'amateur' rating), the bottom line in the above text is that it DOES NOT APPLY to you. If you are pursuing a career in which you may DESIGN one or more aspects of ships 200' and up, then it applies in the states that decided to make it apply. The 200' rule is different by state. Can't remember which, but one of them went as short as 60', another 120'. Getting your PE is just a bit of CYA so you can continue your work unheeded should the rules change. This is more important if you are contracting your work to others, since you probably can't get liability insurance without it if the state you operate out of requires the license. MOST OFTEN, when you work for someone else or some other company, no PE is required. Companies often have NOBODY with a PE, but are self-insuring or can obtain insurance anyway (more difficult if you are working alone.) Now, on to Scotty's question ...what does SNAME think of people like him? Can't speak for the bylaws, but SNAME has tons and tons of publications that apply to small craft. Maybe not quite as small as Scotty's typical boat, but the theory applies anyway. Sounds open minded to me, except that SNAME has entrance requirements for joining. One of the reasons for joining is so that you can contribute. I expect that is the primary reason that they have entrance requirements, like most professional organizations. I'm pretty sure they'll sell the documents to anybody but they cost more if you are not a member. Being a member requires a couple of recommendation letters and at least being enrolled in a yacht design or naval architecture school, or having graduated from one. ...oh, and money of course. The money gets you periodicals and discount rates on literature ..just like most professional organizations. BTW, comments about SNAME also apply to the American Boat and Yacht Council (ABYC) I believe. Between these two organizations, you have so much good information to read that it's unlikely that you'll ever cover it all, in this lifetime anyway. Join if you can, buy docs you want/need otherwise. Brian "Backyard Renegade" wrote in message m... steveb wrote in message . .. "D MacPherson" lifted the trapdoor, peered around and wrote: 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. You may be right, but I read that he was asking if he would be discouraged from posting "here" ie. in this ng, otherwise the reference to "flames" doesn't make much sense. Oh well, I'm sure he will say :) steveb What I am really getting to I think is what as Marine Architects, and Marine Engineers, PE's etc. do you think of someone like myself building, designing, and even selling plans for a few small boats? Keeping in mind that I do abide by USCG regs and test my boats, full size, on the water, before I expose the public to them. If I am reading correctly, SNAME members should not deal with the likes of me at all. I am not trying to make this thread about just SNAME, I was actually hoping to hear from Jaques' and other schooled folks in the business. Scotty |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
"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. |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
"D MacPherson" wrote in message . ..
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. I understand that completely, and find that fair enough. I should note that I am quickly grandfathering into being qualified to join SNAME, and when the time comes, I will attempt to do so. I do want access to this information too, I have no doubt as to its value as an organization. I am not sure I would like them to be the regulating organization for all manufacturers. 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 --- |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
"D MacPherson" wrote in message . ..
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 Yes, that is a good program. I have been drawing out a personal skiff (20 feet) for about a year now and used that program quite a bit along the way. It did give me a pretty good feel for not only how my boat would "work", but also gave me a lot of direction as to where I wanted the hull design to go and what I was looking for. Using the calculations available there I have designed the hull, and the interior including placement of components and taking into account crew, equipment and such. After a year, I am almost ready to start cutting lumber, of course I did have one more thing to do. Last week I sent it off to a SNAME/ABYC etc. professional designer who I am hiring to make sure everything is right, and if not to redesign it to give me the tool I need for my boating purposes. Scotty |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
"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… |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
I'm not sure current regulations apply to people selling plans and to home
builders. With most types of plans, like houses and other structures for example, it is "up to the builder to modify as necessary to fit local regulations and ordinances." I'm betting boat plans fall into the same category. Home builders are inspected by law enforcement only to make sure the boat has a HIN displayed properly and that the boat is not stolen. It is of course, a good idea to familiarize yourself with ABYC standards (only about $250) and USCG rules that apply (noting the pertinent portions are included in your set of ABYC standards.) For someone in the business, I'd recommend buying the set from ABYC. For the rest of the crowd, ask lots of questions of those that bought the standards ;) . The USCG guidelines for backyard boat builders is a good cheat-sheet compendium of information that's close enough for the majority of boats. It can be found on the web and I'm also happy to email it to someone if they can't find it. Brian "Backyard Renegade" wrote in message om... "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. |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
Hi
"Backyard Renegade" skrev i en meddelelse om... "Jacques Mertens" wrote in message news:_BUgb.18539. 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. A lot of the cheap plans you se is no good anyway ; when you expect just a bit of advise and realise that the design is 70 years old you maby understand that even you saved a few $ , you will "pay" by the fact that you get an outdated design and no way to find relevant advise. ----------- Bad idear from my point of view, beside also 70 years ago there was also "desktop-designers" ; people who produced boat plans without having a clue about what boat design is about and what I find more serious than the lack of basic skills from the designers side, is the fact that an amature builder have no way to know or reconise a set of "toy-plans" from real boat plans. -------- Anyone with just a bit experience will know just what to look for , but an amature builder will rather think that the simpler the design , the easier it's build where you with just a bit experience will know that surely that can be true, if you want a bad boat. With boat plans the builder often will need the advise of the designer, and as you can not fight copying of outdated designs, your only option is, to offer a service that is worth paying beside a repurtation that will make the designs of yours into somthing special , for the one who chose to build one of your designs. The web is a very difficult marked ,and for decades the boat plan marked been flooded by old fasion designs , -------then I took the choice to offer somthing more or rather somthing different , other designers chosen their way to promote their designs, my way been to focus on the options with CAD. Beside I took the stand, that amature boatbuilding, alway's been the platform for an exiting hobby. ---------- now please know that I do talk with a bit of experience, I am a boatbuilder and even lectured CAD at the boatbuilding school here in Dk. But my experience is, that if you think you can make a decent offer , by selling your own designs, you soon are up against 70 year old designs made on a desktop, and it seem no one want modern designs and safe boats, if you can find plans that offer you to save a few $. ------- Ontop as you know, I tried to build ontop the tradisional lofting and section plans , and still today I guess Cyber-Boat is the only concept, offering true lapstrake 3D models, as the basic for the unfolded planks , where anything else I seen concerning CAD, been smoothened surfaces , and that will not unfold the true panels. When I closed down the Cyber-Boat site as a buisness, it never had given any true profit but a lot of trouble being among the first few, just like you, who tried making the web into a new marked, --------- I failed but as full-scale plans at that time wasn't even accepted in this group ; I had a crowd against me telling everyone , that full-scale plans didn't work , even I proven lots of designs acturly building them, -------- but realy I got out of it, with the experience , that people rather have a clumpsy Galant-Elefant with all flat bottom, rather than a wonderfull new design where the designer translated the rigid CAD tools, into somthing to acturly profit amature boatbuilding. But this is the way things work and I guess a lot of Bolger boxes is what show american children the true beauty of tradisional boatbuilding , I spended a lot of time and a lot of efford , but as you know , either they sit bored behind their desk getting their fee anyway , so nothing is easier than taking the bread from somones mouth. And esp. when paper is so cheap and printing is so cheap and you don't need to pay a designer, ----- I dropped out even I bet my home made unfolding software and other in house software is still today better than what you could find, beside the software I develobed was produced in a real building process and design process. But this is how the web decided ; 70 year old designs and old fasion , pre.computer age building methods , is still what you have to fight, even you think boatbuilding shuld not be a craft to be seen in a museum , there isn't even any respect for the craft when it is up against an Elegant Elefant and a crowd of usenet trolls, laughing the back out their pans , for every piece of bread they can steal from your mouth , ------- fact is fact and boxes are boats. Beside if your father or grand father way back in the 50' produced a squarebox boathull from some old popular mechanics, you are in your right to destroy any attemt from any designer trying to make his living on decent designs. Those are acturly as bad, as as soon as you discussed with somone who acturly want a nice modern design, you can be sure somone will tell the world what a boat is , and that is some 70 year old design . P.C. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cyber-Boat/ |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
It's not natural selection against creativity but the opposite: I want that
creativity to be out there, free from regulations and count on natural mechanisms to balance things. Amateur boat builders should not be protected against their will, they should be free to decide what level of safety they want. For example, all our designs can be have the positive and upright bouyancy as specified in the ABYC/USCG standards but the builder is free to decide if he wants it or not. I don't care about that in my boats, I prefer preventative safety. It is true that such freedom goes with responsibility. The builder should be responsible for understanding his choices and that may require some education. Good amateur builders will learn enough about design and building to make an educated choice. The others may choose to go with governement standards but leave us the choice. I lived through that in France 25 years ago: plans for amateurs had to be homologated by a government agency. It delayed the publication of new plans by almost one year and doubled or tripled the cost of developing a new design. In one of our designs, we used polar coordinates instead of cartesian. This is much more accurate for round bilge hulls and allowed the builder to skip lofting. A little desktop dictator forced us to remove those coordinates from the plans and revert to the old table of offsets. We lost time and money, the builders lost the benefit of our mathematical lofting. Check the price of boat plans for amateurs in France: 4 or 5 times higher. Herreshoff and Atkins designed great boats without the ABYC standards, without STYX stability calculations, without a PE license. Designers and amateur builders are in the same boat :-) Excessive regulations can destroy our freedom to build our own boats. We'll be all stuck with cookie cutter plastic buckets . . . and their high cost. -- Jacques http://www.bateau.com "Backyard Renegade" wrote in message om... 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. |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
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. 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. 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. 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. Everyone who watches this group knows well how much you hate Bolger boats and my type of operation... 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! 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. Personally, I look at your scam as Intellectually lazy, and as I noted before, impractical from any real boat building point of view. Then when we tried to make suggestions, in a constructive manner, you attack us as a group, call us stupid, lazy, unsafe, etc. Your plans from what I have seen, don't even address the simple fact of flotation, and you consider yourself a responsible designer? Anyone can draw lines on a computer, 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? 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. Scotty, from SmallBoats.com |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
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/ |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
You are impossible dude, and so I must abandon this part of the thread.
Scotty |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
Scotty & Jacques,
I've been following this thread for some time. At this juncture I think you have hit a nodal point. While I very much agree that while some regulation is good, a LOT is not necessarily better; how do you 'regulate' the 'buyer'? Lets leave the 'diminished capacity by self-applied substances' factors out, and focus on the basic stupidity of actions we've probably all seen; - a 'typical' small Aluminum 'jon boat' {12 to 15 feet}, built by a well known manufacturer, with all the attendant safety and 'anti-litigation' items included in it's design, construction, and labeling. It is out on a large, active river {the Delaware, in this case}. Maybe a 10hp o/b and the following 'cargo' . . . 4 adults plus 4 children plus various hampers & coolers . . . NOT a single PFD in evidence . . . freeboard about 6 inches. - a small 'runabout' {15 to 17 feet} with o/b, the same active river [Tugs/Towboats {with & without barges}, freighters, tankers, & large wake throwing powerboats], with NO anchor, radio, 'cell phone', reserve fuel. Adrift, trying to 'flag down' a small sailboat to 'call their friends' because they are in trouble. I have no idea what happened to these people . . . hopefully they all survived. The individual with the "$100,000.oo high-speed powerboat" that was running at night, wide open with his young child driving, when he ran DIRECTLY into an ILLUMINATED channel marker post, did not. What IS certain, is that the design & materials of the boats they were in had NOTHING to do with THEIR circumstances. 'Natural Selection' is the concept of the 'Annual Darwin Awards' that get published on the 'net and some newspapers. Some 'candidates' are simply more eligible than others. Regards, Ron Magen Backyard Boatshop {PS: In 'another life' I worked in engineering and was contemplating applying for my PE cert. Another engineer, who had one, advised AGAINST it. When I asked him, his answer was simple & straight forward . . . "because THAT's who they go after when ever anything hits the fan !!" "Jacques Mertens" wrote in message . .. It's not natural selection against creativity but the opposite: I want that creativity to be out there, free from regulations and count on natural mechanisms to balance things. SNIP |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
"Jacques Mertens" wrote in message ...
It's not natural selection against creativity but the opposite: I want that creativity to be out there, free from regulations and count on natural mechanisms to balance things. Amateur boat builders should not be protected against their will, they should be free to decide what level of safety they want. For example, all our designs can be have the positive and upright bouyancy as specified in the ABYC/USCG standards but the builder is free to decide if he wants it or not. I don't care about that in my boats, I prefer preventative safety. It is true that such freedom goes with responsibility. The builder should be responsible for understanding his choices and that may require some education. Good amateur builders will learn enough about design and building to make an educated choice. The others may choose to go with governement standards but leave us the choice. I lived through that in France 25 years ago: plans for amateurs had to be homologated by a government agency. It delayed the publication of new plans by almost one year and doubled or tripled the cost of developing a new design. In one of our designs, we used polar coordinates instead of cartesian. This is much more accurate for round bilge hulls and allowed the builder to skip lofting. A little desktop dictator forced us to remove those coordinates from the plans and revert to the old table of offsets. We lost time and money, the builders lost the benefit of our mathematical lofting. Check the price of boat plans for amateurs in France: 4 or 5 times higher. That is exactly what I am afraid of, that kind of regulation and for the same reasons as you. For now we will keep "inventing" and tinkering. There is a lot of new material and technique out there to still be developed and like you say, a lot of it will come from those who are new as they have not yet been stuck into a certain mold. I guess what got me going is a recent article in a very popular boating mag that put me in a list with Mickelak (sp?), Payson, Jaques' Glen-L and a few others. I was of course pretty excited, but at the same time I don't know that I belonged in that category. Thanks to all that have answered here, and sorry about going off on Per. Scotty, just happy to be building boats... Herreshoff and Atkins designed great boats without the ABYC standards, without STYX stability calculations, without a PE license. Designers and amateur builders are in the same boat :-) Excessive regulations can destroy our freedom to build our own boats. We'll be all stuck with cookie cutter plastic buckets . . . and their high cost. -- Jacques http://www.bateau.com "Backyard Renegade" wrote in message om... 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. |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
There is no such thing as "some regulation". Government will always use
some regulation to justify more. Those that think there is a need for this better take a long hard look at what has happened in the US in our lifetimes. Ron |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
This is true. Anyone ever see many laws repealed, or sales taxes reduced???
The real goal is safety. If more weight, among consumers and designers, were given to voluntary compliance with things like the ABYC standards (which already exist of course), then I would think there'd be less pressure by the gov't to push through mandatory regulations for small craft. People should make obvious statements on their plans (and in advertising and on web sites etc) that say something like "Compliant with v.XXXX of the ABYC Standards & Technical Guidelines for Small Craft" or some such thing. Hopefully consumers/customers would start to see that showing up and would develop a preference for boats that meet the guidelines. Designers are the only ones who can start things in this direction ...don't know if this would keep the dogs off our backs or not but it can't hurt. Brian "Ron Thornton" wrote in message ... There is no such thing as "some regulation". Government will always use some regulation to justify more. Those that think there is a need for this better take a long hard look at what has happened in the US in our lifetimes. Ron |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
Passing a test just means you pass the test. In particular it does not
mean you can design a good, or even a safe, boat. There are a large number of graduates of all sorts of certification programs who do not have the judgement and experince of people who did not take the test. Goodness I've seen too many people with BA after their names who can't perform or produce, or even cope. I have belonged to professional associations and have been certifed and I know it may not mean much. What it says is at some point in time you knew some specialized knowledge. Some of the actual aims of certification associations I know of were basically self-promotion, lobbying, networking, and marketing. I discontinued membership in one after a short time. I was arguing recently online with kayak paddlers who claimed you needed formal instruction from a certified paddling instructor. They were quite defensive about it. I think the best protection for any consumer is is free and open discussion like we have on the Usenet, which is why I like newsgroups and avoid forums. I don't think people need to agree. Spirited discussion is good. Even married couples don't *always* agree. Ever since Consumer's Report started its annual automobie reliability survey better built Asian cars and trucks have been taking market share away from other manufacturers. Openess is good. Often people who design and build boats for money are restricted in what they can do. If you've put in the time and money to become certified you serve the market. It the amateur who can try new things. I know amateur dingy racers have introduced new things which eventually found their way into the designs of larger boats carrying the names of certified marine (naval?) architects. When I was racing dingys in a small way with a local club one of the things I liked best about big race meets was walking around looking at the neat things people added to their boats. Long live the amateur desinger and boatbuilder. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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 |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
"Brian D" wrote in message news:jZXhb.734183$Ho3.178853@sccrnsc03... People should make obvious statements on their plans (and in advertising and on web sites etc) that say something like "Compliant with v.XXXX of the ABYC Standards & Technical Guidelines for Small Craft" or some such thing. Good suggestion. We may print that on our plans with some warnings etc. Note that we sell 30% of our plans to export and do not plan to stuyd all the regulations of all countries but the ABYC standards make sense. -- Jacques http://www.bateau.com |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
"Jacques Mertens" wrote in message ...
"Brian D" wrote in message news:jZXhb.734183$Ho3.178853@sccrnsc03... People should make obvious statements on their plans (and in advertising and on web sites etc) that say something like "Compliant with v.XXXX of the ABYC Standards & Technical Guidelines for Small Craft" or some such thing. Good suggestion. We may print that on our plans with some warnings etc. Note that we sell 30% of our plans to export and do not plan to stuyd all the regulations of all countries but the ABYC standards make sense. I have been putting warnings and the regs I follow on my plans for years ;) Scotty from SmallBoats.com |
Yacht Design School/Amateurs?
I have a standard statement on house plans that we use that basically says
"We tried, but if it doesn't meet your local requirements, then it's your fault." A disclaimer. Written more nicely than that of course ;) I can dig it up and post it here if anyone is interested... Brian "Jacques Mertens" wrote in message ... "Brian D" wrote in message news:jZXhb.734183$Ho3.178853@sccrnsc03... People should make obvious statements on their plans (and in advertising and on web sites etc) that say something like "Compliant with v.XXXX of the ABYC Standards & Technical Guidelines for Small Craft" or some such thing. Good suggestion. We may print that on our plans with some warnings etc. Note that we sell 30% of our plans to export and do not plan to stuyd all the regulations of all countries but the ABYC standards make sense. -- Jacques http://www.bateau.com |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:15 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com